트럼프 2기 시대, 미국이 중국의 188개 기업을 군사 blacklist에 추가
US-China Relations in the Trump 2.0 Era: A Timeline - China Briefing
미국 국방부의 중국 기술 기업 188개 회사를 블랙리스트에 추가한 조치가, 근시일 내 지분 가격에 압박을 줄 것으로 예상됩니다.
핵심 요약
미국은 2026년 6월 알리바바, 바이두 등 188개 중국 기업을 군사 blacklist에 추가했습니다.
핵심요약
- 미국 국방부는 2026년 6월 188개 중국 기업을 군사 blacklist에 추가했습니다
- 알리바바와 바이두는 SASAC와 연결되어 중국 국방 산업에 기여한다고 지정되었습니다
- 코스코는 PLA를 대표하는 기업으로 지정되었습니다
- 이 목록에 포함된 기업들은 미국 국방부와의 계약이 금지됩니다
- 이전에는 2026년 2월에 발표되었으나 철회되었습니다
도입
이번 기사에서 미국이 중국의 주요 기술 기업들을 군사 blacklist에 추가한 것은 투자자에게 중요한 시사점을 제공합니다. 특히 중국 기업들의 미국 시장에 대한 접근이 제한될 수 있으므로, 포트폴리오 조정이나 리스크 관리가 필요해졌습니다. 또한, 미국과 중국의 기술 경쟁이 더욱 심화될 가능성을 고려해야 합니다.
본문 1: 미국 군사 blacklist의 경제적 영향
미국이 188개 중국 기업을 군사 blacklist에 추가한 것은 중국 기업들의 미국 시장 진출에 직접적인 타격을 줄 수 있습니다. 특히 알리바바와 바이두와 같은 기업들은 미국 시장에서의 비즈니스 확장이 어려워질 수 있으며, 이는 그들의 수익성에 부정적인 영향을 미칠 수 있습니다. 또한, COSCO Shipping과 같은 기업들은 미국과의 무역 활동에 제한이 생길 수 있어 글로벌 공급망에 영향을 줄 수 있습니다. 이는 중국 기업들의 주식 가격 하락이나 투자 유치 어려움으로 이어질 수 있습니다.
본문 2: 기술 경쟁 심화와 글로벌 공급망 변화
이번 조치는 미국과 중국의 기술 경쟁을 더욱 심화시킬 가능성이 있습니다. 중국 기업들은 미국 시장에서의 활동이 제한되면 다른 시장으로의 진출을 강화할 수 있으며, 이는 글로벌 기술 시장 구조에 변화를 줄 수 있습니다. 또한, 미국 기업들도 중국 시장에서의 활동에 대한 리스크를 고려해야 하며, 이는 두 국가 간의 기술 협력 감소로 이어질 수 있습니다. 이는 글로벌 공급망의 분열을 가속화할 수 있으며, 기업들의 운영 비용 증가로 이어질 수 있습니다.
결론
미국이 중국의 주요 기술 기업들을 군사 blacklist에 추가한 것은 미국과 중국의 관계에 새로운 장벽을 세운 것으로 보입니다. 이는 중국 기업들의 미국 시장 진출을 어렵게 만들며, 기술 경쟁을 더욱 심화시킬 수 있습니다. 투자자들은 이 조치의 장기적인 영향을 고려하여 포트폴리오를 조정하고, 글로벌 공급망 변화에 대비해야 합니다. 또한, 미국과 중국의 기술 협력 감소 가능성에 주목해야 합니다.
Original Article
US-China Relations in the Trump 2.0 Era: A Timeline - China Briefing
This timeline was created on January 21, 2025, and was last updated on June 17, 2026.
This timeline tracks the developments in the US-China relationship during President Donald Trump’s second term in office.
Previously, China Briefing tracked and documented the US-China trade war in the Trump era and the evolution of US-China relations in the Biden Era . We also track current tariff rates in our article: Breaking Down the US-China Trade Tariffs: What’s in Effect Now?
US-China relations in the Trump 2.0 era
June 8 to 13, 2026: US Adds Top Chinese Tech Firms to Military Blacklist
The US Department of Defense (DoD) has designated a slew of top Chinese tech companies as military companies, adding a total of 188 new entities to the List of Chinese Military Companies (the 1260H List).
The new additions include Alibaba, Baidu, BGI Group, BYD, COSCO Shipping, China Mobile, and China Telecom.
Alibaba and Baidu are “indirectly affiliated with SASAC [State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission]” and a “military-civil fusion contributor to the Chinese defense industrial base” through their affiliation with the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT), according to the DoD.
