近來，中美經貿關係又出現一些雜音。一些人認為美國在對華貿易中吃了虧，還有人認為中國低估人民幣以獲取競爭優勢，攫取貿易順差。對此，我們更加需要傾聽理性的聲音，把握髮展的大方向，以建設性的態度繼續推動中美經貿合作健康發展。

　　一、中美貿易不平衡問題中的五個基本事實

　　中美貿易不平衡問題由來已久，原因複雜，應全面客觀地理性分析。

　　（一）中美貿易格局是經濟全球化條件下國際産業分工的結果。半個多世紀以來，在發達國家主導的經濟全球化進程中，美國産業結構不斷向高端製造業和現代服務業升級，陸續把傳統的勞動密集型産業轉移到國外。這些産業的主要承接地先是日本、韓國和中國台灣，美國由此對上述經濟體産生了大量貿易逆差。中國改革開放以後，相關産業進一步轉移到勞動力成本更低的中國大陸，中國從日、韓、臺進口原材料和中間品，加工裝配後出口到美歐發達國家。由此，中國對周邊經濟體逆差增加，而對美順差擴大，但同期美對亞洲整體的逆差佔其逆差總額的比重並未明顯增加。以2009年為例，中國對日本、韓國和台灣的逆差總額達1471億美元，較中國對美順差1434億美元還略高。跨國企業對這一貿易鏈條的形成發揮了主導作用，其中包括大量美資企業。在現有國際分工格局下，美國即使限制自華進口，也難以使傳統製造業回流，只能轉而從其他發展中國家尋求替代。

　　（二）美國對華逆差程度被明顯高估。今年3月4日，中國商務部與美國商務部、美國貿易談判辦公室共同發佈了雙方關於貨物貿易統計差異的研究報告。根據研究結果測算，2006年美國實際對華貿易逆差應在美官方數據基礎上縮減26%。造成統計差異的主要原因，一是原産中國的貨物通過其他經濟體轉口至美國過程中的增值部分被計算為中方順差；二是在對美加工貿易出口中，中國企業通常只負責接單生産，不掌控設計、運輸、銷售等環節，美方進口報關價格高於中方出口報關價格，進而推高中方順差。如按此推算，2009年美國實際對華貿易逆差應在美方公佈數據基礎上減少約600億美元。

　　（三）美國對華出口管制加劇了雙邊貿易不平衡。美國長期實行對華出口管制，2007年還將中國單列，專門增加了包括纖維材料、數字機床、部分集成電路設備在內的47個出口管制項目。嚴格的管制迫使很多中國用戶放棄進口美國産品，轉從他國進口。近年來中國高技術産品進口快速增長，但自美進口比重從2001年的18.3%下降到2009年的7.5%，如果仍按2001年的進口比例推算，2009年美國對華出口至少損失330億美元。據商會測算，到2020年中國僅在集成電路、機床和民用航天領域的進口需求就高達6000多億美元，但其中恰恰有大量産品受限于美國出口管制。在美優勢産品出口受限的情況下，中美貿易差額不是雙方競爭力的真實反映，依此調整兩國經貿政策只能造成更大的扭曲。

　　（四）美國長期逆差與美元作為主要國際貨幣地位有關。早在上世紀60年代，美國耶魯大學的特裏芬教授就提出，美元作為主要的國際貨幣，要滿足世界各國在貿易清算、債務清償和國際儲備等方面的需要，就必須通過國際收支逆差使美元流出。隨著國際貿易和投資的擴大，全球對美元的需求增多，美國的逆差就會越大，但長期逆差又威脅美元幣值的穩定，威脅美元的國際貨幣地位。“特裏芬難題”是佈雷頓森林體系解體的內在原因。當前，美元也仍然面臨著既要通過經常項目逆差為世界提供流動性，又要確保美元穩定的兩難窘境。

