Analysis Report on the Impact of the Trump Administration's IEEPA Tariff Measures: A Panoramic View of Country, Industry, and Valuation Shocks

Based on the latest collected data and analysis, I will provide you with a systematic and comprehensive report analyzing the differentiated impacts of the Trump Administration’s IEEPA-based tariff measures on different countries and industries, as well as the potential shocks to corporate valuations.

---

The International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) was first passed in 1977, aiming to grant the President broad authority to regulate international economic activities during a national emergency[1]. On January 20, 2025, the Trump Administration issued the “America First Trade Policy” executive order, marking the official launch of the IEEPA tariff strategy[2].

• February 1, 2025
  : Trump declared a national emergency targeting China, Canada, and Mexico citing “fentanyl smuggling” and “trade deficits”, imposing 25% (later raised to 20%) and 25% tariffs respectively[1][3]
• April 2, 2025
  : Announced “reciprocal tariffs” on almost all trading partners on “Liberation Day”, universally imposing a 10% benchmark tariff, with rates as high as 34%-50% for specific countries[1][4]
• August 7, 2025
  : Reciprocal tariffs officially took effect after the 90-day suspension period expired[1]
• August 29, 2025
  : Terminated the de minimis exemption for packages valued under $800[1]
• November 5, 2025
  : The Supreme Court held oral arguments in the “Learning Resources v. Trump” case, with the ruling pending[1]

According to the latest executive orders, tariff rates faced by different countries vary significantly[5][6]:

Country/Region	Reciprocal Tariff Rate	Composite Tariff Rate
Mainland China	34%	~47.5% (including previous measures)
Vietnam	46%	~20% (after negotiations)
EU	20%	15%
Japan	24%	15%
India	26%	50% (including punitive tariffs on Russian oil)
Mexico	25%	Exempt under USMCA
Canada	35%	Exempt under USMCA
Brazil	50%	50%
Taiwan	32%	Semiconductor Exemption
South Korea	25%	15%
Bangladesh	37%	37%
Cambodia	49%	49%

---

Based on differences in trade dependence, U.S. market share, and negotiating position, I classify the affected countries into four tiers:

Country	Vulnerability Indicators	Core Risks
China	Exports to the U.S. account for ~3.8% of GDP; largest source of U.S. imports (13.4% of total U.S. imports)[7]	Highest composite tariff rate (47.5%), combination of fentanyl tariffs and reciprocal tariffs; significant profit pressure on export enterprises; countermeasures via rare earth export controls[1][4]
Vietnam	Exports to the U.S. account for ~33% of GDP; manufacturing sector highly dependent on the U.S. market[6]	Initial 46% tariff reduced to 20%, but facing 40% transshipment tariff risks; status as the top supply chain transfer destination challenged[6]
Mexico	Exports to the U.S. account for ~31% of GDP; core beneficiary of nearshoring[3]	Complex game between 25% tariffs and USMCA exemption clauses; highly integrated automotive industry chain, with Ford, GM and other automakers warning of production disruptions[7][8]

Country	Vulnerability Indicators	Core Risks
India	Exports to the U.S. account for ~6.5% of GDP; fourth-largest trading partner of the U.S.[5]	50% composite tariff rate (including 25% secondary tariff on Russian oil) severely erodes competitiveness; pharmaceuticals, textiles, and IT services sectors impacted[5]
Brazil	Exports to the U.S. are dominated by agricultural products and resources; moderate dependence on manufacturing exports[5]	50% tariff leads to surging export costs for soybeans and iron ore; rising political pressure from agricultural states[5]
Bangladesh	Textile sector highly dependent on the U.S. market (accounting for over 80% of exports)[6]	37% tariff directly hits garment exports; industry profit margins typically only 8-12%, making it difficult to fully pass on costs[6]
Cambodia	Garment manufacturing dominates; exports to the U.S. account for ~30% of GDP[6]	One of the highest tariff rates at 49%, almost completely offsetting cost advantages[6]

