Cover: One Obstacle to Trump’s Industrial Revival – His Own Policies (AI Translation)

【周刊提前读】深度：特朗普关税能复兴美国制造吗？

Summary:

The article analyzes the evolving landscape of U.S. manufacturing policy, investment trends, and industrial challenges under the recent Trump and Biden administrations, with special attention to key sectors like semiconductors, automobiles, pharmaceuticals, and new energy. It reviews the impact of tariffs, subsidies, regulatory reforms, global trade tensions, and structural weaknesses hampering the U.S. ambition to revitalize domestic manufacturing.

[para. 1]

After the recent U.S.-China trade talks yielded progress, President Trump announced that Apple would increase its U.S. investment beyond a previously announced $500 billion plan and expand manufacturing with new factories, further motivated by mutual tariff reductions. About 30% of Apple’s iPhone revenue comes from the U.S., but most manufacturing occurs in Asia. Apple’s stock suffered from earlier tariffs but rebounded temporarily after the agreement, though overall market uncertainty persists. Nvidia also announced additional U.S. investment, with plans for $500 billion in AI infrastructure over four years, and secured major contracts amid fluctuating U.S. export controls, highlighting the rapid shifts in trade policy. [para. 1][para. 2][para. 3][para. 4][para. 5]

The pharmaceutical sector has also been affected by tariff pressures, with the Trump administration using trade policy to drive multinational drugmakers to move operations to the U.S. and to lower domestic drug prices. Major pharmaceutical companies like Roche, Novartis, Eli Lilly, and Merck have outlined tens of billions of dollars in new U.S. investments to create jobs and strengthen local supply chains.[para. 6][para. 7][para. 8][para. 9]

Multiple global giants—in information technology, semiconductors, automotive, food, and other sectors—are responding to U.S. policies and have announced expanded investments in America, while countries such as the UAE, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Japan have also pledged significant capital inflows. The administration’s current strategy maintains high tariffs in strategic sectors (pharma, semiconductors, autos) to incentivize onshoring, but has relaxed tariffs for non-strategic sectors to protect trade flows and state revenue.[para. 10][para. 11]

Despite stimulus measures, U.S. manufacturing output growth has slowed sharply, attributed to lagging expansion in actual production capacity and cost disadvantages versus Asia. Challenges such as the cost of production, labor shortages, and talent development remain significant obstacles to “reshoring.” Much of the announced investment has not yet translated into operational output. [para. 12][para. 13]

The semiconductor industry, critical for U.S. technology competitiveness, has seen major investment driven largely by the 2022 CHIPS Act, which offers over $52 billion in subsidies and tax incentives. TSMC, Intel, Micron, and others have secured billions in support, but under Trump’s second term, these subsidies face possible repeal, with a policy shift to using tariff relief as an incentive. Progress is hampered by slow regulatory processes and delayed disbursement of subsidy funds. Company executives note that investment is primarily driven by actual market demand rather than policy incentives alone.[para. 14][para. 15][para. 16][para. 17][para. 18]

Despite TSMC’s massive $165 billion pledge for U.S. chip manufacturing—including six fabs in Arizona—profitability remains a challenge due to higher costs and less mature ecosystems compared to Asia; 30% of its most advanced chips are expected to be produced in the U.S. in the coming years. Analysts agree that while investment announcements are politically significant, their timing often lags policy cycles, and U.S. tariffs have had a limited direct effect on motivating reshoring.[para. 19][para. 20][para. 21]

For the auto sector, the U.S. remains heavily reliant on imports (half of 2024’s 16 million new cars), prompting Trump to impose stiff tariffs of up to 25% on vehicles and parts. This has driven automakers such as Mercedes-Benz and BMW to expand U.S. production, but high labor costs, weak supply chains, and capital intensity mean job increases may be modest—and pressure global automakers’ profitability.[para. 22][para. 23][para. 24][para. 25][para. 26]

In contrast, the U.S. new energy and EV supply chain expansion, boosted by Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act ($370 billion in incentives), has doubled domestic battery capacity but faces future uncertainty as Trump freezes and reviews related subsidies and policies. Chinese and other global firms are taking a cautious approach to new U.S. projects due to high costs, unstable market demand, and shifting policy signals.[para. 27][para. 28][para. 29][para. 30][para. 31][para. 32]

A historic Achilles’ heel of American manufacturing is the high cost of capital, slow project approval, a chronic shortage of skilled labor, weak supply chains, and limited investment from domestic capital—exacerbated by cultural and educational gaps in the workforce. Notably, up to 65% of U.S. manufacturers cite labor shortages as a top challenge. Even flagship projects like Foxconn’s Wisconsin LCD factory fell well short of targets.[para. 33][para. 34][para. 35][para. 36][para. 37][para. 38][para. 39][para. 40]

Analysts conclude that without structural reforms to cost, workforce skills, and supply chains, the U.S. will struggle to reverse decades of industrial decline, despite heavy-handed tariffs or generous subsidies. Industrial policy alone cannot overcome fundamental economic and cultural headwinds.[para. 41][para. 42][para. 43][para. 44]