　　（五）人民幣匯率無法解決中美貿易不平衡問題。無論是理論還是實踐都表明，一國本幣升值對調解貿易收支的作用有限。2005-2008年，人民幣對美元累計升值21.1%，同期美國貿易逆差佔GDP的比重年均達到5.9%，對華逆差年均增長21.6%，是歷史上規模最大、增長最快的時期。2009年人民幣對美元匯率保持穩定，而美國貿易逆差佔GDP的比重從2008年的5.7%降至3.5%，對華逆差下降16.1%。上世紀七、八十年代，美國也曾因貨幣問題向德國、日本施壓，迫使兩國的貨幣大幅升值，但到2008年，美國對德國仍然逆差429億美元，對日本逆差726億美元。由此可見，貿易流向的決定性因素是市場供求關係，而非匯率。

　　二、中美經貿合作的總體利益關係基本平衡

　　中美經貿合作不僅給中國，也給美國帶來巨大收益。簡單地把中國在貨物貿易中的順差解讀為中國受益，美國吃虧，是非常片面的。

　　（一）中國出口産品，惠及美國民眾。中國對美國的出口大幅提高了美國消費者和生産者的福利。美國自華進口以日用消費品為主，紡織服裝、鞋類、玩具、傢具和箱包等佔30%左右，電器及電子産品佔45%左右。這些物美價廉的産品有效抑制了美國通脹，提高了美國消費者的實際購買力。按照摩根士坦利公司研究結果推算，2009年自華進口為美國消費者節省了約1000億美元的開支。限制自華進口，只能是以美國民眾尤其是低收入群體的福利為代價。

　　（二）順差在中國，利益在美國。中國對美國出口中加工貿易佔60%左右，2009年加工貿易形成對美順差1176億美元，佔中美貿易順差的82%。中國加工企業接單生産後出口，只獲得少數加工費，而産品設計、運儲和營銷等環節的大量利潤被包括美國企業在內的外國企業獲得。一台在美售價約1200美元的筆記本電腦，中國加工企業僅獲取35美元加工費。英國《經濟學家》雜誌也曾引過一個小例子，標有“中國製造”的ipod播放機的市場零售價為299美元，其中中國出口組裝廠只賺取4美元的加工費，而160美元被美國設計、運銷和零售企業獲得。

　　（三）美國利益不僅在貨物貿易。美國從對華投資和服務貿易中獲取了巨大收益。目前在華經營的美資企業約3萬家，調查顯示，2008年美資企業在華實現銷售收入1530多億美元，出口750多億美元，利潤總額近80億美元。中國美國商會《2009年美國企業在中國白皮書》表明，2008年74%的美國在華企業實現盈利，81%的企業對未來5年在華業務發展前景表示樂觀。在服務貿易領域，美國長期保持對華順差，近5年年均增長35%。美國會計、銀行、保險、證券等服務貿易企業在華均有良好的經營業績。目前，中美關於服務貿易尚無全面的統計數字，但初步估算中方逆差在130-150億美元之間。

　　買賣是交易雙方根據市場規律自主作出的理性決定，在中美貿易持續快速發展的事實面前，中美經貿關係利益嚴重失衡的論斷顯然不符合邏輯。

　　三、建設性地推動中美經貿關係健康發展

　　胡錦濤主席和奧巴馬總統提出中美要建設21世紀積極合作全面的夥伴關係。去年奧巴馬總統訪華時，中美雙方在《聯合聲明》中提出要共同努力促進更加可持續和平衡的貿易與增長，並共同致力於反對各種形式的保護主義。我們應當認真落實這些共識，避免中美經貿合作遭遇不必要的傷害。

　　一是要堅持對話與合作，妥善化解分歧。中美經貿合作規模巨大，出現一些不同意見不足為奇。中美在經貿問題上有暢通的溝通渠道，特別是已經建立了中美戰略與經濟對話、中美商貿聯委會等重要機制，我們可以充分利用這些平臺就各種問題進行開誠布公的討論。如果一方因為國內政治需要向對方施加壓力，動輒以貿易制裁相威脅，顯然無助於問題的解決。

