Bu Shaohua: The "text game" of the US supply chain outsourcing can be closed

For a period of time, the topic of supply chain trade and its outsourcing methods has begun to occupy an increasingly important position in US economic diplomacy and foreign policies. The United States believes that the participation and control of important supply chains are related to its core competitiveness. At the same time, China ’s long -term key location and continuous progress in the global supply chain system have made the United States feel anxious. In this context, Meiji regrets the attention of industrial policies. The political and academic circles have proposed a series of new design and new concepts on reconstruction of supply chain outsourcing forms, trying to break the global supply chain's reliance on China, thereby suppressing China Revitalize US leadership. However, from the actual effect, the "novel" "outsourcing" design in the United States has not made much progress, and basically flows in "text games". Just like its failed tariff policy, the US supply chain outsourcing "small abacus" is also destined to be "bad for others."

"Outsourcing" new concept is full of sky

After the financial crisis in 2008, the U.S. government began to deliberately corrected the problem of the long -term "deficiency and false" of its economic system, and gradually revived the manufacturing industry and returned to the real economy as the first priority. Since the US manufacturing industry has formed a close offshore collaboration relationship with China for a long time, "You have me, I have you", the US government has played a "crooked idea" of the supply chain and frequently in "outsourcing". A professional term in the field of supply chain is an article in an attempt to promote the reconstruction of the global supply chain pattern and meet its private interest in the domestic manufacturing industry.

The Obama government "first opened the moment", and at the beginning of his office, he sacrificed the "re -industrialization" banner of the United States, and then successively introduced or launched the "Revitalizing the Framework of the United States", the "U.S. Manufacturing Promotion Act", "National Advanced Manufacturing", "National Advanced Manufacturing" A series of auxiliary measures such as project office ". In terms of implementation paths, the United States has regarded the way to attract American companies from China and other places to "return" the way to harm self -interest as the main starting point. By formulating preferential tax policies, Obama encourages US companies to replace the original "outsourcing" to replace the original "outsourcing" to transfer investment and employment back to the United States. At that time, the support of the manufacturing "return" has basically formed consensus in the American and political circles. For example, the Corney Consulting Company created its famous annual "Refluing Index Report" in 2011.

In the Trump period, the US "outsourcing" policy became more aggressive and was developing in a diversified direction. On the one hand, the Trump administration's "return" measure is much "fierce" than the predecessor. If Obama's tenure is still in accordance with economic laws to attract corporate returns, then Trump's "return" is somewhat mandatory. Among them, huge tariffs imposed on China can be regarded as the most absurd measure of "return" in the "backflow" of Huamei enterprises. In addition, Midea also took out a lot of funds to "reimburse" for the return of corporate regression, which can be described as exhausted. On the other hand, the concept of "near -shore outsourcing" has risen. When the effect of "return" is not clear, the new round of concept speculation has begun. In 2019, the Corlin's "Request Report Report" launched the "near -shore offshore trade ratio" for the first time, tracking the transfer of imports from the US import to Mexico, near the shore. In 2020, Trump signed the "US -Mexico and Canada Agreement" to promote the "near -shore outsourcing" from the trade mechanism. In addition to Mexico, the US think tank also suggested that the United States also incorporates the Great Caribbean into the "near -shore".

The new contribution of the Biden government to the concept of "outsourcing" is to combine it with the alliance policy. In the "U.S. Supply Chain Administrative Order" and "Guide to the National Security Strategy during the Transition" released by the beginning of the stage, Biden emphasized the desire to strengthen the supply chain cooperation with allies and partners who share common values. In the "Centennial Report of the United States Supply Chain" released last year, Biden explicitly expressed his support to support the "allies outsourcing" and proposed relevant execution strategies. At the same time, the US Treasury Secretary and the Minister of Commerce also proposed the concept of "friendly outsourcing" on multiple occasions, echoing synonymous with the "allies outsourcing". Measures such as the "US -European Trade and Technical Committee" and "Indo -Pacific Economic Framework" that the United States recently pushed into the world obviously wanted to promote the above concepts at the practice level.

The endless "outsourcing" narrative obviously makes Americans a little dizzy. Cornen released a concept of "appropriate outsourcing" in the cloud last year, emphasizing that the company should consider more comprehensive and complicated factors when making outsourcing decisions, and cannot fall into the "backflow" and "offshore". In dual theory. But as for where the most appropriate outsourcing location, the report did not give a clear answer, I am afraid that the United States did not figure out.

The actual progress is slow

Some people in the United States have always been fully revealed on the supply chain bag. Over time, the newly designed "outsourcing" new architecture has gradually collapsed.

