
毕马威(KPMG)美国供应链主管玛丽·罗尔曼(Mary Rollman)表示:“几乎与我交谈过的每一位客户都已设立战情室。他们组建起一支专职团队,团队成员彻底搁置日常事务。当下,他们的任务就是关注新闻动态,以便及时掌握最新消息,并迅速向领导层汇报。”
在2025年全球大贸易战纷扰的复杂格局中——不过公司并非是这场战争的发起者。在各国政府彻底重塑全球商业环境之际,它们正奋力求生存、谋发展。这一挑战的核心在于供应链,而究竟该如何对其进行变革则是所有这些战情室的首要议题。美国供应链管理协会首席执行官安倍·埃什肯纳齐(Abe Eshkenazi)表示:“这在供应链历史上是绝无仅有的时期,我们此前从未在如此复杂的局面下应对过类似挑战。”
全球皆预感重大变局将至——特朗普曾屡次向世界宣称他将大幅提高关税力度与规模——然而,几乎无人预料到他于4月2日针对57个国家所实施的关税加征幅度竟如此之大。关税税率从11%(针对喀麦隆和刚果民主共和国)到49%(针对柬埔寨)不等,这使得美国的平均有效关税率飙升至22.5%——这是自1909年以来的最高水平。一周后,他暂停了对大多数国家的关税,将除中国以外所有国家的关税税率降至10%。当下,没有任何一位在世的美国企业经营者,拥有在如此环境下开展业务的经验 。
截至目前,大多数美国公司似乎都在采取规模有限的举措。罗尔曼表示,部分公司正加速推进将制造业务回迁美国本土的既有规划。还有部分公司在关税政策调整时,选择将进口商品滞留在边境。但她表示,“此类举措尚属个别现象。与我合作的大多数公司都在努力模拟各种应对方案和情景,但尚未做出任何重大决策。”
进行调整并非易事。在已然成为历史的全球化经济模式下,以汽车生产为例,在美国组装的汽车,其零部件往往源自数十个国家。部分零部件在生产过程中需多次跨越国境流转。福特公司表示,它使用的零部件由约1400家供应商提供的1000多种材料制成。重构这样的供应链体系,难度超乎想象。
在特朗普首个任期实施加征关税政策后,部分行业被迫废弃原有的供应链,然而此次面对关税变动,那些行业恐难凭借此前经验占得先机。毕马威美国及全球贸易与海关业务主管安德鲁·西西利亚诺(Andrew Siciliano)表示:“我们看到纺织与服装业成为受冲击最为严重的行业之一。特朗普首个任期实施加征关税政策后,许多公司于2018年撤离中国,转而迁往越南、泰国、印度和马来西亚。”截至4月2日,上述四国均面临高额关税。尽管当前关税已下调至10%,但关税暂停期结束后,这些国家将面临何种关税政策仍充满不确定性。
当下又平添一层变数:今日的关税,明日是否依旧?暂停加征关税实属意料之外,而从历史来看,未来无疑还将涌现更多不可预知的变数。例如,特朗普在首个任期内曾宣布对源自巴西的金属产品加征新关税,然后在与时任巴西总统雅伊尔·博索纳罗(Jair Bolsonaro)会谈数日后便取消了这项关税。如今,类似的情况再次出现,但规模远超以往。特朗普最近在“空军一号”专机上对记者表示,关税政策赋予美国“强大的谈判权”,并坦言“我已与众多欧洲、亚洲乃至全球各地的领袖展开对话,他们迫切希望达成协议”。包括美国贸易代表贾米森·格里尔(Jamieson Greer)在内的其他官员也暗示,美国政府对达成协议持开放态度。4月2日宣布的关税政策显然是谈判中的初步试探,这意味着企业领导人如今必须基于随时可能毫无预兆发生变化的关税政策来构建新的供应链体系。
这恰恰是致使供应链难以顺畅运作的环境。埃什肯纳齐表示:“供应链依赖于稳定性,这种稳定性既涵盖数据层面,也包括可预测性。若能明确市场需求,我们便能精准规划供应、订单、库存及物流。然而,正如金融市场难以驾驭不确定性一样,供应链体系同样不擅长应对突如其来的变数。”
