4月6日，央视国际电视台（CGTN）《China 24》节目播出对对外经济贸易大学法学院纪文华教授的专访，围绕美方“对等关税”措施的理由、中方应对措施及依据展开解读。

As US President Donald Trump pushes for a return to his so-called "reciprocal tariffs" against China, experts argue that his approach is economically flawed and legally questionable under WTO rules. The tariffs, which claim to match China's rates, would significantly disrupt global trade while failing to address core trade imbalances. Our reporter Li Shuang has more.

Within 36 hours of the US raising tariffs on Chinese goods, Beijing not only responded in kind but also began exploring legal action under the WTO framework.

HE YADONG, Commerce Ministry spokesman "This neither contributes to so-called national security nor helps the domestic industry in the United States. It only highlights the unilateralism, protectionism and bullying nature of the US measures."

China's six major chambers of commerce have issued statements condemning Trump's 54% tariffs on imports from China, calling them unfair and disruptive to global trade.

LI SHUANG, Beijing "Trump's so-called 'reciprocal tariffs'—are they truly reciprocal?"

JI WENHUA, International Trade Law & WTO Rules Expert, University of International Business and Economics, Beijing "What we eventually saw was not truly reciprocal. He used the idea of reciprocity to cover many intangible factors—things that are difficult to quantify—and included considerations that traditionally have no role in determining tariff rates. In the end, the tariffs he set were neither based on what trade partners were imposing, nor grounded in any transparent calculation. The methodology was both chaotic and overly simplistic."

The U.S. justifies its tariffs by citing national security concerns and unfair trade practices. But are these claims legally valid under WTO regulations?

JI WENHUA, International Trade Law & WTO Rules Expert, University of International Business and Economics, China "The main reasons behind his tariffs, I believe, are twofold: first, to bring manufacturing jobs back to the US; and second, to reduce the US trade deficit. As for the national security justification, it might apply in specific sectors or products—but in cases like the tariffs on Canadian lumber, it's difficult to argue that national security is truly at stake."

Under WTO rules, tariffs are determined by negotiated commitments, not arbitrary matching. Professor Ji warns that Trump's approach would undermine the Most-Favored-Nation principle, which ensures equal treatment among WTO members.

JI WENHUA, International Trade Law & WTO Rules Expert, University of International Business and Economics, China "This fundamentally breaches the basic rules governing trade in goods under the WTO. In fact, it's clear that WTO rules were not even a serious consideration in the process."

LI SHUANG, Beijing "With both China and the US standing firm, the outlook remains uncertain. As Beijing responds through tariffs, legal action, and trade diversification, the coming months will be critical in shaping the future of global trade. Li Shuang, CGTN, Beijing."

附原文及视频链接：

https://news.cgtn.com/news/2025-04-06/VHJhbnNjcmlwdDgzODky/index.html