　　二是要採取建設的積極行動，有效解決問題。中方並不回避中美貿易中美方逆差的問題，也在加快自身經濟結構的調整。中國在應對危機的一攬子計劃中，增加投資，刺激消費，擴大進口，為世界經濟的復蘇做出了重要貢獻。2009年中國貿易順差銳減1000億美元，澳大利亞、新西蘭、巴西、南非等不少國家對華出口仍然增長20%以上，中國一舉首次成為日本、澳大利亞、巴西、南非的第一大出口市場。2009年，美國出口總體下降了17%，對華出口卻基本持平。2010年1-2月，中國的貿易順差繼續大幅減少50%，預計3月份甚至將出現貿易逆差。據美方統計，美國今年1月出口增長18.2%，但對華出口增長了64.9%。毫無疑問，中國將繼續實行進口促進政策，也要求出口國不對中國實行歧視性的出口管制政策，共同為世界經濟增長提供動力。解決中美貿易不平衡問題，消極打壓中國的出口於事無補，我們願意與美方共同採取行動，開闢新的合作領域，支持美國企業擴大對華出口，為包括美資企業在內的在華外資企業創造更加公平優良的投資環境，也希望美方能夠以開放的精神維護中美經貿合作的健康發展。

　　三是共同致力於全球貿易體制的建設與完善。開放的貿易和投資對中美兩國經濟和全球經濟具有不言而喻的重要性。建設更加完善的多邊貿易體制，既是建立合理的國際經濟秩序的客觀要求，也是促進全球經濟平衡發展的重要途徑。多哈回合談判歷時八年多，已取得難能可貴的成果，我們應當在現有成果的基礎上，拿出更大的誠意和決心，推動商品、資本在國際間有規則地自由流動，提高全球經濟的協調與治理水平。

　　中美經貿關係是中美關係的重要基礎。我們始終認為，兩國和則兩利、鬥則俱傷，對話比對抗好，合作比遏制好，夥伴比對手好。相信中美經貿合作一定能排除各種干擾，繼續沿著互利共贏的正確方向不斷前進。

　　Constructively Advancing China-US Trade and Economic Relations on a Healthy Track

　　Minister of Commerce, Chen Deming

　　March 28th, 2010

　　Trade and economic relations between China and the United States have developed rapidly since the establishment of the bilateral diplomatic ties. Two-way trade in goods amounted to nearly USD 300 billion in 2009, a 118-fold increase over 1979 when the two countries entered into diplomatic relations. American businesses have invested cumulatively USD 62.2 billion in China. Although it has not always been a smooth sail, no twists or turns have really held back the advance of the bilateral commercial and trade relationship. This is evidence enough to show that cooperation fits the fundamental interests of the two countries' people and hence has strong vitality, and the keynote of China-US economic and trade relations has been and will always be cooperation based on mutual benefit and for win-win results.

　　However, some jarring notes have been heard recently. Some believe that the US is losing in its trade with China while some other hold the opinion that China undervalues its currency (RMB) to get a competitive advantage and trade surplus. Given all this, we have more reasons to listen to rational opinions, steer and carry forward, in a constructive way, China-US economic and trade relations on the right track.

　　I. Five facts about the China-US trade imbalance

　　Trade imbalance has been an age-old issue between China and the US. It is caused by complicated reasons and therefore should be approached in a comprehensive, objective, and rational manner.

　　(I) Current state of China-US trade is the result of international division of labor against the backdrop of globalization. For over half a century, globalization led by developed countries has concurred with the continued sophistication of US industries toward high-end manufacturing and modern services while traditional, labor-intensive industries have gradually migrated offshore, first to Japan, Korea and Taiwan with which the US began to run huge trade deficits. After China's reform and opening-up, these industries were then shifted to the mainland where labor costs were even lower. China imported raw materials and semi-finished goods from Japan, Korea and Taiwan, and after processing and assembling, exported the finished goods to developed countries in America and Europe. As a result, China's deficits with neighboring economies grew concurrent with its surplus with the US. However in the same period, Asia's share in total US trade deficit did not rise significantly. For instance, in 2009 China's deficit with Japan, Korea and Taiwan combined was USD 147.1 billion, a figure even larger than its USD 143.4 billion surplus with the US. Transnational corporations including American ones play a leading role in shaping this trade chain. Given the present international division of labor, traditional manufacturing industries would hardly return to the US even if imports from China were restricted, and the US would have to turn to other developing countries for import replacement.