First of all, the supply chain "return" is proven to be wishful thinking. Over the years, the US "re -industrialization" has fallen into stagnation, and its manufacturing added value and employment have not improved significantly. British economist think tanks have even explicitly stated that there will be no large -scale supply chain return in North America in the next few years. Recently, the cancellation of the call for tariffs on China has risen, which directly announced the bankruptcy of the "return" plan. After a few years, huge tariffs not only did not promote the return of US companies and revived the US manufacturing industry. Instead, it distorted the global supply chain, and eventually caused the inflation of 40 years to come to the US consumers. Senior officials and other senior officials such as US Treasury Secretary recently scolded the tariffs "not strategic". Obviously, this evaluation was also applicable to the "return" policy. Secondly, the effect of "near -shore outsourcing" is not good. In particular, the actual progress of the "flagship project" of the "flagship project" of the "flagship project" is slow. On the one hand, the trade volume of the finished product of the US -Mexico does not increase and fall. After the outbreak, it was mainly affected by the break of the automotive manufacturing industry chain of the two countries, and the export of ink was severely damaged. In 2020, the export amount of Mo to the United States fell by 10%year -on -year, and the share in the import of American finished products decreased by 0.7%. On the other hand, it is not as interesting to invest in ink to go to ink. Many companies have found that Mexico has limited capabilities, and some equipment or components cannot be produced there, such as expensive molds of plastic products, and have to be obtained from Asia. Ford, GM, Chrysler and other car companies have not went smoothly.

In the end, the "allies outsourcing" and "friends outsourcing" that the Biden government was pushing the government was being questioned shortly after the launch. Faced with the exemption of tariffs and market access arrangements, but also forced countries to accept the so -called high -standard "Indo -Pacific Economic Framework" of the United States, the Asia -Pacific countries are obvious. Singapore Prime Minister Li Xianlong even warned the motivation of the "return" and "friends outsourcing" behind the framework behind the framework, emphasizing that "such a move cuts the way to regional economic growth and cooperation, increasing the differences between the country, and may cause the differences between the country and the country, which may cause trigger a trigger Everyone does not want to see the conflict. " Former Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir bluntly criticized the "Indo -Pacific Economic Framework", which is the "political group used by the United States to isolate China", and directly pierced the hypocritical cover of the United States.

"Made in China" is unstoppable

In addition to its slow progress, the original intention of the "de -China" of the US supply chain strategy has not been realized. On the contrary, China's position in the global supply chain system is becoming more and more stable.

From the perspective of the global trade structure, China's connection with the world is closer than ever. China has maintained its status of the world's largest country trade in the world for 5 consecutive years. At the supply side, China's "world factory" has become more stable. In 2020, China's share of global goods exports reached 14.7%, setting the highest level of all countries since 1978. At the demand side, China continues to build the "world market". Taking luxury trade as an example, in 2021, China's share in the global luxury market exceeds 20%. The policy of supporting tax -free trade by the Chinese government is likely to increase the sales of luxury goods by China by 2025. The "Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement" (RCEP), which has just been effective, will undoubtedly further consolidate China's position in the global supply chain in China and East Asia.

From the perspective of corporate investment, foreign companies' confidence and loyalty to China will not decline. In 2021, China's absorption of foreign investment exceeded 1 trillion yuan for the first time. In the first four months of this year, China's actual use of foreign capital increased by 26.1%year -on -year. Many visible multinational companies not only did not leave China, but chose to expand their business in China. For example, the Tesla Shanghai plant is about to expand production, and it is expected to become Tesla's largest car export hub in the world in the future. The BMW Group will establish an innovation and digital center in Nanjing this year. Its equity ratio in BMW Brilliance will also increase from 50%to 75%; SK Hynix's 30GWH (Gichva) power battery project will start in Yancheng this year.

From the perspective of foreign companies, it continues to invest in China because China has the following absolute advantages: First, it has the world's most complete supply chain ecosystem. China is the only country in the world that has all industrial categories listed in the UN industrial classification. More than 220 industrial products have the number one in the world. The first -class infrastructure and business environment also saved a lot of costs for enterprises. The second is the achievement of industrial upgrades driven by innovation. China has formed a new comparative advantage in advanced manufacturing. In the chip field, China's manufacturing capabilities have recently improved significantly. According to Chinese customs data, in the first quarter of this year, the number of imports in China's integrated circuit decreased by 9.6%year -on -year, which fell sharply compared with the 33.6%increase in the same period in 2021. In the field of electric vehicle batteries, the Ningde era alone reached 35%of the global market share. The third is huge consumption potential. At present, China's share in the global pure electric vehicle market is even as high as 61%.

But even so, as long as the Sino -US game is not over one day, Biden and the subsequent U.S. government will definitely continue to construct and speculate on its "outsourcing universe" and talk about the supply chain. However, the formation and development of the global industrial chain supply chain is the result of the development of market laws and enterprises in the development wave of globalization. It is the embodiment of economic laws. Unrealistic, it does not solve the problems faced by the country's economy, and will damage global economic development.

I sincerely advise the United States to say: instead of "proper outsourcing", it is better to "normally outsourcing".Respecting objective economic laws is the most appropriate outsourcing.(Bu Shaohua, deputy director of the Latin America and Caribbean Research Institute of China International Institute, the original "Guangming Daily" June 8th)

- END -