Economic Conditions and Trends

More stories

  • 125 Shares139 Views

    in Economy

    World Bank Projects Weak Global Growth Amid Rising Interest Rates

    by

    A new report projects that economic growth will slow this year and remain weak in 2024.The World Bank said on Tuesday that the global economy remained in a “precarious state” and warned of sluggish growth this year and next as rising interest rates slow consumer spending and business investment, and threaten the stability of the financial system.The bank’s tepid forecasts in its latest Global Economic Prospects report highlight the predicament that global policymakers face as they try to corral stubborn inflation by raising interest rates while grappling with the aftermath of the pandemic and continuing supply chain disruptions stemming from the war in Ukraine.The World Bank projected that global growth would slow to 2.1 percent this year from 3.1 percent in 2022. That is slightly stronger than its forecast of 1.7 percent in January, but in 2024 output is now expected to rise to 2.4 percent, weaker than the bank’s previous prediction of 2.7 percent.“Rays of sunshine in the global economy we saw earlier in the year have been fading, and gray days likely lie ahead,” said Ayhan Kose, deputy chief economist at the World Bank Group.Mr. Kose said that the world economy was experiencing a “sharp, synchronized global slowdown” and that 65 percent of countries would experience slower growth this year than last. A decade of poor fiscal management in low-income countries that relied on borrowed money is compounding the problem. According to the World Bank, 14 of 28 low-income countries are in debt distress or at a high risk of debt distress.Optimism about an economic rebound this year has been dampened by recent stress in the banking sectors in the United States and Europe, which resulted in the biggest bank failures since the 2008 financial crisis. Concerns about the health of the banking industry have prompted many lenders to pull back on providing credit to businesses and individuals, a phenomenon that the World Bank said was likely to further weigh down growth.The bank also warned that rising borrowing costs in rich countries — including the United States, where overnight interest rates have topped 5 percent for the first time in 15 years — posed an additional headwind for the world’s poorest economies.The most vulnerable economies, the report warned, are facing greater risk of financial crises as a result of rising rates. Higher interest rates make it more expensive for developing countries to service their loan payments and, if their currencies depreciate, to import food.In addition to the risks posed by rising interest rates, the pandemic and the conflict in Ukraine have combined to reverse decades of progress in global poverty reduction. The World Bank estimated on Tuesday that in 2024, incomes in the poorest countries would be 6 percent lower than in 2019.“Emerging market and developing economies today are struggling just to cope — deprived of the wherewithal to create jobs and deliver essential services to their most vulnerable citizens,” the report said.The World Bank sees widespread slowdowns in advanced economies, too. In the United States, it projects 1.1 percent growth this year and 0.8 percent in 2024.China is a notable exception to that trend, and the reopening of its economy after years of strict Covid-19 lockdowns is propping up global growth. The bank projects that the Chinese economy will grow 5.6 percent this year and 4.6 percent next year.Inflation is expected to continue to moderate this year, but the World Bank expects that prices will remain above central bank targets in many countries throughout 2024. More

  • 113 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    For Turkey, Erdogan Victory Brings More Risky Economic Policy

