U.S.-China Trade RelationsThe Next Dispute?

- Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

17/06/12 14:47

U.S.-China Trade RelationsThe Next Dispute?

Michael Pettis Q&A, February 17, 2010 Comments

The bilateral trade imbalance is creating tensions between China and the United States. China contends that U.S. trade protectionism has been growing ever since the global financial crisis began, while U.S. leaders continue to urge China to appreciate its currency as complaints mount that Chinas undervalued exchange rate puts American exports at a disadvantage. Michael Pettis discusses global trade, looming trade tensions, and the avenues for reducing disputes in a new video Q&A. Pettis explains that trade tensions will continue to rise: things are going to get worse before we reach a point where leaders in the three or four major economies can come to an agreement over a long-term solution. Are bilateral trade frictions between the United States and China on the rise and is a global trade war possible? Its hard to imagine that were not going to see a significant increase in global trade tensions. And the reason I say that is because we have competing needs from the two major players in the systemand
http://www.carnegieendowment.org/2010/02/17/u.s.-china-trade-relations-next-dispute/14v Page 1 of 5

U.S.-China Trade RelationsThe Next Dispute? - Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

17/06/12 14:47

this is true of the whole system. In the United States weve had extremely low savings rates matched by very high savings rates in China. As part of the adjustment process in the United States, savings rates must rise. And since its unlikely that total investment is going to rise as quicklyin fact total investment may declinethat means that the gap between the two, which is the trade deficit, is going to contract over the medium term (or ought to contract). The problem is that in order for there to be a global balance we would need to see the savings rate in China come down as quickly as the savings rate in the United States goes up. And thats very, very unlikely. The development model that China has followedwhich has been exacerbated by the fiscal, credit, and monetary stimulus in response to the crisisis likely to continue with a process in which total income, GDP, grows faster than consumption. Over the short term you can change that a little bit by an increase in investment, but that increase in investment is probably not sustainable. So in China you are going to have persistent, high savings rates and in the United States you are going to have rising savings rates. And that means that somehow there needs to be an adjustment and the brunt of the pain is going to be determined by the trade account. If the U.S. trade deficit stays high, that means that much of the adjustmentmuch of the painwill be born by U.S. workers. If the U.S. trade deficit comes down quickly, that means that much of the pain will be born by Chinese workers and there will be rising unemployment in China. And this is true with a whole bunch of countries. This is going to happen in Europe and this is going to happen in Asia too. The way the burden of the adjustment is distributed will be determined by the trade account. That means that the trade account is going to be highly politicized, and were going to be spending a lot of time working on the trade account and deciding how the adjustment is going to be carried out. Can China reduce its trade surplus? In order for China to reduce its trade surplus, its not that consumption needs to groweveryone says that we need Chinese consumption to growChinese consumption has been growing very quickly. In the past decade its grown around eight or nine percent a year which is a much faster growth rate than in any other major economy. But thats not enough. The problem is that Chinese production is growing faster than Chinese consumption and so the gap between the two is increasing. Why is it growing faster? I would argue that the reason it is growing faster is because Chinese consumption growth is more or less in line with the growth in Chinese household income. So that national incomethat is the total amount of stuff that China producesis growing faster than household income. And the reason for that is that the development model that China has followedthe very successful Asian Development modelone of its key components is that the household sector via low interest rates on their bank deposits, via an undervalued currency, and via a number of other mechanisms are effectively forced to subsidize producers. The simplest way to think about it is through interest rates. With interest rates so low on banking deposits, that means basically savers are getting a portion of their income taxed away. Those low banking deposits translate into very low lending rateslending rates that are well below any definition of what the natural borrowing costs should be in China. So users of capitalwhich are mostly infrastructure investment and manufacturersare getting very cheap capital and that cheap capital is being subsidized by the household sector. So unless China reverses this process of subsidy, its extremely difficult to get household incomes to grow much more quickly and therefore consumption to grow much more quickly.
http://www.carnegieendowment.org/2010/02/17/u.s.-china-trade-relations-next-dispute/14v Page 2 of 5

U.S.-China Trade RelationsThe Next Dispute? - Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