Country	Vulnerability Indicators	Core Risks
Japan	High-end manufacturing; exports to the U.S. dominated by automobiles and machinery[5]	24% reciprocal tariff can be partially absorbed via product upgrades; automotive industry has initiated cost transfer[5]
South Korea	Semiconductor and display sectors highly dependent on the U.S.[5]	Differentiated impacts between 25% reciprocal tariffs and semiconductor exemptions; limited pressure on Samsung and SK Hynix[5]
Taiwan	Semiconductor sector accounts for ~15% of GDP[5]	32% reciprocal tariff but semiconductors are exempt; indirect impacts on IC design and testing sectors[5]
EU	Diversified economy; exports to the U.S. spread across multiple industries[5]	20% tariff is relatively moderate; differentiated impacts on luxury goods, automobiles, and agricultural products[5]

According to analysis from Oqtima Geopolitical Analysis[9]:

Currency	Potential Depreciation Range	Drivers
Mexican Peso (MXN)	5-7%	USMCA uncertainty, manufacturing supply chain disruptions, risk of trade surplus compression[9]
Chinese Yuan (CNY)	Gradual depreciation	Declining export competitiveness, capital outflow pressure, PBOC’s gradual depreciation strategy[9]
South Korean Won (KRW)	3-5%	Vulnerability of tech exports, combined with geopolitical risks[9]

: Singapore Dollar, Thai Baht, Malaysian Ringgit – benefiting from supply chain diversification adjustments and post-negotiation tariff reductions[9].

---

Based on research from J.P. Morgan, Mitsui & Co., and RBC Capital Markets[4][7][8], the following industries are ranked by vulnerability:

• Bangladesh, Cambodia, Vietnam
  : Textile exports account for over 60% of total exports to the U.S.[6]
• Root cause of vulnerability
  : Average industry net profit margin is only 8-12%, with extremely weak tariff pass-through ability
• Typical case
  : Nike’s gross margin compressed by 300 bps due to tariffs, with China sales declining 17%[10]

• Vietnam, Mainland China
  : Consumer electronics exports to the U.S. account for over 40%[4]
• Root cause of vulnerability
  : Supply chains are highly concentrated in assembly bases in the Pearl River Delta (China) and northern Vietnam
• Typical case
  : Apple reported a 3-4% increase in supply chain costs, but has limited pricing power for high-end products[9]

• China, Vietnam, Mexico
  : Top three sources of U.S. furniture imports[8]
• Root cause of vulnerability
  : Dual pressure from raw material costs and tariffs, high consumer price sensitivity
• Typical case
  : Williams-Sonoma, Wayfair face 30-50% phased tariffs[9]

• Mexico, Canada, Japan, Germany
  : Concentrated sources of U.S. automobile imports[3]
• Root cause of vulnerability
  : Highly integrated industry chain, difficult to restructure in the short term
• Typical case
  : Ford, GM warn of production disruptions; Canadian auto parts suppliers face shutdown risks[7][8]

• China, Vietnam, Indonesia
  : Global footwear manufacturing hubs[10]
• Root cause of vulnerability
  : Sensitive to labor costs, limited brand premium
• Typical case
  : Nike’s China sales declined 17% due to tariffs and domestic market competition[10]

• China, Mexico
  : Main sources of U.S. plastic imports[8]
• Root cause of vulnerability
  : Downstream packaging industry has thin profit margins, making it difficult to absorb costs

• Brazil, Canada, Mexico
  : Soybeans, pork, fruits and vegetables exported to the U.S.[5]
• Root cause of vulnerability
  : Sensitive to price fluctuations, combined with seasonal factors
• Chinese countermeasures
  : Imposed 10-15% tariffs on U.S. agricultural products[1]

• Germany, Japan, China
  : Industrial equipment exports[8]
• Root cause of vulnerability
  : Technology-intensive, partial cost pass-through possible
• Typical case
  : Caterpillar, Deere face input cost pressure and weakened overseas demand[9]