    by

    The Turkish lira has hit a new low, and analysts see few improvements ahead as re-elected President Erdogan pursues unconventional economic policies.Since winning re-election, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey has publicly doubled down on his idiosyncratic economic policies.“If anyone can do this, I can do it,” he declared in a victory speech last Sunday, referring to his ability to solve the country’s calamitous economic problems.His brash confidence is not widely shared by most analysts and economists.The Turkish lira dropped to a record low against the dollar this week, and foreign investors have been disheartened by the president’s refusal to stray from what is widely considered to be an eccentric economic course.Instead of combating dizzying inflation by raising interest rates and making borrowing more expensive — as most economists recommend — Mr. Erdogan has repeatedly lowered rates. He argues that cheap credit will boost manufacturing and exports.But his strategy is also fueling inflation, now running at an annual rate of 44 percent, and eroding the value of the Turkish lira. Attempts by the government to prop up the faltering currency have drained the dwindling pool of foreign reserves.As the lira’s value drops, the price of imported goods — like medicine, energy, fertilizer and automobile parts — rises, making it more expensive for consumers to afford daily costs. And it raises the size of debt payments for businesses and households that have borrowed money from foreign lenders.The national budget is also coming under increasing strains. The destructive earthquakes in February that ripped up swaths of southern Turkey are estimated to have caused more than a billion dollars in damage, roughly 9 percent of the country’s annual economic output.At the same time, Mr. Erdogan went on a pre-election spending spree to attract voters, increasing salaries for public sector workers and payouts for retirees and offering households a month of free natural gas. The expenditures pushed up growth, but economists fear that such outlays will feed inflation.President Erdogan in Istanbul last month. Foreign investors have been disheartened by his refusal to stray from what is widely considered to be an eccentric economic course.Sergey Ponomarev for The New York TimesAn effort to encourage Turks to keep their savings in lira by guaranteeing their balances against currency depreciations further adds to the government’s potential liabilities.Critics of the president’s economic approach were somewhat heartened by reports that Mr. Erdogan is expected this weekend to appoint Mehmet Simsek, a former finance minister and deputy prime minister, to the cabinet. Mr. Simsek is well thought of in financial circles and has previously supported a tighter monetary policy.“What Turkey really needs now is more exports and more foreign direct investment, and for that you have to send a signal,” said Henri Barkey, an international relations professor at Lehigh University. One signal could be Mr. Simsek’s appointment, he said.Mr. Barkey argues that Mr. Erdogan will have no choice but to make a U-turn on policy by winter, when energy import costs rise and some debt payments are due.Others are more skeptical that Mr. Erdogan will back down from his insistence that high interest rates fuel inflation. Kadri Tastan, a senior fellow at the German Marshall Fund, a public policy think tank based in Brussels, said that regardless of the cabinet’s makeup, he didn’t believe a policy turnaround was imminent.“I’m quite pessimistic about an enormous change, of course,” he said.To deal with the large external deficit and depleted central bank reserves, Mr. Erdogan has been relying on allies like Russia, Qatar and Saudi Arabia to help bolster its reserves by depositing dollars with the central bank or extending payment deadlines and discounts for imported goods like natural gas.In a note to investors this week, Capital Economics wrote that any optimism about a policy shift is likely to be short-lived: “While policymakers like Simsek would probably pursue more restrained fiscal policy than we had envisaged, we doubt Erdogan would give the central bank license to hike policy rates to restore balance to the economy.”Turkey’s more than $900 billion economy makes it the eighth largest in Europe. And Mr. Erdogan’s efforts to position himself as a power broker between Russia and the European allies since the war in Ukraine began has further underscored Turkey’s geopolitical influence.Mr. Erdogan, who has been in power for two decades, built his electoral success on growth-oriented policies that lifted millions of Turks into the middle class. But the pumped-up expansion wasn’t sustainable.As the lira’s value drops, the price of imported goods rises.Sergey Ponomarev for The New York TimesThe borrowing frenzy drove up prices, spurring a cost-of-living crisis. Still, Mr. Erdogan persisted in lowering interest rates and fired central bank chiefs who disagreed with him. The pandemic exacerbated problems by reducing demand for Turkish exports and limiting tourism, a large source of income.Mr. Erdogan is likely to keep up his expansionary policies until the next local elections take place next year. Until then, Hakan Kara, the former chief economist of the Central Bank of Turkey, said the country would probably just “muddle through.”“Turkish authorities will have to make tough decisions after the local elections, as something has to give in eventually,” Mr. Kara said. “Turkey has to either switch back to conventional policies, or further deviate from the free market economy where the central authority manages the economy through micro-control measures.”“In either case,” he added, “the adjustment is likely to be painful.” More

