#美国对60个经济体加征关税 The US imposes tariffs on 60 economies: another fracture of the global trade order

On July 24, 2026, the US government suddenly announced that it would impose additional tariffs on 60 major trading partners, with rates ranging from 5% to 25%. The measures cover key areas such as automobiles, semiconductors, clean-energy equipment, and pharmaceutical raw materials. The decision quickly triggered turmoil in global markets: Dow Jones index futures fell by more than 2% after the close, and the euro-to-US dollar exchange rate broke below 1.08. Unlike previous punitive measures aimed at a single country, this “carpet-style” coverage nearly encompasses all of the US’s top ten import source countries. Traditional allies such as Japan, Germany, and South Korea were also not spared.

The White House said the reasons are to “correct long-standing trade imbalances” and “protect the security of strategic industries.” Data show that in 2025 the US merchandise trade deficit was still as high as $1.2 trillion, and the share of manufacturing employment fell to less than 8%. But a deeper consideration is that, with the 2026 midterm elections approaching, the incumbent government urgently needs to win over blue-collar voters in key swing states through a tough trade posture. By packaging 60 economies together, it both avoids political risks associated with “tariffs targeting specific countries” and maximizes negotiating leverage—any economy seeking an exemption in a specific industry would need to make concessions in non-tariff areas.

However, the cost of this “indiscriminate crackdown” is extremely high. The Peterson Institute for International Economics estimates that the new tariffs will increase average annual spending by about $1,700 for a typical US household, and that core inflation could be pushed up by 0.8 percentage points. Even more alarming is that among the 60 economies, more than 40 are WTO member states, making a collective lawsuit—and thus an almost certain activation of the dispute settlement mechanism—nearly inevitable. The US has repeatedly obstructed the appointment of judges to the appellate body in the past, and the multilateral system could be brought to a complete halt. On the supply-chain front, companies face a “double bind”: they need to shift production capacity out of China, yet they cannot obtain stable tariff treatment in countries such as Vietnam and Mexico, driving up costs for global industrial-chain arrangements sharply.

Retaliatory measures are already being prepared. The European Union announced that it would launch countermeasures against US agricultural products and services trade. China is considering restricting rare-earth exports, and countries such as India and Brazil may also increase tariffs on US goods. A “global tariff brawl” may soon officially begin.

History repeatedly proves that unilateral tariffs cannot solve structural problems. When the US raises tariff banners against 60 economies at the same time, it may gain short-term political benefits—but it is dismantling, with its own hands, the global trade system that it helped lead and build. In a fragmented world, there are no winners.