U.S ECONOMIC RECOVERY AND MACROECONOMIC OUTLOOK IN 2009/2010

The latest macroeconomic data from major world economies suggested that the recessionary contraction is likely to be ended in the light of positive news on GDP growth and midterm macroeconomic outlook. However, the road of the economic recovery remains uncertain. The policymakers responded to the great contraction of 2008 by decreasing interest rates close to zero rate. Massive injections of monetary stimulus boosted liquidity and attempted to accelerate credit expansion. However, monetary stimulus such as TARP in the U.S encouraged excess reserves. Thus, the banking sector published significant quarterly results as the stimulus package covered the overall losses from the credit crunch and subprime mortgage crisis of the previous year. In this brief article, I outline the economic recovery in the U.S in the ongoing year.

In Q3, the U.S economy grew by 2.4 percent despite the negative unemployment figures. While the U.S productivity grew by 6.8 percent in Q2:09 and by 9.8 percent in Q3:09, the unemployment rate is expected to reach 10.5 percent in December. The $787 billion stimulus from Obama administration to the ailing industries did little to prevent the fallout of demand and the financial difficulties of many firms. In fact, most of the stimulus has not already been spent. In spite of enormous fiscal emergency aid, the Obama administration effectively nationalized the auto industry as Detroit's auto industry declared bankruptcy. The auto industry is likely to recover gradually. Eventually, the fall of Detroit's giants was more likely a consequence of auto industry's inability to cope with high labor cost and fringe health and pension benefits.

The underlying economic theory and evidence teach that massive government intervention in the economy is inefficient as if government bailout hadn't occured. In Q3:09, financial industry posted significant quarterly earnings. Monetary stimulus inflated another asset bubble which translated into highly prospective annual data and higher volatility. Morgan Stanley's annual stock return currently stands at 133.4 percent (link). On the other hand, stock markets rallied in the light of significant quarterly earnings of the banking and financial sector. In one year, Dow Jones Industrial Average grew by 18.27 percent (link), S&P 500 increased by 22.16 percent (link) while Nasdaq Composite's annual growth rate stands at 36.91 percent (link). Stock markets rallied in the light of favorable earnings projections and cost reductions.

On the macroeconomic level, the U.S economy is likely to face a long L-shaped recovery. The underlying conditions are extremely low interest rate, high unemployment rate and high quarterly productivity growth rate. Much of the confidence in fiscal stimulus and expansionary fiscal policy was based on the initial assumption that spending multipliers will exceed 1 and boost short-term output and investment to reduce the negative output gap. Nevertheless, fiscal policy outlook remains sluggish and the prevailing evidence suggests that spending multipliers are hardly positive, except for when the unemployment rate exceeds 12 percent, causing a major fallout of capacity utilization. Robert Barro and Charles Redlick recently estimated the cost of fiscal stimulus. The Obama administration has already expressed commitment to raising the marginal tax rates. Tax increases are the unfortunate midterm alternative because excessive borrowing and the estimated 9.9 percent of the GDP fiscal deficit in 2009 (link) has already downgraded sovereign U.S debt outlook. Redlick and Barro showed that one-period lagged increase in the average marginal tax rate reduces, GDP growth by 0.56 percentage point. The overall effect on consumption purchases is -0.29 and the overall effect on investment is -0.35, both statistically significant at 99 percent.

The U.S dollar further depreciated against the euro (link), increasing the U.S inflation rate above the expected target, partly as a result of the increase in short-term yield on Treasury bonds. Purchases of Treasury bonds effectively increased demand for U.S dollars and triggered short-term depreciation trend. An effective reduction of fiscal deficit in the coming years is a necessary condition for mitigating the negative effects of U.S current account deficit. As fiscal deficit raises demand for imports in the U.S, real depreciation of the real effective exchange rate raises relative prices in the tradable sector compared to non-tradable sector. The main highlights of U.S economy recovery will be focused on restrictive fiscal policy and policy interest rates. Zero interest ground is a real disadvantage in economic recovery, mainly because the negative output gap and the Fed is likely to face hard time trading-off between higher inflation if interest rates remains at historic lows while the real sector's credit demand could surge and potential output contraction in the coming quarterly periods if the Fed will raised targeted federal funds rates. In the latter scenario, the U.S economy could repeat the Japanese disease from the 1990s, being faced with long, sluggish and slow economic recovery that could last for several years.

