2026年风险之一是USMCA重新审视：协定自2020年生效，首次在「仅6年」后触发检讨；美国贸易代表称公开征询期收到逾1,500份回应，虽多数支持延长，但几乎都要求「改进」，使三方在利益分配上更容易陷入零和谈判。供应链方面，红海若全面恢复通行（改回苏伊士捷径）可能释放额外运力并引发欧洲港口拥堵；同时若美国在2026年如官方预期加速成长、在降息与投资带动下补库存，需求端也可能再度挤爆航运能力。
另一重不确定性是「非传统、可逆」的交易安排与司法风险：多项2025年达成的协议缺乏严格约束与执行条款，且对中只有「1年休战」而非完整协议，易受北京对第三国施压影响；例如美印尼7月宣布「里程碑」后，印尼改口抵制部分要求并预计在1月下旬签署。最关键的法理变数是最高法院对「对等关税」的裁决：赌盘估计特朗普败诉概率约75%，若败诉，是否需要退还已征关税及其行政可行性，将决定政府改用其他授权工具延续关税冲击的力度与节奏。
The article (Dec 24, 2025) argues global trade ended 2025 resilient on the surface but increasingly bifurcated underneath. Data show global container volumes rose 2.1% year over year in October, even as US inbound volumes contracted 8%. After a 15.2% full-year jump in US container imports in 2024, 2025 is portrayed as a sharp reversal, consistent with tariff-driven rerouting and reconfigured supply chains outside the US.
For 2026, one fault line is the USMCA review. The pact took effect in 2020 and is being reconsidered after just six years, a novel reset that drew over 1,500 public submissions. While many stakeholders support extending the deal, most also demand improvements, raising the odds that gains for one member come at another’s expense. Logistics risks include a potential full return to the Red Sea/Suez route after about two years of detours and, separately, a demand surge if the US economy accelerates and triggers inventory restocking.
A second fault line is deal fragility and legal uncertainty. Many 2025 arrangements are described as less binding, and the US-China relationship is only a one-year truce, leaving room for reversals and Chinese pressure on partners; Indonesia’s July “landmark” deal is cited as slipping toward a late-January signing amid resistance. The biggest wildcard is a pending Supreme Court ruling on “reciprocal tariffs”: betting markets assign roughly a 75% chance Trump loses, and a loss could raise contentious questions about refunds and push the administration to seek other tariff authorities.
