Round 1: China makes washing machines for 500元, Trump slaps a 100% tariff → price becomes 1000元 in the U.S. → China avoids this by exporting the machine to Vietnam, relabeling it “Made in Vietnam”, and exporting to the U.S. → Vietnam’s tariff is only 40% → so price in U.S. is 700元.
Round 2: The U.S. realizes this workaround and changes the rule: tariff is based on where it’s actually made, not the label. → China responds by disassembling the washing machine into parts: drum to Vietnam, casing to Malaysia, local assembly there with local parts. → Since parts from China only account for 10% of the final product, only that 10% gets the high tariff. → Final product taxed mostly at 40%, only 10% subject to extra China tariffs → still sells for around 700元, evading the full tariff.
Round 3: Trump pre-emptively raises the tariff to 245% on Chinese products. → Now even if 10% of the parts are from China, the extra tariff is 245% × 10% = 24.5%, plus 40% base tariff = 64.5% total. → Now the price rises to 820元 — makes it less profitable, Southeast Asian countries won’t want to use Chinese parts anymore, and China’s workaround collapses.
Does this logic make sense?
Yes — it’s very reasonable and aligns with real-world trade strategies.
Countries often redirect or reassemble products in third countries to avoid tariffs.
The U.S. responds by tightening rules of origin (like what % of a product must be made where).
A huge tariff like 245% is designed to close loopholes preemptively, making it too costly even when parts are rerouted.
就以洗衣机为例子，其它产品类似。
原来中国洗衣机500元，川普加税后是1000元，中国决定不出口美国，而是整机卖到越南，贴上越南牌出口，绕过美国的关税，只按照越南40%的关税计算，卖700元一台。
这是第一回合。
美国发现立刻禁止，按生产产地来决定税率，而不是贴牌和组装产地。
进入第二回合。
中方拆开洗衣机，或者说，不组装洗衣机，而是作为零件给东南亚，卖洗衣机滚筒给越南，卖洗衣机壳子给马来西亚，配合他们自己的零件，做成本地洗衣机出口美国。
假设这些国家的税是40%，这样，习500元的洗衣机，拆开了卖到美国实际还是700元。完美避开1000元的价格。
美国发现了能说什么？这确实是东南亚本地的洗衣机，用点中国零件，比例不大，你能说啥？
美国当然只能按照零件数量比例加税。如果10%的中国零件，那对于原来40%的税，还要加上中国零件的税，100%税，
那就再加100%X10%=10%,现在税是50%，洗衣机卖750元。
如果中国给点其它方面的补偿，还能接受。
中国的洗衣机，还能拆开了配合东南亚的生产卖掉。
这是第二回合结束，进入第三回合。
老川预见这种情况，预先加到245%，那就变成再加245%X10%+40%=64%的税了，洗衣机变成820元，东南亚就不太会愿意用你的零件了。
自己生产便宜得多。
这回拆开了，也卖不掉了。
Temu上卖点小破东西能赚几个钱，苹果在中国赚了多少钱？
美国要请中国帮忙，就要和颜悦色，比如Yellen和Blinken，忍着被中国轻视的羞辱去和中国商量，让中国去产能，配合关税。
川普这样大喊大叫正中中国的下怀，你又没本事，你还发脾气，那就饿着你！
AI中国也不弱。
美国海关的大老爷们，哪有那么多的闲工夫，来看一台洗衣机有多少成份是中国的？
从原料的零关税到如今的细分，原来可以闭着眼睛process，现在得每个东西都盯着，不可行的
本来很好的物流，阻力一大，中国少赚了钱，美国少了货，必定不可持续的。梦幻中的产业链回流，只是个大饼。
最基本的事实都不清楚，还争论什么 见下 出口退（免）税指南
https://shanghai.chinatax.gov.cn/bsfw/bszn/znckts/201910/t448852.html
做一件衬衫，中国厂家收5元钱，walmart caymen Island 运到美国港口，Walmart USA 进口价，20元。最后卖25元。walmart caymen Island 藏起来15元的利润，谁都不上税。
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/06/walmart-tax-evasion-luxembourg/
苹果也是同样，他们的公司设在爱尔兰。
虽然进口价都算到中美贸易逆差里面（如上20元）其中15元都被美国公司赚走藏起来。否则为什么美国人都去中国生产？廉价物品有规模有供应链，多省心？
美国公司赚爆，中国也有就业率，就是美国蓝领吃亏。
美国人应该醒一醒了。中国每年培养过百万STEM毕业生，规模不是美国可以比的。
你不敢面对美国的衰落而已。 我以后不刺激你了。
比如iPhone，苹果从富士康买$100一个（不知道具体价格，只是猜测），拿到美国卖$800 - $1000, 苹果一家攫取了全球手机市场85%的利润（2022年数据）, 苹果在印度或美国生产iPhone会有这么高的利润率吗？ 维持同样高利润率的售价又会是多少？
的时候，把上一个环节的增值税退给厂家，因为最终消费不是发生在中国的。
第三回合，245% 是针对个别产品，不是针对洗衣机的，举例无效！第二回合也不是你说成立就成立的，要看零部件价格在整个洗衣机价格构成占的比例，对于洗衣机来说零部件的价格占比重，不一定可以打越南制造或马来西亚制造，你还是好好做两年生意再出来吹吧
跟大嘴一样
蛇吞象做不到
What it’s saying (in simple terms):
Round 1:
China makes washing machines for 500元, Trump slaps a 100% tariff → price becomes 1000元 in the U.S.
→ China avoids this by exporting the machine to Vietnam, relabeling it “Made in Vietnam”, and exporting to the U.S.
→ Vietnam’s tariff is only 40% → so price in U.S. is 700元.
Round 2:
The U.S. realizes this workaround and changes the rule: tariff is based on where it’s actually made, not the label.
→ China responds by disassembling the washing machine into parts: drum to Vietnam, casing to Malaysia, local assembly there with local parts.
→ Since parts from China only account for 10% of the final product, only that 10% gets the high tariff.
→ Final product taxed mostly at 40%, only 10% subject to extra China tariffs → still sells for around 700元, evading the full tariff.
Round 3:
Does this logic make sense?Trump pre-emptively raises the tariff to 245% on Chinese products.
→ Now even if 10% of the parts are from China, the extra tariff is 245% × 10% = 24.5%, plus 40% base tariff = 64.5% total.
→ Now the price rises to 820元 — makes it less profitable, Southeast Asian countries won’t want to use Chinese parts anymore, and China’s workaround collapses.
Yes — it’s very reasonable and aligns with real-world trade strategies.
Countries often redirect or reassemble products in third countries to avoid tariffs.
The U.S. responds by tightening rules of origin (like what % of a product must be made where).
A huge tariff like 245% is designed to close loopholes preemptively, making it too costly even when parts are rerouted.