  • 150 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    How the G7 Oil Price Cap Has Helped Choke Revenue to Russia

    by

    Group of 7 leaders are prepared to celebrate the results of a novel effort to stabilize global oil markets and punish Moscow.In early June, at the behest of the Biden administration, German leaders assembled top economic officials from the Group of 7 nations for a video conference with the goal of striking a major financial blow to Russia.The Americans had been trying, in a series of one-off conversations last year, to sound out their counterparts in Europe, Canada and Japan on an unusual and untested idea. Administration officials wanted to try to cap the price that Moscow could command for every barrel of oil it sold on the world market. Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen had floated the plan a few weeks earlier at a meeting of finance ministers in Bonn, Germany.The reception had been mixed, in part because other countries were not sure how serious the administration was about proceeding. But the call in early June left no doubt: American officials said they were committed to the oil price cap idea and urged everyone else to get on board. At the end of the month, the Group of 7 leaders signed on to the concept.As the Group of 7 prepares to meet again in this week in Hiroshima, Japan, official and market data suggest the untried idea has helped achieve its twin initial goals since the price cap took effect in December. The cap appears to be forcing Russia to sell its oil for less than other major producers, when crude prices are down significantly from their levels immediately after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.Data from Russia and international agencies suggest Moscow’s revenues have dropped, forcing budget choices that administration officials say could be starting to hamper its war effort. Drivers in America and elsewhere are paying far less at the gasoline pump than some analysts feared.Russia’s oil revenues in March were down 43 percent from a year earlier, the International Energy Agency reported last month, even though its total export sales volume had grown. This week, the agency reported that Russian revenues had rebounded slightly but were still down 27 percent from a year ago. The government’s tax receipts from the oil and gas sectors were down by nearly two-thirds from a year ago.Russian officials have been forced to change how they tax oil production in an apparent bid to make up for some of the lost revenues. They also appear to be spending government money to try to start building their own network of ships, insurance companies and other essentials of the oil trade, an effort that European and American officials say is a clear sign of success.“The Russian price cap is working, and working extremely well,” Wally Adeyemo, the deputy Treasury secretary, said in an interview. “The money that they’re spending on building up this ecosystem to support their energy trade is money they can’t spend on building missiles or buying tanks. And what we’re going to continue to do is force Russia to have these types of hard choices.”Some analysts doubt the plan is working nearly as well as administration officials claim, at least when it comes to revenues. They say the most frequently cited data on the prices that Russia receives for its exported oil is unreliable. And they say other data, like customs reports from India, suggests Russian officials may be employing elaborate deception measures to evade the cap and sell crude at prices well above its limit.“I’m concerned the Biden administration’s desperation to claim victory with the price cap is preventing them from actually acknowledging what isn’t working and taking the steps that might actually help them win,” said Steve Cicala, an energy economist at Tufts University who has written about potential evasion under the cap.The price cap was invented as an escape hatch to the financial penalties that the United States, Europe and others announced on Russian oil exports in the immediate aftermath of the invasion. Those penalties included bans preventing wealthy democracies from buying Russian oil on the world market. But early in the war, they essentially backfired. They drove up the cost of all oil globally, regardless of where it was produced. The higher prices delivered record exports revenues to Moscow, while driving American gasoline prices above $5 a gallon and contributing