DOING BUSINESS 2010

The World Bank has recently released the latest Doing Business 2010 report, measuring the level of business and economic regulation around the world. In spite of the financial crisis and the global recession, Singapore, New Zealand, Hong Kong and the United States retained the leadership as the most friendly locations for doing business. Notably, some countries have achieved high ranks. For example, Saudi Arabia moved to 13th placed and Georgia, once the bastion of Soviet-style state capitalism, now ranks as 11th most friendly place for doing business with open investment environment and low regulatory barriers to trade, entrepreneurship and investment. Countries such as Georgia, Thailand and Saudi Arabia have surpassed countries such as Sweden, Finland and Iceland although there is a notable difference in international comparison of those countries when it comes to the issues of the rule of law, property rights and institutionaly quality.

Douglass North, the 1993 Nobel-winning economist once famously wrote the essence of institutionaly quality for economic development. He said that the inability of societies to develop effective low-cost institutions is the major reason of today's contemporary underdevelopment of the third world. In terms of the ease of contract enforcement, 3 out of top 10 countries are Iceland, Finland and Norway where institutional quality and the rule of law are on the high level by all international indices and comparison.

In recent decade, embracing free-market ideas has had a significantly positive impact on the institutional quality, regulatory barriers and the overall quality of business environment - all of which affect the size of transaction cost and, by empirical evidence, the standard of living and the wealth of nations. Global economic integration further induced institutional competition in terms of tax structure, regulatory environment, administrative barriers and labor market structures. Thus, when countries such as Georgia, FYR Macedonia, Moldova, Liberia and United Arab Emirates, enacted the liberalization of the business environment, the results were significant ever after. The World Bank also published the list of top 10 reforms in 2010 among which are Rwanda, Kyrgyz Republic, FYR Macedonia, Egypt, Moldova, Belarus, Columbia, United Arab Emirates, Tajikistan and Liberia (link).

The efforts to deregulate and liberalize business environment worldwide, will have a strong impact on high-income countries to remove the existing barriers to trade and investment such as high tax burden, rigid labor market structure and government size relative to private sector. 2008/2009 financial crisis and the growing role of government in the economy will probably deteriorate the country ranking in the next year. However, the leadership in the quality of business and regulatory environment will depend on further liberalization of the business environment, particulary the labor market, which is a major backbone of high-income countries where union density and regulated labor markets are widespread.

If countries such as Italy, France, Germany and the rest of the developed world will hesitate in reforming the remaining barriers to trade, more direct investment flows will move to high-growing emerging markets where macroeconomic stabilization is proceeding and where policymakers impose reforms faster then their peers in the developed world.

If such trend continues, emerging markets will soon reap the benefits and could become the leaders in reforming the business environment, attracting direct investment and, by and large, in economic growth and catch-up with the rest of the world.

ECONOMIC SURVEYS

The OECD has recently published Economic surveys of Greece (link) and Mexico (link)

ECONOMIC GROWTH IN THE WORLD IN 2009

Source: Congressional Budget Office (link)

LABOR PROTECTIONISM IN THE U.S

Daniel Griswold, trade economist at CATO Institute, describes (link) how American labor unions oppose the free-trade agreement between the U.S and Columbia although the U.S International Trade Commission's estimates show that the free trade agreement between the two countries would boost U.S exports by about $1 billion annually. The AFL complains that Columbia is an unworthy of an agreement because of violence levied on union members (link). This may sound politically feasible, but the background is certainly much different from what AFL complains. In fact, Daniel Griswold showed that Columbian unions are as safe as American unions against political violence (link).

Recall the basics of international trade, H-O-S theorem (link) explains that international trade occurs because of the differences in relative factor abundance, i.e. differences between labor/capital ratio. Thus, a country with relative abundance in labor shall export labor-intensive products while the second country shall export capital-intensive products and services. Consequently, relative wages in labor-abundant country are lower compared to those in capital-abudant country. Why? Because in a more developed capital-abundant country, labor is scarce and, hence, relative wage is higher.

