|
Smith
Faculty Opinion Article
|
December
12, 2007
|
|
By Dr. Peter Morici, Professor
of International Business
E-MAIL
WEB SITE
|
 |
U.S. Records $57.8
Billion Trade Deficit in October
Heightens Risk of Recessions, Lowers GDP
by $250 Billion
Today, the Commerce Department
reported the October deficit on trade in
goods and services was $57.8 billion.
This was up from $57.1 billion in
September and was about 5.0 percent of
GDP. My published forecast was $57.4
billion.
The deficit on trade in goods was
$66.8 billion in October, up from $65.8
billion in September, while the surplus
on services increased to $8.9 billion in
October from $8.7 billion the previous
month.
The dollar has weakened against the
euro, pound and Canadian dollar, and
this boosts exports. However, the trade
deficit remains stubbornly large,
because imports of petroleum and from
Asia are not much affected by exchange
rate movements.
Petroleum is priced in dollars.
Consumer goods from China and automotive
products from Japan and Korea remain
strong, because these countries central
banks sell billions of yuan, yen and won
in foreign exchange markets to keep
their currencies undervalued against the
dollar.
The stubbornly large trade deficit
heightens the risk of recession. The
deficit subtracts about $250 billion
from GDP, and that amount could double
if the economy slips into recession.
Breaking down the Deficit
Petroleum, China and automotive
products total about 110 percent of the
trade deficit, and no solution to the
overall trade imbalance is possible
without addressing these segments.
Petroleum products accounted
for $26.3 billion of the monthly trade
gap. Since December 2001, net petroleum
imports have increased $20.8 billion, as
the average price of a barrel of
imported oil has risen from $15.46 to
$72.49, and monthly imports have
increased from 353 million to 406
million barrels.
Retuning conventional gasoline
engines and transmissions, hybrid
systems, lighter weight vehicles,
nuclear power, and other alternative
energy sources could substantially
reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil.
These solutions require national
leadership, but both Republican and
Democratic Party leaders have failed to
champion policies that would reduce
dependence on Middle East oil.
China accounted for $25.9
billion of the October trade deficit, up
from $23.8 billion in September and $5.5
billion in December 2001. The bilateral
deficit keeps rising, because China
undervalues the yuan, and this makes
Chinese exports artificially inexpensive
and U.S. products too expensive in
China.
China revalued the yuan from 8.28 to
8.11 in July 2005 and has since
permitted the yuan to rise 3.8 percent
every twelve months. Modernization and
productivity advances raise the implicit
value of the yuan about 7 percent every
12 months, and the yuan remains
undervalued against the dollar by 40 to
50 percent.
Chinas huge trade surplus creates an
excess demand for yuan on global
currency markets; however, to limit
appreciation of the yuan against the
dollar and drive its value down against
the euro, the Peoples Bank of China
sells yuan and buys dollars, euros and
other currencies on foreign exchange
markets.
In 2007, the Chinese central bank is
on track to purchase about $450 billion
in U.S. and other foreign currency and
securities. This comes to about 15
percent of Chinas GDP and about 45
percent of its exports. These purchases
provide foreign consumers with 3.6
trillion yuan to purchase Chinese
exports, and create a 45 percent off
budget subsidy on foreign sales of
Chinese products, and an even larger
implicit tariff on Chinese imports.
In addition, China provides numerous
tax incentives and rebates, and low
interest loans, to encourage exports and
replace imports with domestic products.
These practices clearly violate Chinas
obligations in the WTO, and it agreed to
remove those when it joined the trade
body.
Automotive products account
for about $11.2 billion of the monthly
trade deficit. Japanese and Korean
manufacturers have captured a larger
market and are expanding their U.S.
production. However, Asian manufacturers
tend to use more imported components
than domestic companies, and GM and Ford
are pushing their parts suppliers to
move to China.
GM, Ford and Chrysler carry a
significant cost disadvantage against
Toyota plants located in the United
States, thanks to clumsy management and
unrealistic wages, excessive fringe
benefits and arcane work rules imposed
by United Autoworker contracts. Recent
negotiations have improved the Detroit
Threes cost position but did not wholly
close the labor cost gap with Toyota and
other Asian transplants.
Recently negotiated labor agreements
should reduce, but not eliminate, these
cost disadvantages. Even with retiree
health care benefits moved off the books
and a two tier wage structure, the cost
disadvantage will remain well above
$1000 per vehicle.
Also, the central banks of Japan and
Korea have aggressively stepped up sales
of yen and won for U.S. dollars and
other securities to keep their
currencies cheap against the dollar.
This discourages Toyota, Hyundai and
others from moving more auto assembly
and sourcing more parts in the United
States.
Deficits, Debt and Growth
Trade deficits must be financed by
foreigners investing in the U.S. economy
or Americans borrowing money abroad.
Direct investments in the United States
provide only about a tenth of the needed
funds, and Americans borrow about $50
billion each month. The total debt is
about $6 trillion, and at five percent
interest, the debt service comes to
about $2000 per U.S. worker each year.
High and rising trade deficits tax
economic growth. Each dollar spent on
imports, not matched by a dollar of
exports, shifts workers into activities
in non-trade competing industries like
department stores and restaurants.
Manufacturers are particularly hard
hit by this subsidized competition.
Through recession and recovery, the
manufacturing sector has lost 3.3
million jobs since 2000. Following the
pattern of past economic recoveries, the
manufacturing sector should have
regained about 2 million of those jobs,
especially given the very strong
productivity growth accomplished in
technology-intensive durable goods
industries.
Productivity is at least 50 percent
higher in industries that export and
compete with imports. By reducing the
demand for high-skill and
technology-intensive products, and U.S.
made goods and services, the deficit
reduces GDP by about $250 billion a year
or about $1750 for each worker.
Longer-term, persistent U.S. trade
deficits are a substantial drag on
growth. U.S. import-competing and export
industries spend at least three-times
the national average on industrial R&D,
and encourage more investments in skills
and education than other sectors of the
economy. By shifting employment away
from trade-competing industries, the
trade deficit reduces U.S. investments
in new methods and products, and skilled
labor.
Cutting the trade deficit in half
would boost U.S. GDP growth by one
percentage point a year, and the trade
deficits of the last two decades have
reduced U.S. growth by one percentage
point a year.
Lost growth is cumulative. Thanks to
the record trade deficits accumulated
over the last 10 years, the U.S. economy
is about $1.5 trillion smaller. This
comes to about $10000 per worker.
The damage grows larger each month,
as the Bush administration dallies and
ignores the corrosive consequences of
the trade deficit.
Peter Morici is a professor at the
University of Maryland School of
Business and former Chief Economist at
the U.S. International Trade Commission.
|