to President Biden’s sagging approval rating.A new round of European sanctions was set to hit Russian oil hard in December. Economists on Wall Street and in the Biden administration warned those penalties could knock oil off the market, sending prices soaring again. So administration officials decided to try to leverage the West’s dominance of the oil shipping trade — including how it is transported and financed — and force a hard bargain on Russia.Oil tankers near the port city of Nakhodka, Russia. Many analysts were concerned that a price cap might prompt Russia to restrict how much oil it pumped and sold. But the country has mostly kept producing at about the same levels it did when the war began.Tatiana Meel/ReutersUnder the plan, Russia could keep selling oil, but if it wanted access to the West’s shipping infrastructure, it had to sell at a sharp discount. In December, European leaders agreed to set the cap at $60 a barrel. They followed with other caps for different types of petroleum products, like diesel.Many analysts were skeptical it could work. A cap that was too punitive had the potential to encourage Russia to severely restrict how much oil it pumps and sells. Such a move could drive crude prices skyward. Alternatively, a cap that was too permissive might have failed to affect Russian oil sales and revenues at all.Neither scenario has happened. Russia announced a modest production cut this spring but has mostly kept producing at about the same levels it did when the war began.Fatih Birol, the executive director of the International Energy Agency, has called the price cap an important “safety valve” and a crucial policy that has forced Russia to sell oil for far less than international benchmark prices. Russian oil now trades for $25 to $35 a barrel less than other oil on the global market, Treasury Department officials estimate.“Russia played the energy card, and it didn’t win,” Mr. Birol wrote in a February report. “Given that energy is the backbone of Russia’s economy, it’s not surprising that its difficulties in this area are leading to wider problems. Its budget deficit is skyrocketing as military spending and subsidies to its population largely exceed its export income.”Biden administration officials say that there is no evidence of widespread evasion by Russia, and that Mr. Cicala’s analysis of Indian customs reports does not account for the rising cost of transporting Russian oil to India, which is embedded in the customs data. A White House official told reporters traveling with Mr. Biden in Hiroshima on Thursday that the Group of 7 leaders would adopt new measures meant to counter price-cap evasion in their meeting this weekend.There is no dispute that the world has avoided what was privately the largest concern for Biden officials last summer: another round of skyrocketing oil prices.American drivers were paying about $3.54 a gallon on average for gasoline on Monday. That was down nearly $1 from a year ago, and it is nowhere near the $7 a gallon some administration officials feared if the cap had failed to prevent a second oil shock from the Russian invasion. Gas prices are a mild source of relief for Mr. Biden as high inflation continues to hamper his approval among voters.After rising sharply in the months surrounding the Russian invasion, global oil prices have fallen back to late-2021 levels. The plunge is partly driven by economic cooling around the world, and it has persisted even as large producers like Saudi Arabia have curtailed production.Falling global prices have contributed to Russia’s falling revenues, but they are not the whole story. Reported sales prices for exported Russian oil, known as Urals, have dropped by twice as much as the global price for Brent crude.The Group of 7 leaders meeting in Japan this week will probably not spend much time on the cap, instead turning to other collective efforts to constrict Russia’s economy and revenues. And the biggest winners from the cap decision will not be at the summit.“The direct beneficiaries are mostly emerging market and lower-income countries that import oil from Russia,” Treasury officials noted in a recent report.The officials were referring to a handful of countries outside the Group of 7 — particularly India and China — that have used the cap as leverage to pay a discount for Russian oil. Neither India nor China joined the formal cap effort, but it is their oil consumers who are seeing the lowest prices from it. More