The complete liberalization of trade between the U.S and Columbia would reward the relatively abundant factor in the U.S (capital) and reduce the real reward to less abundant factor (labor). Thus, in the short run, relative wages may decline. Note that the Columbian level of productivity is less than half of the U.S level. In the long run, however, relative wages shall not decline given a staggering difference in productivity between the U.S and Columbia.

As a interest group, AFL is protecting labor againist the short-run decline in relative wages. The hindrance of free trade, in fact, harms everyone. The U.S exporters would suffer the loss of one the key Latin American markets while the Columbian exporters wouldn't absorb the benefits of free trade. On the other hand, the greatest victims of protectionist trade policy are consumers. The consumers in the U.S would be denied the freedom of choice of Columbian imports while Columbian consumers would lose the variety of choices from the U.S at a lower price, following the abolition of tariff protection.

THE WORLD IN 2009 IN FIGURES

The Economist designed an interactive mapping with data, factsheet and forecast for 80 countries in the world (link).

SLOVENIA: ELECTION AND THE ECONOMY

In Sunday, voters in my native Slovenia elected left-leaning political party that will presumably hold the majority in the national parliament, given favorable majority conditions for left-leaning political parties as well as the distribution of votes and preferences of political agents. Political analysts and comments have said that Slovenian voters now turned to the left. Aside from political populism of welfare state, it is time for a brief economic view on the future of Slovenian economy and consequences that left-leaning economic policy may induce.

Some Facts about Growth

In 2007 and 2008, the output of Slovenian economy grew by historically high rates, averaging around 6 percent. Economists have different views and analytical opinion what pushed growth onto such high rate. One group of economists believe that output increase is a consequence of demand boost through government spending on infrastructure that boosted economic growth, bringing demand-pull inflation as a consequence while another group of economists believe that Slovenia's economic growth is a result of higher investment rates, favorable global economic conditions such as lowering interest rate and tax cuts. After reviewing the data and forecasting assumptions, I analytically believe that the phenomena of economic growth in recent years in Slovenia has mainly been the outcome of robust investment, reductions in marginal tax rates on labor and capital, and low interest rate. However, given the state of low interest rate, capital deepening is not a key to aggregate productivity growth. What Slovenian economy experieneced was surging investment and small supply-side tax cuts that boosted output growth. In the long run, the growth of productivity is essential to economic growth. Without it, the output growth would slowly diminish in relative terms since a continious lowering of interest rate would lead to deflation trap such as experienced by Japan in 1990s. As first, I would like to refer to the pioneering work of professor Moses Abramovitz on economic growth and output trends (here, here and here). Professor found out that there are huge growth residuals in the measurement of economic growth. For example, when the emergence of new economy propelled innovation, the latter was perceived as an exogenous shock, leaving a huge part of economic growth unexplained. While the static measurement of growth was an empirical practice as long as measuring samples of output growth were based on simplified input assumptions, dynamic advancement of innovation into production, at first, seemed as a measure that is decreasing productivity growth. However, productivity paradox revealed that assumptions in the measurement of economic growth are not a static experiment but rather an experiment that needed empirical renewal. Today, we measure economic growth through endogenous growth model where engines of growth do not come from the "outside" (exogenously) but from the "inside" (endogenously). An advantage of the endogenous model of growth is that, in general, there are not many residuals since shocks are already entailed into the model of growth. However, economic policy can significantly affect the economic performance over the future horizon.

The Greed of Political Agents

In the political market, political parties are utility-maximizing agents that seek anticipated rents through time and power they aim to achieve in the political arena. Therefore, their existence depends entirely on the distribution of economically absurd promises to different interest groups and stakeholders. In Slovenia's pre-election period, political parties delivered countless promises about the prospects of economic development, inflation and other economic issues. If there's a widespread virus of economic illiteracy, then the ideas such as "inflation is a fiscal phenomena" and "government is to be blamed for poverty" can really stick to the conventional wisdom.