　　(II) US trade deficit with China is overestimated. The Ministry of Commerce of China and the US Department of Commerce and the US Trade Representative Office released on March 4th a study report on statistical divergence in trade in goods. The report finds that the actual US trade deficit with China for 2006 should be 26% lower than the official US figure. Reasons for the statistical difference are: a) markups on goods of Chinese origin transiting via other economies are counted as China's surplus; and b) in processing trade, Chinese companies normally produce by order and have little control over design, transport, sales and other activities. The import value of goods declared at US customs being higher than the export value declared at Chinese customs further inflates the surplus figure. Following this methodology, the actual US deficit with China for 2009 should be about USD 60 billion less than the official US figure.

　　(III) Export control against China exacerbates the trade imbalance. The US has practiced export control policy against China for many years. In 2007 it even singled China out and added to the control list another 47 items such as fiber materials, numerically controlled machine tools and certain integrated circuits. Rigid control has forced many Chinese users away from the US and to buy from others. China's hi-tech import increased rapidly in recent years, but US share dropped from 18.3% in 2001 to 7.5% in 2009. If the share in 2001 is used as a benchmark, US companies had lost at least USD 33 billion worth of export opportunities in 2009. According to relevant Chinese chambers of commerce, by 2020 China's import demand on integrated circuits, machine tools and civil avionics alone will reach over USD 600 billion. But many of these products are subject to US export control. Therefore the trade imbalance does not reflect the true competitiveness of the two countries because competitive US products cannot be freely exported to China, and any adjustment of trade policy based on this fallacy of trade imbalance will only lead to greater distortion.

　　(IV) US long-running deficit has to do with the dollar being a global reserve currency. In 1960, Professor Robert Triffin from Yale University pointed out that the dollar, as the global reserve currency, must flow out of the US through a balance-of-payment deficit in order to satisfy all countries' needs for trade settlement, debt repayment and international reserves. But as international trade and investment grows, the demand on the dollar will increase, pushing up US trade deficit, which in the long run will threaten dollar stability as well as its role as the global reserve currency. The Triffin Dilemma is the intrinsic cause of the collapse of the Bretton Woods system. Today the US is still caught between generating liquidity for the rest of the world through current-account deficits and maintaining the stability of it currency.

　　(V) RMB appreciation cannot redress the trade imbalance. It has been proved both in theory and practice that the appreciation of a nation's currency provides little help for improving balance of payments. From 2005 to 2008, RMB appreciated by 21.1% against the US dollar whereas US trade deficit accounted for 5.9% of its GDP and its trade deficit with China soared by 21.6% on annual average, the biggest and fastest increase ever. In 2009, the RMB exchange rate against the US dollar was basically stable whereas the share of trade deficit in US GDP decreased to 3.5% from 5.7% in 2008 and the deficit with China down by 16.1%. Back in the 1970s and 1980s, on similar currency issues the US had pressured Germany and Japan into appreciating their currencies significantly. But by 2008, the US still ran a trade deficit of USD 42.9-billion with Germany and USD 72.6-billion with Japan. Obviously trade flow is determined by supply and demand instead of the exchange rate.

　　II. China's and the US' gains from bilateral trade and economic relations are roughly balanced.

　　Trade and economic cooperation has generated great benefits not only for China but also for the US. One would be looking narrowly at the whole trade story by equating China's trade-in-goods surplus with China winning and the US losing.

　　(I) Chinese exports benefit American people. China's exports to the US have substantially improved the welfare of American consumers and producers. The bulk of US imports from China are consumer goods, with textiles and garments, footwear, toys, furniture, bags and cases taking up 30% and appliances and electronics 45%. These good-value-for-money goods have served as an effective damper on inflation in the US and bolstered the real purchasing power of American consumers. According to a research by Morgan Stanley, imports from China saved American consumers about USD 100 billion in 2009. Restrictions on imports from China would have to come at the cost of reduced welfare on the part of American people, especially the low-income population.

　　(II) China gets the surplus yet the US gets the real gains. Processing trade represents 60% of Chinese exports to the US. In 2009, processing trade accounted for USD 117.6 billion or 82% of China's surplus with the US. Chinese processing firms take orders, produce goods and export for a meager processing fee, whereas massive profits are reaped by foreign firms including US firms in such areas as product designing, transportation, warehousing, and marketing. For a laptop sold for 1,200 dollars in the US, only 35 dollars goes to the Chinese processing firm. There was another example in the Economist: an iPod carrying the “Made in China” label is sold for 299 dollars, but the Chinese assembling plant only gets paid 4 dollars while some 160 dollars go to US companies doing the designing, shipping, marketing and retailing.