Other companies, such as COSCO, are designated as being directly controlled by SASAC and acting officially on behalf of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA).
A previous update to the list, which included the addition of these companies, was announced in February, but the DoD withdrew the document shortly after release without explanation at the request of the Pentagon.
Under Section 1260H of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2021, the Secretary of Defense is required to identify and publish a list of “Chinese military companies” annually until 2030. Inclusion on this list does not result in immediate sanctions in the same way that the Commerce Department’s Entity List does, but it prohibits the companies from entering into US defense contracts and sends a signal to investors that they may be subject to regulatory scrutiny and possible restrictions in the future.
The military blacklist will have a more direct impact on biotechnology companies. Under the BIOSECURE Act, which was passed through the NDAA 2026 in December, Chinese biotechnology companies included on the list will be restricted from entering into federal contracts for biotechnology equipment or services. The 2025 update already included three subsidiaries of the Chinese biotech company BGI Group, while WuXi AppTec Co. has been added to the latest update.
Speaking to reporters on June 13, a spokesperson for China’s Ministry of Commerce stated that “China expresses its strong dissatisfaction and firm opposition” to the move, adding that the US had “disregarded the consensus reached at the Beijing meeting between the two heads of state” and “unreasonably suppressed Chinese companies”. They also urged the US to withdraw the measures immediately, and warned that China would otherwise “resolutely and forcefully retaliate”.
June 2, 2026: USTR proposes 12.5 percent tariff on goods from the Chinese mainland and Hong Kong
The US Trade Representative (USTR) has proposed a tariff ranging from 10 to 12.5 percent on 60 economies, including China, as a result of a Section 301 investigation into forced labor.
The investigation, one of two launched on March 12, seeks to reinstate tariffs on trading partners following the Supreme Court’s decision striking down tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a core tenet of Trump’s tariff regime.
The USTR alleges that all 60 countries under investigation have “failed both to impose a forced labor import prohibition and to effectively enforce such a prohibition”.
The USTR has proposed a lower 10 percent tariff on countries that already impose or have taken steps to impose a forced labor import prohibition. However, China falls outside this scope and would therefore be subject to the higher 12.5 percent tariff.
A range of items would be exempt from the tariff, including all goods currently subject to the Section 232 tariffs, as well as commodities that cannot be produced in sufficient quantities in the US, such as tea, coffee, and tropical fruits. These goods were previously exempt from the IEEPA tariffs.
The USTR is collecting comments on the proposal until July 6, before a hearing on July 7.
A spokesperson for China’s Foreign Ministry condemned the move, telling reporters that “China opposes all forms of unilateral tariff measures”, adding that “There is no such thing as ‘forced labor’ in China, and we oppose using it as a pretext for political manipulation”. However, China has thus far stopped short of announcing any counter-measures. This may be due to an agreement reached between the two sides during Trump’s recent visit to Beijing that the US could reinstate tariffs, provided they do not surpass the rate negotiated as part of the Busan agreement.
However, another Section 301 investigation into excess capacity is still ongoing, and any additional tariffs proposed as a result could exceed this threshold.
May 20, 2026: US and China agree to tariff terms but delay extension to one-year truce
China and the US appear to have agreed on terms for the restoration of the US’s now-voided tariffs on China, but have not yet agreed on an extension to the one-year trade truce negotiated in October last year.
In an interview with Reuters on May 19, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said he believed that China would accept the restoration of the prior tariff rates through the Section 301 investigations, “as long as they don’t go higher”. The two investigations are set to be concluded this summer.
The Chinese side has obliquely confirmed this. In a May 20 press briefing , the Chinese Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) told reporters that it hoped the US would “honor its commitments” and ensure that “the level of US tariffs on China will not exceed the level” agreed upon following the Trump-Xi meeting in Busan in October. This meeting resulted in the two sides agreeing to cut two-way tariffs and suspend a range of other trade barriers.
This suggests that the two Section 301 tariff investigations, initiated in March following the Supreme Court’s decision to remove the two tariff lines imposed on China under IEEPA, will each result in a 10 percent duty on Chinese goods, replacing the 10 percent “fentanyl” and 10 percent reciprocal tariff imposed under IEEPA.
It remains unclear whether this means China will rescind the investigations launched in retaliation for the two Section 301 investigations.
While this is not a final resolution to the trade dispute, agreeing on the terms of the tariff restorations reduces the risk that the Section 301 investigations instigate another tariff war.
When asked whether the one-year truce negotiated in Busan would be extended, Bessent said that the US was “not in a rush to extend it”, adding that “Things are stable”.