Economic Scoreboard

In the fiscal year 2006-2007, the Ministry of Finance launched the first tax reform in the history of independent Slovenia. Top tax rate on personal income was reduced from 50 percent to 41 percent. Also, the entire tax code was gradually reduced from 5 tax brackets to 3 tax brackets with progressive income tax structure - 16 percent, 27 percent and 41 percent. Although tax burden remained high, consuming approximately 47 percent of the GDP, there was an intial supply-side effect on jobs, investment and tax revenue that reached historic highs after tax reductions were imposed. Also, budget deficit (in percent of the GDP) has been reduced and public spending (in GDP's share) reduced as well. Some economists blame tax reductions for poverty. In Slovenia, there is a wrong perception of poverty. The latter cannot be defined by confusing income and net wealth. Using Gini coefficients, the income inequality in Slovenia is among the lowest in the EU, just behind Sweden and Denmark. Also, using Eurostat data (here) as an analytical source, the risk of poverty in Slovenia is among the lowest in the world. Also, Slovenians owe the highest share of owned tangible households in the world. Thus, the rate of poverty in Slovenia is approximately 3 percent of the individuals above the age of 15. In the last four years, the rate of economic growth reached historic highs. Even though Slovenia is a transition economy, output growth throughout transition period was among the lowest in Eastern Europe. However, in the last four years, output growth exceeded 5 percent; the most rapid economic expansion in the economic history of independent Slovenia. Unemployment shrank sharply with its natural rate averaging 4 percent. Although "higher wages" are a popular manifest nowdays, it must be recognized that, in the long run, wages and productivity correlate. In the short run, it is evident that wage growth is behind the productivity growth. Recently published data by the Eurostat have shown that Slovenian economy has not completed the convergence of productivity relative to EU27. Today's level of real labor productivity in Slovenia is 84 percent of the EU27 level, and between 60 and 70 percent of the EU15. Estonia is the regional leader in productivity convergence from 1997-2008, while Slovenia is a regional laggard. From 1997 to 2008, the overall productivity improved by 12,5 index points. For example, in 1997, the relative level of real productivity in Estonia was 38,7 percent of the EU's. In 2008, today's level of real productivity in Estonia compared to the EU is 65,4 percent. Not surprisingly, there is an obvious empirical relationship between bargining power of the unions and slow productivity growth since economies with higher bargaining power of the unions tend to have lower productivity growth. Social democrats, the winners of the election, pledged to raise taxes on productive behavior. In that case, the growth of productivity would reduce to at least 2,5 percent in the medium run. In that case, Estonia's standard of living would catch-up Slovenia's standard of living in 13-14 years, assuming Estonia's 4,5 percent average productivity growth over the medium term. Unfamously, Slovenia is known for the highest rate of inflation in the EMU. Neither the introduction of euro, neither "fiscal impulse" are the flames of inflation which is (by the way), monetary phenomena True, lower interest rate in previous periods by the ECB may have boosted output activity and, at the same time, boosted the level of prices but, in retrospect, high rate of inflation is a consequence of rigid market structure that spills supply shocks into higher prices either because of oligopolistic market structure that imposes mark-ups on input prices, spilling it into consumer prices.

Looking to the Future

After the political turmoil, it is likely that left-leaning political parties will continue the statist course of economic policy with high tax burden in the share of the GDP, hostility towards financial markets (with enormously high tax rate on derivates) and foreign direct investment, postponing privatization with political management and meddling of inefficient state-owned companies. Tax rates will likely remain the highest in the region and Slovenia will, after Hungary and Croatia, remain the only country without flat-rated income tax. As in previous periods, there is little prospect for labor market deregulation that severely hampers productivity growth. In the long run, productivity is everything. After decades of market socialism, Slovenia's unique gradualist approach to economic reform, there is still much to be reformed immediately. Without tax cuts, market liberalization, reduced public spending, the economic growth, and consequently, the standard of living, would decline. Economic theory and practice teach us that there's no better welfare state than high economic growth, enabled by economic and individual freedom.

Rok SPRUK is an economist.

Copyright 2008 by Rok SPRUK

THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH TAX HAVENS

One of the most interesting discussions among the economists and policy experts is a debate about the role of tax havens and offshore destinations that compete with other nations in the areas of taxes, regulation and investor protection. The opponents of tax havens believe that tax havens cause an enormous damage to the economies on the other side of the world since (in their opinion), tax havens are the fundamental reason for the lack of reinvestment and capital flight in onshore economies. The real reason why tax havens are prosecuted by governments is that governement agents seek the highest possible utility from tax revenues in the form of rent-seeking that would yield more power and revenue.