17/06/12 14:47

And thats the problem that we face, because if you do eliminate the subsidyand even reverse the subsidythe manufacturing sectorwhich is very heavily dependent on these subsidiesbecomes unprofitable. So, we cant do it quickly because if we do it quickly well see a rise in unemployment in China. We have to do it slowly over six, seven, eight years. It wont be easy but if its stretched out over many years it can be done. The problem is, if the trade deficit countries want a very quick resolution, then China is in a very difficult position because they cannot resolve it quickly. How does China's exchange rate impact other countries and influence international trade? Will China appreciate its currency? Most of the focus is on the currency, even though the currency is simply one of many factorsbut its the most visible one. My guess is that China will appreciate the renminbi, but not by a lot, because if it does it too quickly it runs the risk of what happened to Japan. In the 1980s, the Japanese postponed an appreciation of the yen for much too long until it reached the point where it became politically difficult and it was forced to appreciate the yen very quickly, which, as we saw, led to all sorts of problems. But much of the focus was on the currency back then and will be on the currency currently. In that sense its very instructive to look at what happened in the 1930sand this is based on work by Barry Eichengreenand what Eichengreen argued was that in the 1930s at the beginning of the trade conflict, a number of countries that were able to devalue their currencies did so. And it was the famous beggar thy neighbor devaluations or depreciations. A number of countries, however, were not able to depreciate their currenciesthis included the United States and the so-called gold block nations. And what Eichengreen argues was that in the scramble to grab a larger share of this contracting demand, the countries that were able to depreciate did so. It was the most efficient way of beggaring thy neighbor. But the countries that werent able to depreciate, they chose the second best set of policies which was import tariffs or import quotas. My suspicion is that were going to see a replay of this. Countries that are able to intervene heavily to keep their currencies low, are going to do so. Unfortunately, the United States and Europe will not be able to do so. The United States wont be able to do so because most of the intervention is against the dollar. Europe wont be able to do so because as the dollar is forced to depreciate to bring some kind of balance to the United States and the dollar cant depreciate against Asian currencies or against most developing country currencies, all the depreciation takes place against the euro. So, the euro and the dollar and other floating currencies like sterling are sort of stuck. They cant depreciate their way into grabbing a bigger share of global net demand, so these are the countries that are most likely to resort to the second best set of solutions, which is to raise import tariffs. There has been a lot of talk about U.S.-China trade frictions, but how are Chinas trade relations with other major economies, including Europe? One of the mistakes we make is by looking purely at U.S.-China relationships to understand the nature of trade tensions. U.S.-China is very important for symbolic reasonsif we start seeing a significant increase in U.S. tariffs, that becomes a signal that the rest of the world can also engage much more aggressively on trade issues.
http://www.carnegieendowment.org/2010/02/17/u.s.-china-trade-relations-next-dispute/14v Page 3 of 5

U.S.-China Trade RelationsThe Next Dispute? - Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

17/06/12 14:47

The fact is that the most difficult trade disputes are not taking place between the United States and China, they are taking place between China and some of its Asian neighbors. For instance, India and Indonesia have enacted some very tough measures. There is a lot of conflict and tension between China and Korea. Secondarily, there are very strong trade tensions between China and Europe. I would say that trade tensions between the United States and China, even though the United States is running, by far, the largest trade deficit, have also been the least aggressive and the least painful. But I think thats starting to change. If it does change, I think it has a very bad effect on the rest of the world because once the United States blatantly engages in trade protection as a response to Chinas policies, that opens the door for everyone in the world to be much more aggressive. In that sense, Smoot-Hawleywhich is often a very bad example that we usewas the wrong policy for the Unites States in the 1930s because the United States was the leading trade surplus country. As the trade deficit country, Smoot-Hawley is not a useful way for thinking about the consequences for the United States. Once it was clear that the president was not going to veto Smoot-Hawleyit passed in June 1930that was a signal for the rest of the world to raise tariffs (although some countries like Canada actually started before, once it was clear that the United States was going to respond). And that began that degeneration into the collapse of international trade. How can Beijing and Washington work together to avoid serious trade conflicts? Can a breakdown in global trade be prevented? Its very important for the United States, China, and Europe to come to some kind of grand agreement. China needs to recognize that the trade surpluses it needs to absorb its excess capacity are politically unacceptable in countries suffering from high unemployment. Europe and the United States need to understand that China simply cant adjust quickly enough. In an ideal world, the leadership of the three economies would get together and work out a plansix years, eight years, however long it tookin which China committed to taking the necessary steps. Most importantly, raising the value of the currency, liberalizing interest rates, and liberalizing the banking system, that would go a long way to rebalancing the Chinese economy. It will be painful and it will be difficult, but its what China will need to do one way or another. In exchange, in order to make the difficulty much less, the United States and Europe would commit to slowing down their own adjustments. The United States would continue to run large fiscal deficits in order to slow down the increase in savings in the United States. And they would commit to keeping their markets completely and totally open to Chinese goods, so that the adjustment in China could be slowed down over a seven or eight year period. When I put it that way, I am immediately a little bit pessimistic that we are going to arrive at that kind of grand bargain. At least, I think its unlikely that we do so before things get worse. My guess is that trade tensions are going to continue rising and things are going to get worse, especially for China as the trade surplus countrytrade surplus countries are always the most vulnerable to a contraction in global demandbefore we reach a point where leaders in the three or four major economies can come to an agreement over a long-term solution.

http://www.carnegieendowment.org/2010/02/17/u.s.-china-trade-relations-next-dispute/14v

Page 4 of 5

U.S.-China Trade RelationsThe Next Dispute? - Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

17/06/12 14:47

Comments Post your comments (2500 character limit - Comments are moderated and may not appear immediately

- Screen names appear with your comment)

Enter screen name:

(Nevermind this field if you have CSS turned off) Characters used: 0
Post

Resources available for this publication Issues Economics Regions Americas Global Trade Chinese Economy U.S. Foreign Policy

United States

East Asia

China Mainland

Author Michael Pettis Source: www.carnegieendowment.org/publications/index.cfm?fa=view&id=30975

http://www.carnegieendowment.org/2010/02/17/u.s.-china-trade-relations-next-dispute/14v

Page 5 of 5