  • 113 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    For Biden, Debt Limit Crisis Complicates Trip to Asia

    by

    Volatility has become the new norm in Washington as the president heads to Japan, where he will reassure world leaders that the debt ceiling showdown will not upend the global economy.President Biden left for Japan on Wednesday for a meeting of the leaders of seven major industrial democracies who get together each year to try to keep the world economy stable.But as it turns out, the major potential threat to global economic stability this year is the United States.When Mr. Biden lands in Hiroshima for the annual Group of 7 summit meeting on Thursday, the United States will be two weeks from a possible default that would jolt not only its own economy but those of the other countries at the table. It will fall to Mr. Biden to reassure his counterparts that he will find a way to avoid that, but they understand it is not solely in his control.The showdown with Republicans over raising the federal debt ceiling has already upended the president’s international diplomacy by forcing a last-minute cancellation of two stops he had planned to make after Japan: Papua New Guinea and Australia. Rather than being the unchallenged commander of the most powerful superpower striding across the world stage, Mr. Biden will be an embattled leader forced to rush home to avert a catastrophe of America’s own making.He was at least bolstered before leaving Washington by signs of progress as both sides emerged from a White House meeting on Tuesday expressing optimism that an agreement was possible. In the preparations leading up to the G7 meeting, officials from the other participating countries have not struck U.S. officials as all that alarmed about the possibility of default, perhaps because they trust Mr. Biden, know that the moment of truth is still a couple weeks away and assume that Washington will get its act together in time.Mr. Biden is set to depart on Wednesday for the G7 meeting in Hiroshima, Japan.How Hwee Young/EPA, via ShutterstockBut that simply underscores how much volatility has become the new norm in Washington. After generations of counting on the United States as the most important stabilizing force in world affairs, allies in recent years have increasingly come to expect a certain level of dysfunction instead. Extended government shutdowns, banking crises, debt ceiling fights and even political violence would once have been unthinkable but have prompted foreign leaders to factor American unpredictability into their calculations.“I think our biggest threat is us,” said Jane Harman, a former Democratic representative from California who later served as the president of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. “Our leadership in the world is being eroded by our internal dysfunction. The markets are still betting against our defaulting, and that’s a decent bet. But if we only manage to eke out a short-term extension and the price is onerous budget caps — including on defense — we will be hobbled when Ukraine needs us most and China is building beachheads everywhere.”The White House warned that a default would only embolden America’s adversaries, using the argument against Republicans, whom they blame for playing with fire.“There’s countries like Russia and China that would love nothing more than for us to default so they could point the finger and say, ‘You see, the United States is not a stable, reliable partner,’” said John F. Kirby, a spokesman for the National Security Council.But he sought to play down the effects of the dispute on the G7 meeting, saying that he doubted it would “dominate the discussion” and maintaining that other leaders “don’t need to worry about that part of it.” The president’s counterparts would understand his need to cut short his trip, he said.“They know that our ability to pay our debts is a key part of U.S. credibility and leadership around the world,” Mr. Kirby said. “And so they understand that the president also has to focus on making sure that we don’t default and on having these conversations with congressional leaders.”Even if they understand, though, they see consequences. Mr. Biden’s decision to head home early reinforces questions about American commitment to the Asia-Pacific region and leaves a vacuum that China may exploit, according to analysts. A presidential visit to places like Papua New Guinea, where no U.S. leader has gone before, speaks loudly about diplomatic priorities — as does the failure to follow through.This is not the first time an American president has scrubbed a foreign trip to deal with domestic concerns. President George H.W. Bush canceled a two-week trip to Asia in 1991 to show he was focused on a lagging economy at home, while President Bill Clinton scrapped a trip to Japan during a government shutdown in 1995. President Barack Obama delayed a trip to Indonesia and Australia in 2010 to focus on health care legislation, then skipped an Asia-Pacific summit meeting in 2013 during a government shutdown of his own.The perpetual culture of crisis in Washington, however, has grown only more intense since the arrival of President Donald J. Trump, who threatened to unravel bedrock alliances and embraced longstanding adversaries abroad while disrupting democratic norms and economic conventions at home.Speaker Kevin McCarthy said it was possible that a deal regarding the debt ceiling could materialize in days.Haiyun Jiang/The New York TimesThe debt ceiling showdown between Mr. Biden and Speaker Kevin McCarthy has underscored to the president’s peers that however much he may seek to restore normalcy, U.S. politics has not returned to the steady state of the past — not least because Mr. Trump seeks to reclaim office in next year’s election.World leaders took notice last week during Mr. Trump’s CNN town hall-style interview in which he refused to back Ukraine in its war against Russian invasion and casually endorsed the idea of a default, saying it would not be that damaging and indeed “could be maybe nothing.”That is not how most policymakers and analysts see it.Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen said at a meeting of G7 finance ministers and central bankers in Japan last week that a default “would spark a global downturn” and “risk undermining U.S. global economic leadership and raise questions about our ability to defend our national security interests.”Mr. Biden, a veteran of half a century in high office in Washington, has regularly remarked on the uncertainty surrounding America’s place in the world that he discovered when he took office after Mr. Trump’s disruptive four years. “America is back,” he said he would tell foreign counterparts, only to hear, “But for how long?”By contrast to his predecessor, Mr. Biden has conducted a far more conventional foreign policy familiar to world leaders, and foreign officials see him as a more traditional U.S. president. But they also understand that he is presiding over a country whose democracy has been tested and found to be fragile. And they see a fractious politics in Washington that values confrontation over compromise, even at the risk of something that would have once been unimaginable, like a default.“For sure, the U.S. debt ceiling issue will be a topic of conversation and concern at the G7 summit,” Matthew P. Goodman, a senior vice president for economics at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, said at a briefing about the meeting last week. “I’m sure the other leaders will ask, you know, how serious this risk is. And I assume President Biden will say he’s working on it and doing everything he can to avoid it.”By this point, U.S. partners have become oddly accustomed to the culture that dominates Washington. They have watched the brewing debt ceiling fight with little evident fear.“I don’t think many European governments are very concerned, presumably because these crises come round quite often but never end in disaster,” said Charles Grant, the director of the Centre for European Reform in London. “Cutting short the trip is a bad signal, but there is such good will to Biden in most capitals that they are prepared to cut him some slack.” More