• Taiwan, South Korea, Japan
  : Global core chip manufacturing hubs[5]
• Special exemption
  : Semiconductors are fully exempt from reciprocal tariffs, with limited indirect impacts on downstream packaging and testing sectors[5]

Upstream Materials → Midstream Manufacturing → Downstream Brand/Retail → End Consumers
    ↓            ↓            ↓              ↓
Rare Earths/Metals    Assembly Processing     Brand Premium       Price Sensitivity
(China-dominated)   (Vietnam/Mexico)   (Limited)        (High)

:

• Cost Transmission Diminishing Effect
  : Bargaining power decreases from upstream raw materials → midstream manufacturers → downstream brands → retailers
• Time Lag Effect
  : It takes approximately 3-6 months for impacts to be transmitted to end consumer prices, with enterprises bearing cost pressures in the interim
• Differentiated Pass-Through Ability
  : High-premium brands (Nike, Apple) can partially pass on costs; mass consumer goods struggle to do so

---

Based on RBC Capital Markets’ earnings call analysis[8]:

Industry	Profit Impact Mechanism	Expected EPS Adjustment
Retail (WMT/TGT/COST)	Cost absorption + price hike constraints	2025 Q4 guidance shows margin compression[9]
Apparel (NKE/ADDYY)	Difficulty passing on tariff costs	Gross margin compressed by 200-400 bps[10]
Automobiles (F/GM)	Rising production costs + slowing demand	2026 earnings forecast lowered by 5-10%[9]
Technology (Apple)	3-4% increase in supply chain costs	Limited impact, strong pricing power for high-end products[9]
Industrial (CAT/DE)	Cost pressure + weakened overseas demand	Export chain enterprises face profit pressure[9]

According to data from Oqtima Geopolitical Analysis[9]:

Enterprise Type	P/E Compression Range	Drivers
Highly export-dependent retailers	10-15%	Margin risks, uncertainty in consumer spending[9]
Textile/footwear manufacturers	15-25%	Direct tariff impact, margin compression[10]
Auto parts suppliers	10-20%	Supply chain disruption risks, declining capacity utilization[8]
Tech hardware manufacturers	5-10%	Partial cost pass-through possible, relatively rigid demand[9]

Tariff Shock → Earnings Downgrades → Deteriorating Cash Flow → Rising Credit Risk → Stock-Bond Sell-Off
    ↓         ↓          ↓           ↓
Valuation Compression   EPS Decline   ROE Reduction    Rising Debt Costs  Expanded Risk Premium

:

1. Earnings Side
   : Directly impacts net profit margins, with net profits of high-dependence enterprises expected to decline 8-15% in 2025
2. Cash Flow Side
   : Increased working capital demand, extended accounts receivable cycles
3. Cost of Capital Side
   : Widening credit spreads, higher debt refinancing costs
4. Valuation Side
   : Rising equity risk premium (ERP), higher WACC in DCF models

Indicator	Data	Interpretation
China Sales	17% YoY decline	Double pressure from intensified domestic competition and tariffs[10]
Gross Margin Compression	300 bps	Direct erosion from tariffs[10]
Stock Performance	22% annual decline	Market pricing in pessimistic expectations[10]
P/E Historical Comparison	Below 5-year average	Valuations have fully priced in risks[10]

: Even for export-dependent consumer goods enterprises with brand premium capabilities, it is still difficult to fully hedge against tariff impacts.

Indicator	Data	Interpretation
Supply Chain Cost Increase	3-4%	Relatively manageable[9]
Pricing Power	Strong	Rigid demand for high-end products[9]
Valuation Impact	Limited	Buffered by semiconductor exemptions[9]

: Enterprises with high technological barriers and strong brand premium capabilities have stronger resilience.

Indicator	Data	Interpretation
Production Costs	Significant increase	Transmitted from import tariffs on parts[8]
EV Transformation Costs	Compounded pressure	Double blow from battery import tariffs[9]
Employment Impact	Potential risk	Capacity adjustment pressure[7]

: Industries with highly integrated chains face systemic restructuring costs.