　　(III) US gains go beyond trade in goods. The US has made huge profits on their investments in and services trade with China. Currently, some 30,000 American-funded companies operate in China. The results of a survey suggest American-funded companies reported over USD 153 billion of sales revenues, USD 75 billion of exports and nearly USD 8 billion of profits in 2008. According to American Chamber of Commerce in China's 2009 White Paper on American Business in China, about 74% of American businesses in China made profits in 2008 and 81% were optimistic about their business outlook in China for the next five years. In services, the US has held China in deficit for many years and its surplus with China has been growing by an annual rate of 35% in the past five years. US accounting firms, banks, insurance firms, securities firms and other service-providers are all doing well in China. In the absence of complete statistics on China-US trade in services, rough estimates suggest China's deficit to range between USD 13 billion and 15 billion.

　　A deal is done when the parties on both ends make an informed decision based on the laws of market. Against the true, compelling story of a robust and growing China-US trade, no rhetoric about a serious imbalance of China-US trade and commercial interests could stand to reason.

　　III. Constructively advancing China-US trade and economic relations on the right track

　　President Hu Jintao and President Obama proposed a positive, cooperative and comprehensive partnership for China-US relations in the 21st century. During President Obama's visit to China last year, both sides committed through a Joint Statement to promoting more sustainable and balanced trade and growth and to resisting protectionism in all its manifestations. We should faithfully honor these shared commitments and avoid doing undesirable harm to China-US trade and economic cooperation.

　　First, dialogue and cooperation should be persisted to appropriately resolve disputes. Given the massive scale of bilateral trade and economic cooperation, it is only natural to have divergent views. There are open avenues of communication between the two countries on trade issues, most prominently the Strategic and Economic Dialogue (S&ED) and the Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade (JCCT). We could fully leverage these forums to have candid discussions. It does not help if one side, driven by its political agenda at home, puts pressure on the other with unwarranted threats of trade sanctions.

　　Second, a constructive course of actions should be pursued to effectively address problems. China is not turning away from the US trade deficit issue. It is now accelerating economic restructuring. In its stimulus program to fight the crisis, China is increasing investment, stimulating consumption and expanding imports, which has contributed significantly to world economic recovery. In 2009, China's trade surplus plunged by USD 100 billion. Exports from countries such as Australia, New Zealand, Brazil and South Africa are still growing by over 20%. China, for the first time, has become the top export destination for Japan, Australia, Brazil and South Africa. In 2009, US exports as a whole dropped by 17% but its exports to China were on par with last year. In the first two months of 2010, China's trade surplus further dipped by 50%, so much as to make an overall deficit in March a real possibility. By US count, US exports were up 18.2% in January this year but its China-bound exports grew by 64.9%. Without doubt, China will move forward with import promotion while dissuading exporting nations from keeping discriminatory export controls so as to collectively generate steam for world economic growth. Suppressing Chinese exports provides no relief for redressing the bilateral trade imbalance. We are willing to take concerted efforts with the US to extend our cooperation into new areas, facilitate more exports by American businesses to China, level and improve the playing field for American and other foreign-invested enterprises in China. We look to the US for an open spirit in protecting the health and growth of China-US trade and economic cooperation.

　　Third, common efforts should be aimed at building and perfecting the global trading system. Open trade and investment holds unequivocal significance for the economies of China, the US and beyond. Building a more sensible multilateral trading system is necessitated by the enforcement of a rational international economic order and constitutes an important means to balanced economic growth. The Doha round has yielded much needed progress after 8 years of negotiations, on which basis we should show greater sincerity and determination to facilitate the free, orderly movement of goods and capital across the world and introduce greater harmony and discipline into the world economy.

　　The China-US trade and commercial relationship is a great cornerstone of China-US relations. We always believe a peaceful China-US relationship makes both countries winners while a confrontational one both losers. It is better to have dialogue than confrontation, cooperation than containment, and partnership than rivalry. I have confidence that China-US trade and economic cooperation will rise above the noises and stay on the right course of win-win and mutual benefits.