  • 150 Shares119 Views

    in Economy

    The ‘Peace Dividend’ Is Over in Europe. Now Come the Hard Tradeoffs.

    by

    Defending against an unpredictable Russia in years to come will mean bumping up against a strained social safety net and ambitious climate transition plans.In the 30 years since the Iron Curtain came crashing down, trillions of dollars that had been dedicated to Cold War armies and weapons systems were gradually diverted to health care, housing and schools.That era — when security took a back seat to trade and economic growth — abruptly ended with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine last year.“The peace dividend is gone,” Kristalina Georgieva, the head of the International Monetary Fund, recently declared, referring to the mountains of cash that were freed up when military budgets shrank. “Defense expenditures have to go up.”The urgent need to combat a brutal and unpredictable Russia has forced European leaders to make excruciating budgetary decisions that will enormously affect peoples’ everyday lives. Do they spend more on howitzers or hospitals, tanks or teachers, rockets or roadways? And how to pay for it: raise taxes or borrow more? Or both?The sudden security demands, which will last well beyond an end to the war in Ukraine, come at a moment when colossal outlays are also needed to care for rapidly aging populations, as well as to avoid potentially disastrous climate change. The European Union’s ambitious goal to be carbon neutral by 2050 alone is estimated to cost between $175 billion and $250 billion each year for the next 27 years.“The spending pressures on Europe will be huge, and that’s not even taking into account the green transition,” said Kenneth Rogoff, an economics professor at Harvard. “The whole European social safety net is very vulnerable to these big needs.” After the Berlin Wall fell, social spending shot up. Denmark doubled the money it funneled to health care between 1994 and 2022, according to the latest figures compiled by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, while Britain increased its spending by more than 90 percent. Over the same period, Poland more than doubled funding for culture and recreation programs. Germany ramped up investments in the economy. The Czech Republic increased its education budget.President Biden with NATO allies in Warsaw in February. Military budgets started to rise after Russia annexed Crimea. Doug Mills/The New York TimesMilitary spending by European members of North Atlantic Treaty Organization and Canada reached a low point in 2014 as the demand for battle tanks, fighter jets and submarines plummeted. After Russia annexed Crimea that year, budgets started to rise again, but most countries still fell well below NATO’s target of 2 percent of national output.“The end of the peace dividend is a big rupture,” said Daniel Daianu, chairman of the Fiscal Council in Romania and a former finance minister.Before war broke out in Ukraine, military spending by the European members of NATO was expected to reach nearly $1.8 trillion by 2026, a 14 percent increase over five years, according to research by McKinsey & Company. Now, spending is estimated to rise between 53 and 65 percent.That means hundreds of billions of dollars that otherwise could have been used to, say, invest in bridge and highway repairs, child care, cancer research, refugee resettlement or public orchestras is expected to be redirected to the military.Last week, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute reported that military spending in Europe last year had its biggest annual rise in three decades. And the spendathon is just beginning.The demand for military spending will be on display Wednesday when the European Union’s trade commissioner, Thierry Breton, is expected to discuss his fact-finding tour to determine whether European nations and weapons manufacturers can produce one million rounds of 155-millimeter shells for Ukraine this year, and how production can be increased. Poland has pledged to spend 4 percent of its national output