要準(zhǔn)確估計(jì)貿(mào)易赤字，是相當(dāng)棘手的任務(wù)。 本月稍早，世界貿(mào)易組織(WTO)秘書長(zhǎng)Pascal Lamy在一次談話中表示，“如果我們用附加價(jià)值而非用計(jì)算毛利的方法來(lái)衡量貿(mào)易，那么，雙邊貿(mào)易平衡就會(huì)顯得非常不同?！笔聦?shí)上，這種用附加價(jià)值來(lái)計(jì)算的方法將導(dǎo)致“中國(guó)與美國(guó)的順差減少一半。” 你說(shuō)什么？ 當(dāng)我第一次在《中國(guó)日?qǐng)?bào)》(China Daily)上讀到這段演講時(shí)，我下意識(shí)地抓了抓頭。 (這份由國(guó)家掌控的報(bào)紙忽略Lamy大部份的談話，僅著重在中國(guó)對(duì)美貿(mào)易順差減少一半上)。 如果你也像我看完整篇演講，就知道Lamy并未特別針對(duì)中國(guó)。相反地，他的重點(diǎn)在于貿(mào)易性質(zhì)已大幅改變。貿(mào)易不再是雙邊的，它是全球性的。 “過(guò)去，高科技產(chǎn)品通常在美國(guó)、日本和德國(guó)制造，”Lamy指出?！岸裉?，這些產(chǎn)品在許多國(guó)家制造組件，最終裝配地所在的國(guó)家對(duì)于該產(chǎn)品的產(chǎn)值貢獻(xiàn)度可能只有一小部分?！? Lamy認(rèn)為，“并非每個(gè)人都已充分了解這個(gè)重大轉(zhuǎn)變，但重點(diǎn)在于我們?nèi)绾稳ズ饬抠Q(mào)易發(fā)展?！? Lamy以蘋果(Apple)的iPhone為例指出， iPhone在中國(guó)組裝的，但它所需的各類產(chǎn)品和 服務(wù)則來(lái)自位在不同國(guó)家的15間不同的公司。而中國(guó)為iPhone添加的價(jià)值是4%左右，遠(yuǎn)低于美國(guó)、日本、德國(guó)和韓國(guó)的附加價(jià)值。 然而，WTO的經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家估計(jì)，若中國(guó)與美國(guó)的雙邊貿(mào)易以產(chǎn)品附加值來(lái)衡量，則中國(guó)對(duì)美國(guó)的2,950億貿(mào)易順差可減少近一半，這是WTO老板的結(jié)論。 Lamy 的說(shuō)法有他的理論基礎(chǔ)。在面臨當(dāng)前的經(jīng)濟(jì)環(huán)境和美國(guó)總統(tǒng)大選時(shí)，中國(guó)被指責(zé)為刻意壓低人民幣匯率，好讓中國(guó)出口的產(chǎn)品更便宜。Lamy對(duì)此表示，并沒(méi)有明 確的結(jié)論顯示人民幣升值會(huì)影響中國(guó)的貿(mào)易平衡。他接著指出：可以觀察出是匯率被高估或者低估的地方并不是WTO，而是國(guó)際貨幣基金(IMF)。 底線在哪里？ 由于美中之間的關(guān)系對(duì)全球其它地區(qū)都有著極端的重要性，因此，現(xiàn)在必須冷靜思考并從不同的角度看貿(mào)易統(tǒng)計(jì)──開始為新產(chǎn)品添加附加價(jià)值。 你怎么看？ 本文授權(quán)編譯自EE Times，版權(quán)所有，謝絕轉(zhuǎn)載 編譯： Joy Teng 參考英文原文：Yoshida in China: $400 iPhones and skewed trade stats ，by Junko Yoshida

相關(guān)閱讀：
• [圖文報(bào)道]中國(guó)是否還能繼續(xù)扮演太陽(yáng)能市場(chǎng)救世主？
• 美運(yùn)營(yíng)商或禁用中國(guó)電信設(shè)備，在華美企擔(dān)心遭報(bào)復(fù)
• 美歐印夾擊中國(guó)光伏，有望磋商解決糾紛YViesmc

{pagination} Yoshida in China: $400 iPhones and skewed trade stats Junko Yoshida Measuring a trade deficit can be a tricky business. In a speech earlier this month, World Trade Organization Director-General Pascal Lamy said, "If we were to measure trade in value-added rather than gross statistical terms, bilateral trade balances would look very different." In fact, such a value-added measure would result in “China's surplus with the United States reduced by half." Say what? When I first read the speech in China Daily, I scratched my head. (The state-controlled newspaper ignored most of Lamy's speech and glammed onto the bit about China’s surplus with the United States being reduced to half.) If, as I did, you read the entire speech, Lamy wasn’t being particularly soft on China. Rather, he was making a point about how drastically the nature of trade has changed. Trade is no longer bilateral, it's global. “High-tech products used to be made in the U.S., Japan or Germany," said Lamy, stating the obvious. "Today, they are made [around] the world, with components and parts fabricated in many countries. The country where the final assembly takes place may contribute only a small fraction of the final value of the product.” In Lamy's view, “Not everyone has fully understood this important shift, but the debate is evolving, starting with the way we measure trade.” Lamy made his case using Apple’s iPhone as Exhibit A. “True, the iPhone is assembled in China, but the goods and services leading up to the final assembly came from 15 different companies in many different countries. The value added to the iPhone in China is around 4 percent, far less than the value added in the United States, Japan, Germany and South Korea. “Yet, when a $400 iPhone is sold in the United States, standard trade accounting lists it as $400 credit to China’s side of the ledger and $400 debit for the United States." WTO economists estimate that China’s $295 billion trade surplus with the U.S. could be reduced by nearly half if two-way trade were measured in value-added terms, the WTO boss concluded. Lamy’s argument is valid. In the current economic environment and the U.S. presidential campaign, China is blamed for keeping the yuan's value artificially low to make Chinese exports cheaper. Lamy said there is “no clear-cut conclusion” that a revaluation of the yuan will affect China’s trade balance. Putting on his politician hat, he added: “The place where the exchange rate could be seen as overvalued or undervalued is not the WTO,” but the International Monetary Fund. What’s the bottom line? Given the critical importance of the U.S.-China relationship to those two countries and for the rest of the world, it’s time to cool the rhetoric and look at trade statistics from a different perspective -- starting with the value added to new products. What do you think?