Taxes and Regulation

There are two reasons for high tax rates. One is that in case of high government spending, the structure of tax rates must be high enough to avoid excessive deficit spending that could impair domestic macroeconomic stability. First, the real threat to macroeconomic stability is not deficit but the size of government spending. Also, excessive deficit spending is a threat to domestic macroeconomic stability because of the so called crowding-out effect where high government spending crowds out investment in the private sector. The net outcome is higher interest rate that arises from an increased scarcity of investment that is caused by budget deficit and high government spending. Second, the basic assertion of the Laffer curve is that high tax rates produce a bulk of negative effect. For example, when Sweden had the highest marginal tax rate in the world excessing 80 percent, the net result had been a decreasing tax revenue and when marginal tax rate were reduced, tax revenue soared. However, the real aim of tax rate reduction is not the growth of government revenue but welfare and the right of taxpayers to use the disposable income they earn. Empirical evidence suggests that prudent macroeconomic discipline such as principles of low tax burden, limited spending and adherence of price stability by the central bank result in the improvement of conditions for economic growth and stabilization process regardless of asymmetric shocks. What about regulation? Government regulate for two reasons. First, to remove the negative effects of market imperfections and second, to insure public goods. However, predatory tax rates, the growth of tax burden and the regulation of the private sector are designed seek monopoly rents in an unregulated way. While sound regulation can certainly offset the sideblocks of negative externalities such as free-riding, excessive regulation is hampering the growth of real productivity which is essential to the standard of living and the quality of life.

Tax Havens

Dan Mitchell recently explained (link) the positive role of tax havens in a global economy. From a basic perspective, minimal tax burden in tax havens is a liberalizing force in the world economy since, given capital mobility and the fluidity of knowledge, destinations with higher corporate and personal income tax burden have no choice but to reduce tax rates on productive behavior. Flat tax revolution, that was initiated by Estonia in early 1990s, also helped reduce corporate tax rates in continental Europe and Scandinavia. Given the lack of data, there are hardly any empirical studies researching the impact of tax rate reductions on tax revenue. When Swedish economy faced an onerous macroeconomic instability marred by high inflation, low output growth, declining productivity growth and a sudden dramatic increase in the interest rate (to 500 percent overnight) by Riksbank, top marginal tax rate was 84 percent. Consequently, economic growth decline and public spending grew and shrank into deficit, pushing the real interest rate up, as explained by crowding-out effect (link). When the economy is on the line of potential output, expansionary fiscal policy boosted money demand which, in turn, induced the increase in the real and nominal interest rate. As a consequence, Swedish economy faced a declining investment. Firstly, because corporate tax rate was excessive and secondly, because crowding-out effect took place. Regarding tax havens, supply-side economic and tax policies induced the trend of lowering tax rates on all sources of productivity ranging from investment, savings and entrepreneurship to labor supply. Concerning regulation, high corporate tax rate and excessive regulation usually go hand in hand since the regulation of the private sector is mostly an implicit insurance against the loss of control and - hence - the loss of tax revenue that is needed to finance government spending.
Empirical observation

I took a closer view on the comparative analysis of tax havens and onshore jurisdictions that impose higher mandatory tax rates on corporate and personal income tax as well as more excessive regulation. I downloaded the data from World Bank's Governance (link) and used a correlation analysis tool to analyze related motions of corporate tax rate, the rule of law and regulatory quality on each of these variables. An important note is that it depends on what is meant by 'regulatory quality' since World Bank oftenly criticizes tax havens. Concerning governance, tax havens scored lower than Germany and Austria - countries with high and almost punitive corporate tax rate. Despite a shaddy and imperialist fiscal agression on Liechtenstein, Germany still enjoys an enormously high score on the rule of law and regulation. However, I did not take a detailed look at methodological details even though I can say that there are extreme bias towards what regulatory quality really is.