更棘手的是,供应链的重大调整往往需要长期的应对措施。例如,汽车制造商在美国新建一家制造工厂至少需要两年半的时间,部分工厂甚至耗时三到五年。待工厂正式投产时,汽车制造商又需规避哪些国家的何种关税呢?那笔数十亿美元的投资是否明智?再比如,仿制药的原料大多来自中国和印度。罗尔曼说:“这种情况已经持续了20年之久。”她表示,在美国生产这些原料,成本将高出35%,而且在美国建厂可能需要长达两年的时间。在此期间,这些原料仍需进口,且价格或将进一步攀升——具体涨幅无人能够预知——这取决于与中印两国的关税谈判结果。
当领导们努力做出重大决策时,由于难以洞悉特朗普的长期目标,他们深感沮丧。路易斯安那州共和党参议员约翰·肯尼迪(John Kennedy)最近向《华尔街日报》坦言:“我实在无法揣测他当下的战略意图。”埃什肯纳齐则疑惑道:“通过所有这些关税,我们到底想要达成什么目标呢?”他们或许应该记住特朗普在2015年出版的《跛脚的美国》一书中写道:“我不想让人们确切地知道我在做什么——或者在想什么。我喜欢出其不意,让他们猝不及防。”
显然,对于供应链高管以及其他人而言,特朗普确实做到了这一点。(财富中文网)
译者:中慧言-王芳
毕马威(KPMG)美国供应链主管玛丽·罗尔曼(Mary Rollman)表示:“几乎与我交谈过的每一位客户都已设立战情室。他们组建起一支专职团队,团队成员彻底搁置日常事务。当下,他们的任务就是关注新闻动态,以便及时掌握最新消息,并迅速向领导层汇报。”
在2025年全球大贸易战纷扰的复杂格局中——不过公司并非是这场战争的发起者。在各国政府彻底重塑全球商业环境之际,它们正奋力求生存、谋发展。这一挑战的核心在于供应链,而究竟该如何对其进行变革则是所有这些战情室的首要议题。美国供应链管理协会首席执行官安倍·埃什肯纳齐(Abe Eshkenazi)表示:“这在供应链历史上是绝无仅有的时期,我们此前从未在如此复杂的局面下应对过类似挑战。”
全球皆预感重大变局将至——特朗普曾屡次向世界宣称他将大幅提高关税力度与规模——然而,几乎无人预料到他于4月2日针对57个国家所实施的关税加征幅度竟如此之大。关税税率从11%(针对喀麦隆和刚果民主共和国)到49%(针对柬埔寨)不等,这使得美国的平均有效关税率飙升至22.5%——这是自1909年以来的最高水平。一周后,他暂停了对大多数国家的关税,将除中国以外所有国家的关税税率降至10%。当下,没有任何一位在世的美国企业经营者,拥有在如此环境下开展业务的经验 。
截至目前,大多数美国公司似乎都在采取规模有限的举措。罗尔曼表示,部分公司正加速推进将制造业务回迁美国本土的既有规划。还有部分公司在关税政策调整时,选择将进口商品滞留在边境。但她表示,“此类举措尚属个别现象。与我合作的大多数公司都在努力模拟各种应对方案和情景,但尚未做出任何重大决策。”
进行调整并非易事。在已然成为历史的全球化经济模式下,以汽车生产为例,在美国组装的汽车,其零部件往往源自数十个国家。部分零部件在生产过程中需多次跨越国境流转。福特公司表示,它使用的零部件由约1400家供应商提供的1000多种材料制成。重构这样的供应链体系,难度超乎想象。
在特朗普首个任期实施加征关税政策后,部分行业被迫废弃原有的供应链,然而此次面对关税变动,那些行业恐难凭借此前经验占得先机。毕马威美国及全球贸易与海关业务主管安德鲁·西西利亚诺(Andrew Siciliano)表示:“我们看到纺织与服装业成为受冲击最为严重的行业之一。特朗普首个任期实施加征关税政策后,许多公司于2018年撤离中国,转而迁往越南、泰国、印度和马来西亚。”截至4月2日,上述四国均面临高额关税。尽管当前关税已下调至10%,但关税暂停期结束后,这些国家将面临何种关税政策仍充满不确定性。
