Smith
Faculty Opinion Article
 |
By Dr. Peter Morici, Professor
of International Business
E-MAIL
WEB SITE |
June 17,
2008
Current
Account Deficit Surges in First
Quarter
Today, the Commerce Department
reported the first quarter current
account deficit was $176.4 billion,
up from $167.2 billion in the fourth
quarter of 2007. The deficit was 5.0
percent of GDP.
The current account is the
broadest measure of the U.S. trade
balance. In addition to trade in
goods and services, it includes
income received from U.S.
investments abroad less payments to
foreigners on their investments in
the United States.
In the first quarter, the United
States had a $36.1 surplus on trade
in services and a $29.8 billion
surplus on income payments. This was
hardly enough to offset the massive
$211.0 billion deficit on trade in
goods, and net unilateral transfers
to foreigners equal to $31.2
billion.
The huge deficit on trade in
goods is mostly caused by a
combination of an overvalued dollar
against the Chinese yuan, a
dysfunctional national energy policy
that increases U.S. dependence on
foreign oil, and the competitive
woes of the three domestic
automakers. Together, the trade
deficit with China and on petroleum
and automotive products total more
than 100 percent of the deficit on
trade in goods and services.
To finance the current account
deficit, Americans are borrowed and
sold assets at a pace of about $600
billion a year. U.S. foreign debt
exceeds $6.5 trillion, and at 5
percent interest, the debt service
comes to about $2000 a year for
every working American.
The current account deficit
imposes a significant tax on GDP
growth by moving workers from export
and import-competing industries to
other sectors of the economy. This
reduces labor productivity, research
and development (R&D) spending, and
important investments in human
capital. In 2008 the trade deficit
is slicing at least $250 billion off
GDP, and longer term, it reduces
potential annual GDP growth to about
3 percent from about 4 percent.
Financing the Deficit
The current account deficit must
be financed by a capital account
surplus, either by foreigners
investing in the U.S. economy or
loaning Americans money. Some
analysts argue that the deficit
reflects U.S. economic strength,
because foreigners find many
promising investments here. The
details of U.S. financing belie this
argument.
In the first quarter, U.S.
investments abroad were $286.6
billion, while foreigners invested
$411.0 billion in the United States.
Of that latter total, only $46.6
billion or 11 percent was direct
investment in U.S. productive
assets. The remaining capital
inflows were foreign purchases of
Treasury securities, corporate
bonds, bank accounts, currency, and
other paper assets. Essentially,
Americans borrowed $364.4 billion to
consume about 5.0 percent more than
they produced.
In the first quarter, foreign
governments loaned Americans $173.5
billion or 4.9 percent of GDP. That
well exceeded net household
borrowing to finance homes, cars,
gasoline, and other consumer goods.
The Chinese and other governments
are essentially bankrolling U.S.
consumers, who in turn are
mortgaging their children’s income.
The cumulative effects of this
borrowing are frightening. The total
external debt now exceeds $6
trillion. The debt service at 5
percent interest, amounts to $2000
for each working American.
The Chinese government alone
holds enough U.S. and other foreign
reserves to purchase about five
percent of the shares of all
publicly traded U.S. companies. The
U.S. trade deficit is the primary
driver behind this phenomenon.
Consequences for Economic
Growth
High and rising trade deficits
tax economic growth. Specifically,
each dollar spent on imports that is
not matched by a dollar of exports
reduces domestic demand and
employment, and shifts workers into
activities where productivity is
lower.
Productivity is at least 50
percent higher in industries that
export and compete with imports, and
reducing the trade deficit and
moving workers into these industries
would increase GDP.
Were the trade deficit cut in
half, GDP would increase more than
$250 billion or more than $1750 for
every working American. Workers’
wages would not be lagging
inflation, and ordinary working
Americans would more easily find
jobs paying higher wages and
offering decent benefits.
Manufacturers are particularly
hard hit by this subsidized
competition. Through recession and
recovery, the manufacturing sector
has lost 3.7 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 durable goods and
throughout manufacturing.
Longer-term, persistent U.S.
trade deficits are a substantial
drag on growth. U.S.
import-competing and export
industries spend 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.
Had the Administration and the
Congress acted responsibly to reduce
the deficit, American workers would
be much better off, tax revenues
would be much larger, and the
federal deficit could be eliminated
without cutting spending.
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.