This chart, for instance, shows a log-linear relationship between corporate income tax and regulatory quality. Considering trend line - estimated by a polynomial of second degree, countries with higher corporate income tax also have sounder regulation. But, if you take a closer look, it can be seen that trend line declines slightly in the area where there is a high concentration of countries (France, Spain, Belgium, Germany...). From WB's data, a curious reasearcher would conclude that higher taxes are good and tax havens have a tighter regulatory quality. However, the relationship in the chart is intuitive since R-square is 0,0436 which means that the variation of the independent variable explains only 4,36 of the variation of the dependent variable.


This chart(log-linearization of the relationship between corporate tax rate and the rule of law) shows that countries with high corporate income tax rate also have comparatively decreased rule of law. Again, it all depends on what is meant under the rule of law. For example, if offshore services are legally recognized in Cayman Islands, and if World Bank's governance methodology treats that as irresponsible, then Caymans will receive a lower score on the rule of law. As you can see, Iceland has the highest rule of law and a modest corporate tax rate (16 percent down from 18 percent). Interestingly, Netherlands Antilles are a tax haven more in terms of regulation and information disclosure than in terms of taxes since 34 percent corporate tax rate seems to be highly sensitive to the rule of law. In fact, many so-called tax havens have a higher rule of law than continental countries. For instance, Cayman Islands have a higher rule of law than Spain, Singapore has a higher rule of law than Germany, Belgium and France etc.

As a conclusion, tax havens are the force of liberalization in the global economy and when surveys (such as WB's) are conducted, it's good to review the methodology and measurement of particular indicators. There are bias everywhere.

Rok Spruk is an economist.

CDS IN ICELAND

In Forbes, there is a brief article (link) on credit default swap in Iceland in the wake of credit crunch and external shocks that affect macroeconomic stability.

LESSONS FROM ARGENTINA

ARGENTINA'S PUBLIC DEBT SHOT UP TO 56 PERCENT OF THE GDP

From FT:

"Argentina’s debt levels are now higher than they were when it crashed into the biggest sovereign debt default in history in 2001, and a worsening crisis of confidence in the government has brought the spectre of a new default closer, a report to be published next week says. Despite a radical restructuring just three years ago, public debt has reached $114.7bn (€74.4bn, £59bn), or 56 per cent of gross domestic product, compared with $144.2bn, or 54 per cent of GDP, in 2001 – at a time when Argentina’s economy was much larger – according to the paper. Martín Krause and Aldo Abram, directors of the Argentine Institutions and Markets Research Centre at Eseade business school and the report’s authors, also found that if the amount owed to bondholders who did not accept the 2005 restructuring and are suing to recover their money is included, Argentina’s overall debt rises to $170bn, or 67 per cent of GDP. “We’re not teetering on the brink of default but if we continue down this path, with this level of [social] conflict, we could get there,” Mr Abram told the FT. Many developed countries, including Italy and Japan, have higher ratios of debt to GDP but Argentina’s higher borrowing costs and rocky institutional record make it harder to secure credit. “The worry is not the amount, it’s that we won’t have access to credit,” Mr Abram said. The six-month-old government of Cristina Fernández, the president, has been struggling to resolve a conflict with farmers after it imposed a sliding scale of export tariffs on key agricultural exports in March. The unrest has spread to truck drivers, who have mounted roadblocks to demand an end to the farm dispute, which has disrupted grains transportation. Their action has caused fuel shortages and will put further pressure on inflation, which the government is widely accused of trying to conceal with doctored data. Meanwhile, the government must this year find $14.6bn for debt servicing, plus $11.8bn next year and $10.5bn in 2010. However, the threat of legal action by bond holdouts bars Argentina from international capital markets whilst it remains in default with the Paris Club of creditor nations, to which it owes $6.6bn. Argentina has increasingly turned to Hugo Chávez, the Venezuelan president, who has bought $6.4bn in bonds in the past three years. But its international financial isolation is costly – Buenos Aires has had to pay Venezuela interest rates of up to 13 per cent, yet it cancelled its low-cost International Monetary Fund debt and the Paris Club debt only costs 5.3 per cent, Mr Krause said. By contrast Brazil, which had a far worse debt profile than Argentina in 2001, recently achieved investment grade and sold a 10-year bond at 5.3 per cent."