on defense. The German defense minister has asked for an additional $11 billion next year, a 20 percent increase in military spending. President Emmanuel Macron of France has promised to lift military spending by more than a third through 2030 and to “transform” France’s nuclear-armed military.Some analysts argue that at times cuts in military budgets were so deep that they compromised basic readiness. And surveys have shown that there is public support for increased military spending, pointedly illustrated by Finland and Sweden’s about-face in wanting to join NATO.Polish military units train Ukrainian soldiers on the German-made Leopard tanks at a military base, in Poland in February.Maciek Nabrdalik for The New York TimesBut in most of Europe, the painful budgetary trade-offs or tax increases that will be required have not yet trickled down to daily life. Much of the belt-tightening last year that squeezed households was the result of skyrocketing energy prices and stinging inflation.Going forward, the game board has changed. “France has entered into a war economy that I believe we will be in for a long time,” Mr. Macron said in a speech shortly after announcing his spending blueprint.But the crucial question of how to pay for the momentous shift in national priorities remains. In France, for instance, government spending as a percentage of the economy, at 1.4 trillion euros ($1.54 trillion), is the highest in Europe. Of that, nearly half was spent on the nation’s generous social safety net, which includes unemployment benefits and pensions. Debt has also spiraled in the wake of the pandemic. Yet Mr. Macron has vowed not to increase what is already one of the highest tax levels in Europe for fear of scaring off investors.Debates over competing priorities are playing out in other capitals across the region — even if the trade-offs are not explicitly mentioned.In Britain, on the same day in March that the government unveiled a budget that included a $6.25 billion bump in military spending, teachers, doctors and transport workers joined strikes over pay and working conditions. It was just one in a series of walkouts by public workers who complained that underfunding, double-digit inflation and the pandemic’s aftermath have crippled essential services like health care, transportation and education. The budget included a $4.1 billion increase for the National Health Service over the same two-year period.Romania, which has been running up its public debt over the years, has pledged to lift military spending this year by 0.5 percent of national output. And this month it agreed to buy an undisclosed number of F-35 fighter jets, which have a list price of $80 million a piece. While the increase will enable the country to hit NATO’s budget target, it will undercut efforts to meet the debt limits set by the European Union.Romania has pledged to lift military spending this year by 0.5 percent of national output.Andreea Campeanu for The New York TimesThe shift in government spending is perhaps most striking in Germany, where defense outlays plunged after the reunification of the former East and West German nations in 1990.“Defense was always the place to save, because it was not very popular,” said Hubertus Bardt, the managing director of the Institute of the German Economy.Germany, the largest and most powerful economy in Europe, has consistently devoted less money to the military as a percentage of gross domestic output than either France or Britain.It’s a “historic turning point,” the German chancellor, Olaf Scholz, said when he announced a special $112 billion defense fund last year. Yet that pot of money did not include any spending for ammunition. And when the fund is depleted, Germany will need to find an additional $38 billion to level up with its NATO partners.Mr. Rogoff, the Harvard economist, said that most Europeans have not yet absorbed how big the long-term effects of a fading peace dividend will be. This is a new reality, he said, “and governments are going to have to figure out how to rebalance things.”Melissa Eddy More