当下又平添一层变数:今日的关税,明日是否依旧?暂停加征关税实属意料之外,而从历史来看,未来无疑还将涌现更多不可预知的变数。例如,特朗普在首个任期内曾宣布对源自巴西的金属产品加征新关税,然后在与时任巴西总统雅伊尔·博索纳罗(Jair Bolsonaro)会谈数日后便取消了这项关税。如今,类似的情况再次出现,但规模远超以往。特朗普最近在“空军一号”专机上对记者表示,关税政策赋予美国“强大的谈判权”,并坦言“我已与众多欧洲、亚洲乃至全球各地的领袖展开对话,他们迫切希望达成协议”。包括美国贸易代表贾米森·格里尔(Jamieson Greer)在内的其他官员也暗示,美国政府对达成协议持开放态度。4月2日宣布的关税政策显然是谈判中的初步试探,这意味着企业领导人如今必须基于随时可能毫无预兆发生变化的关税政策来构建新的供应链体系。
这恰恰是致使供应链难以顺畅运作的环境。埃什肯纳齐表示:“供应链依赖于稳定性,这种稳定性既涵盖数据层面,也包括可预测性。若能明确市场需求,我们便能精准规划供应、订单、库存及物流。然而,正如金融市场难以驾驭不确定性一样,供应链体系同样不擅长应对突如其来的变数。”
更棘手的是,供应链的重大调整往往需要长期的应对措施。例如,汽车制造商在美国新建一家制造工厂至少需要两年半的时间,部分工厂甚至耗时三到五年。待工厂正式投产时,汽车制造商又需规避哪些国家的何种关税呢?那笔数十亿美元的投资是否明智?再比如,仿制药的原料大多来自中国和印度。罗尔曼说:“这种情况已经持续了20年之久。”她表示,在美国生产这些原料,成本将高出35%,而且在美国建厂可能需要长达两年的时间。在此期间,这些原料仍需进口,且价格或将进一步攀升——具体涨幅无人能够预知——这取决于与中印两国的关税谈判结果。
当领导们努力做出重大决策时,由于难以洞悉特朗普的长期目标,他们深感沮丧。路易斯安那州共和党参议员约翰·肯尼迪(John Kennedy)最近向《华尔街日报》坦言:“我实在无法揣测他当下的战略意图。”埃什肯纳齐则疑惑道:“通过所有这些关税,我们到底想要达成什么目标呢?”他们或许应该记住特朗普在2015年出版的《跛脚的美国》一书中写道:“我不想让人们确切地知道我在做什么——或者在想什么。我喜欢出其不意,让他们猝不及防。”
显然,对于供应链高管以及其他人而言,特朗普确实做到了这一点。(财富中文网)
译者:中慧言-王芳
“Almost every client I talk to has a war room,” says Mary Rollman, KPMG’s U.S. supply-chain leader. “They get a team spun up, and the members have completely dropped their day job. Their job now is to watch the news and see what comes out next, and quickly be able to present to leadership.”
That’s life in the chaotic Great Trade War of 2025—but companies aren’t waging the war. They’re trying to survive and thrive as governments radically remake the global business environment. At the heart of that challenge is the supply chain, and exactly how to transform it is Topic A in all those war rooms. “This is a unique time in supply-chain history,” says Abe Eshkenazi, CEO of the Association for Supply Chain Management. “It’s something we have never done at this level.”