INFLATION IN ASIAN ECONOMIES

Financial Times has a brilliant analysis regarding inflationary pressures and the surgence of macroeconomic instability in Asian export-driven economies (here).

OECD - ECONOMIC OUTLOOK 2008

AUSTRALIA'S ECONOMY GROWS FAST

In the latest quarter, Australia's economy grew 0,6 percent - twice as fast as the economists forecasted - continuing 17 years of rapid economic expansion. Economy's growth records may force the central bank to raise interest rate to curb inflationary pressures (link).

RETHINKING ARGENTINA'S ECONOMIC CRISIS

BrinkLindsey of the Cato Institute wrote a piece on the origins and causes of Argentina's economic crisis. The article can be read here.

INFLATIONARY PRESSURES IN GULF COUNTRIES

From FT (link):

"Inflation has replaced unemployment as the most pressing short-term problem facing the oil-rich Gulf economies, which are reaping the benefits of record oil revenues but do not have the tools available to cap rising prices, the International Monetary Fund warned on Monday. Creating jobs for the region’s growing youth population continued to be the main longer-term challenge for Middle Eastern oil exporters, said Mohsin Khan, the IMF’s regional director, but rising prices, already a concern in Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, had now extended across the Gulf Co-operation Council members to traditionally low-inflation countries such as Saudi Arabia, where inflation is approaching 10 per cent... The IMF predicts the Arab Gulf states’ consumer price index will average 7.1 per cent this year, up from 6.1 per cent in 2007 – while the broader Middle East and north Africa region will reach 10.4 per cent this year. With many regional economies pegged to the dollar, central banks lack any monetary policy tools to tackle inflation, leaving fiscal spending, rent caps and price subsidies as the only policy tools available to policymakers. In November last year, for example, rumours of a revaluation in the UAE sparked speculative inflows of $45bn (€29bn, £23bn) in one month, almost a third of the UAE’s gross domestic product... The Middle East and central Asia, which has been largely insulated from global economic uncertainty, was set to continue its strong performance, with oil-exporting countries seeing growth pick up to 6.25 per cent, the IMF said in its biannual regional economic outlook report. The region’s oil and gas exports will amount to $940bn this year, almost $200bn more than last year, as an almost fivefold increase in the price of oil fills the GCC’s coffers. The IMF estimates that the GCC’s combined GDP will reach more than $1,000bn this year, up from $805bn in 2007. The oil exporter’s growing external current account surplus, which is expected to grow to $1,400bn for 2004-2008, signals a continuing ability to invest abroad, while coping with increasing imports and investment into their domestic economies. The GCC’s current account surplus is expected to rise to $332bn from $227bn in 2007, with the UAE’s surplus rising 58 per cent and Qatar’s almost doubling. Official reserves of oil exporters had reached $800bn by the end of 2007. Foreign direct investment into the region reached $80bn in 2007, four times as high as 2002, 55 per cent of which flowed into Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the UAE."

SOUTH KOREA'S REFORM AGENDA

Lee Myung Bak, South Korea's newly elected president and former chief executive of Hyundai Construction and Engineering proposed a package of economic reforms such as tax cuts by cutting the corporate tax rate from 25 percent to 20 percent, fuel taxes by 10 percent, real estate tax, and public expenditure respectively. Korea's new president also pledged to privatize state-owned companies and remove the restrictions preventing industrial groups from owning banks.

Source: Yahoo News (link)

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF CHINA'S INFLATION

Financial Times recently reported that Chinese central government's intention to curb the inflation aims at the introduction of a unique tax on exporters of grain. The report says that exporters of 57 types of grain will have to pay a temporary tax between 5 and 25 percent.

The major reason for imposing an internal tax on grain exporters has been argued by the attempt to develop an explanation for a surgining inflation in China. Previously, the Ministry of Finance imposed a 13 percent rebate on China's grain producers in a move to increase domestic supply. In November, the inflation hit 6,9 percent accordingly.

China's consumer inflation is driven by food prices which rose 18,2 percent recently. The reason for high food prices is determined by global conditions of demand. China has been facing significant GDP growth.