Scenario assumptions based on DCF models:

Industry	Base Case	Optimistic Scenario (Tariff Relaxation)	Pessimistic Scenario (Tariffs Maintained/Upgraded)
Textile Manufacturing	8-10x EV/EBITDA	10-12x	6-8x
Electronics Assembly	12-15x	14-17x	10-12x
Auto Parts	7-9x	9-11x	5-7x
Retail	15-18x	18-22x	12-15x
Tech Hardware	20-25x	25-30x	18-22x

---

• Semiconductors
  : Exempt from tariffs, rigid demand from AI/data centers[5]
• U.S. Domestic Consumption
  : Avoid export shocks, focus on leading essential consumer goods enterprises
• Healthcare
  : Rigid demand, high policy immunity

• Textile and Apparel
  : Direct impact, margin-sensitive[6]
• Auto Parts
  : High supply chain risk premium[8]
• Emerging Market Export-Oriented Stocks
  : Risk of currency and valuation double hit[9]

• Negotiation Progress-Driven
  : Vietnam, India, etc., which obtained tariff concessions through negotiations[5]
• Supply Chain Restructuring Beneficiaries
  : Mexico (nearshoring), India (diversification)[6]

Instrument	Applicable Scenario	Recommended Allocation Ratio
Currency Hedging	Currency depreciation risk	Short positions in MXN, KRW
Interest Rate Futures	Rising inflation expectations	Short positions in short-end contracts
Volatility Strategy	VIX upside risk	VIX futures/options
Gold	Safe-haven demand	3-5% allocation
Tail Risk Funds	Extreme events	1-2% allocation

1. Policy Level
   :
   • Supreme Court ruling on IEEPA (expected early 2026)[1]
   • USMCA renegotiation progress[3]
   • Renewal/termination of national emergency declarations

2. Data Level
   :
   • U.S. CPI/PPI (inflation transmission)
   • U.S. import data (actual demand changes)
   • Emerging market trade surplus changes

3. Market Level
   :
   • High-yield spreads (credit risk)
   • Emerging market currency volatility
   • Earnings revision range of export-oriented enterprises

---

:

• Risk assets rebound 5-10% in the short term
• Emerging market currencies appreciate 3-5%
• Valuations of high-export-dependence enterprises recover

:

• Retail stock P/E expands by 5-8%
• Textile/automotive stock P/E expands by 10-15%

:

• Risk assets come under pressure, volatility rises
• Export-dependent currencies depreciate further
• Corporate earnings expectations are revised downward

:

• P/E of high-dependence enterprises compresses by another 5-10%
• Supply chain restructuring accelerates, benefiting Mexico/India

:

• Congress may pass legislation to limit presidential tariff authority
• Or attach restrictive clauses to budget bills

: Uncertainty persists, making it difficult for enterprises to conduct long-term capital allocation

---

1. Country Level
   : China, Vietnam, India, Brazil, and Mexico are the most vulnerable countries, with China and Vietnam facing the highest risks due to their heavy dependence on U.S. manufacturing exports[1][4][5]

2. Industry Level
   : Textile and apparel manufacturing, electronics assembly, furniture, and auto parts are the most vulnerable industries, characterized by high margin sensitivity and weak bargaining power[6][8][10]

3. Valuation Level
   : High-export-dependence enterprises face 10-25% P/E compression and 8-15% downward revisions in profit expectations, with some enterprises facing rising credit risks[9][10]

4. Transmission Mechanism
   : Tariff shocks are transmitted step-by-step through the supply chain, with upstream material monopolists (rare earths) relatively benefiting, while midstream assembly sectors bear the brunt[4][9]

• Short-Term (1-3 Months)
  : Avoid high-export-dependence targets, wait for policy clarity
• Mid-Term (3-6 Months)
  : Focus on supply chain restructuring beneficiaries (Mexico, India)
• Long-Term (6-12 Months)
  : If IEEPA tariffs are overturned, valuation recovery opportunities are expected; if they persist, the risk premium of export-dependent assets needs to be repriced

---

[1] Wikipedia