Everyone knew something big was looming—President Trump had often told the world he would impose more and heavier tariffs—but hardly anyone was prepared for the magnitude of the tariffs he imposed on 57 countries on April 2. They ranged from 11% (on Cameroon and Democratic Republic of the Congo) to 49% (on Cambodia), raising the average effective U.S. tariff rate to 22.5%—the highest since 1909. A week later he paused most of those tariffs, reducing them to 10% for all countries except China, for which the tariff at this writing is 145%. No one alive has any experience managing a U.S. business in that environment.
So far, most U.S. companies seem to be taking small steps. Some are accelerating existing plans to bring manufacturing to the U.S., says Rollman. Some are holding imports at the border as tariffs change. But “that is the minority,” she says. “Most companies I work with are working to model options and scenarios but not making any major changes now.”
Adapting won’t be easy. In the now-gone globalized economy, cars assembled in the U.S. included parts from dozens of countries, for example. Some parts crossed borders multiple times as they were built. Ford says it uses parts made of over 1,000 materials supplied by some 1,400 suppliers. Redesigning that kind of supply chain will be mind-boggling.
A few industries had to scrap their supply chains after Trump’s tariffs in his first term, but that experience may not give them much of an advantage this time. “One industry we’re seeing that was heavily impacted was the textile and apparel industry,” says Andrew Siciliano, head of KPMG’s U.S. and global trade and customs practices. “Many companies moved out of China in 2018,” after Trump imposed tariffs in his first term, “and moved to Vietnam, Thailand, India, and Malaysia.” As of April 2, all four of those countries faced high tariffs. They’re now down to 10%, and there’s no telling what tariffs they will face when the pause expires.
Now add yet another layer of complexity: Will today’s tariff be the same tomorrow? The pause was a surprise, and history says more surprises are surely ahead. In his first term as president, Trump announced a new tariff on metals from Brazil, for example, then canceled it days later after speaking with then Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro. A similar procedure is shaping up again, this time on a much larger scale. Trump recently told reporters on Air Force One that the tariffs give the U.S. “great powers to negotiate” and that “I spoke to a lot of Europeans, Asians, all over the world. They’re dying to make a deal.” Other officials, including U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, have signaled the administration is open to making deals. The tariffs announced on April 2 are apparently opening bids in a negotiation, which means business leaders must now build new supply chains based on tariffs that could change at any time with little warning.
That is exactly the environment in which supply chains work badly. “The supply chain depends on consistency, not only on data, but on predictability,” says Eshkenazi. “If we know what the demand is, then we know how to sequence supply and ordering and inventories and logistics. As in financial markets, we don’t deal well with uncertainty.”
Compounding the difficulty, big changes in supply chains often require long-term responses. Automakers need at least 2 ½ years to build a U.S. manufacturing facility, for example, and some plants have required three to five years. By the time they’re running, what tariffs on which countries will automakers be trying to avoid? Will that billion-dollar investment have turned out to be wise? Or consider the ingredients for generic drugs, most of which are made in China and India. “It’s been that way for 20 years,” says Rollman. Producing them in the U.S. would cost 35% more, she says, but building U.S. plants could take up to two years. Until then, the ingredients would have to be imported at prices that could be even higher—no one knows how much—depending on tariffs negotiated with China and India.
As leaders struggle to make high-stakes decisions, they’re frustrated by the difficulty of discerning Trump’s long-term objectives. Republican Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana recently confessed to the Wall Street Journal, “I just don’t know what his goal is right now.” Eshkenazi wonders, “What is it that we’re trying to accomplish through all these tariffs?” They may want to remember what Trump wrote in his 2015 book Crippled America: “I don’t want people to know exactly what I’m doing—or thinking. I like being unpredictable. It keeps them off-balance.”
With supply-chain executives and others, he is certainly succeeding.