The growth has been driven by a surge in domestic and global demand which put a cyclical pressure on commodity prices. The fundamental law of economics is the scarcity of resources. Each event that affects the behavior of supply and demand, also affect the equilibirum where the prices are set. In previous year, there have been particular shocks that relatively affected the behavior of world prices. For examples, natural droughts and harvest shortages reduced the supply and lifted input prices respectively.

Though the proposed tax on grain exporters is only temporary, it could hardly be supported by sufficient arguments. There will definitely be an upward pressure on prices unless the exporters give up the marginal gain. Chinese grain market is marred by subsidies and regulation. The additional taxation would further distort the allocation of scarce resources. The producers would harder find the information needed for the free production of goods where different types of grain are included as an input resource.

Given the current analysis of the behavior of food price, higher food prices which caused a surge in inflation, are temporary (link). Various attempts to influence the prices by subsidies, regulation and food quotas are economically irrelevant for two reasons: (1) such incentives cause the lack of information about the production and (2) policy-induced incentives increase the marginal cost of production. Given the conditions of perfect competition, prices equal the marginal cost.

China also proposed a 25 percent fuel tax to limit domestic consumption. Ceteris paribus, fuel prices would increase. However, there are various incentives to introduce a tax on fuel consumption. The most significant argument is that fossil fuels cause a negative effect on global warming and that therefore, fuel tax is justified. Despite the fact that China is world's No.1 air polluter, the reduction in the dependency on fossil fuels takes time. In this case, car producers will face a significant cost-induced shock because of changes in the pattern of production and technological restructuring.

The use of alternative means of energy will induce cost distortions given the magnitude of relatively high fixed costs subject to production plants and technological equipment. Chinese authorities reported that one of the major sources of inflation were higher oil prices. The answer to the question how to curb oil prices and therefore an important inflation pressure is not government intervention and various incentives such as subsidies to oil companies, oil quotas and protectionism. The fact is that oil demand is highly inelastic and that only a shift in demand will calm oil prices.

If the price coefficient of demand for oil is situated onto the interval between 0 and 1, then price increase maximize the intended utility of oil producers, because an increase in the price of oil by about 1 percent, increased the income of oil producers. China is a current leader in global economic growth. It's GDP per capita is growing rapidly, after being adjusted for inflation. A decade of high growth rate invisibly modified the conditions of oil demand. Driven by optimistic estimates and assumptions, the demand for oil became quite inelastic and there each price increase, does not reduce the welfare of oil producer. If the oil demand were prone to relative price changes and elastic, oil producers would have less manoeuvre to lift the price at the margin since such a step would inevitably reduce their income.

Chinese central bank lifted baseline interest rates six times in previous year. Such steps were normally expected due to the need to normalize the magnitude of particular shocks such as rapid economic growth which is highly related to the surgence of inflation. Keeping oil prices artificially low, and providing subsidies to oil refiners to compensate for losses due to global oil prices, is quite risky. Such a move would be justified if there were particular externalities and positive effects but in China's case, the protectionism arrives at the price of market dynamics and holding-back everyday shocks that are quite common in market economy.

Taxing grain producers, imposing tax rebates, giving subsidies to farmers and oil refiners is an inadequate measure to curb the inflation. The flexibility of domestic market to balance the signals of production, prices and consumption is an essential tool as a response to sudden shifts and macroeconomic shocks. Also, regulation makes information asymmetric, making the supply side of the economy worse-off. Subsidies to farmers distort the free mechanism of price establishment.

Inevitably, there is a negative dash on consumer prices. In economics, there are different judgements of subsidies, temporary taxes and tax rebates. Each one of those measures is mismatched by the information signalized by the producers. Fighting the administrative barriers, the establishment of competitive law, deregulation of all sectors of the economy and market liberalization are, by historic and current evidence, the best way to fight the temporary shocks and pressures as well as inflation which is a monetary phenomena.

Rok SPRUK is an economist.

Copyright 2008 by Rok SPRUK

ARE GROWTH AND SIZE OF CHINA'S ECONOMY OVER-ESTIMATED?

The Economist recently published an article discussing the size and growth of China's economy (link)

OECD CUTS GROWTH FORECAST

The OECD questions whether financial shocks and housing market turmoil will push the growth rate to the slowest in five years (link)