  • 113 Shares179 Views

    in Economy

    Why China’s Shrinking Population Is a Problem for Everyone

    by

    China struggled for years to curtail its rapid population growth. Now that its population is declining, economists and others fear serious implications for China and countries around the world.Despite the rollback of China’s one-child policy, and even after more recent incentives urging families to have more children, China’s population is steadily shrinking — a momentous shift that will soon leave India as the world’s most populous nation and have broad rippling effects both domestically and globally.The change puts China on the same course of both aging and shrinking as many of its neighbors in Asia, but its path will have outsize effects not just on the regional economy, but on the world at large as well.Here’s why economists and others are alarmed by the developments.China’s shrinking work force could hobble the global economy.For years, China’s massive working-age population powered the global economic engine, supplying the factory workers whose cheap labor produced goods that were exported around the world.In the long run, a shortage of factory workers in China — driven by a better-educated work force and a shrinking population of young people — could raise costs for consumers outside China, potentially exacerbating inflation in countries like the United States that rely heavily on imported Chinese products. Facing rising labor costs in China, many companies have already begun shifting their manufacturing operations to lower-paying countries like Vietnam and Mexico.A shrinking population could also mean a decline in spending by Chinese consumers, threatening global brands dependent on sales of products to China, from Apple smartphones to Nike sneakers.A factory in Guangzhou. In the long run, a shortage of factory workers could raise costs for consumers outside of China.Gilles Sabrie for The New York TimesThe data is bad news for China’s crucial housing market.In the short term, a plunging birthrate poses a major threat to China’s real estate sector, which accounts for roughly a quarter of the country’s economic output. Population growth is a key driver of housing demand, and homeownership is the most important asset for many Chinese people. During widespread pandemic lockdowns that dampened consumer spending and export growth, China’s economy became even more dependent on the ailing housing sector.The government recently intervened to help distressed real estate developers, in an attempt to stem the fallout from its housing crisis.A housing development in Shanghai. Population growth is a key driver of housing demand, and a plunging birthrate poses a major threat to China’s real estate sector.Qilai Shen for The New York TimesChina’s shrinking work force may not be able to support its growing, aging population.With fewer working-age people in the long run, the government could struggle to sustain an enormous population that is growing older and living longer. A 2019 report by the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences predicted that the country’s main pension fund would run out of money by 2035, in part because of the shrinking work force.Economists have compared China’s demographic crisis to the one that stalled Japan’s economic boom in the 1990s.But China does not have the same resources as a country like Japan to provide a safety net for its aging population. Its households live on much lower incomes on average than in the U.S. and elsewhere. Many older Chinese residents rely on state pension payments as a key source of income during retirement.China also has some of the lowest retirement ages in the world, with most workers retiring by 60. The situation has put a tremendous strain not only on state pension funds, but also on the country’s hospital system.Older Chinese citizens exercising at a park in Beijing. With fewer working-age people, the government could struggle to sustain an enormous population that is both growing older and living longer.Gilles Sabrie for The New York TimesThe crisis has been decades in the making.China introduced the one-child policy in the late 1970s, arguing that it was necessary to keep population growth from reaching unsustainable levels. The government imposed onerous fines on most couples who had more than one child, and compelled hundreds of millions of Chinese women to have abortions. Many families favored boys over girls, often aborting baby girls or abandoning them at birth, resulting in a huge surplus of single men in the Chinese population.China announced the relaxing of the family size restrictions in 2013, but many demographic experts said the change had come too late to change the country’s population trajectory.The government’s efforts to incentivize a baby boom to solve the demographic crisis have failed to stabilize falling birthrates.Gilles Sabrie for The New York TimesThere are no easy fixes.The government’s efforts to start a baby boom to solve the demographic crisis — including offering cash handouts and easing the one-child policy to allow for three — have failed to stabilize falling birthrates. Educated Chinese women are increasingly delaying marriage and choosing not to have children, deterred by the high costs of housing and education.China has also been unwilling to loosen immigration rules to boost the population, and has historically issued relatively few green cards to replenish its shrinking work force.To address the labor shortage, China has been outsourcing low-skilled production to other countries in Asia, and adding more automation to its factories, hoping to rely more on artificial intelligence and technology sectors for future growth. More

  • 163 Shares199 Views

    in Economy

    Pressure Mounts on China to Offer Debt Relief to Poor Countries Facing Default

    by

    There was optimism at the spring meetings of the I.M.F. and World Bank that China will make concessions over restructuring its loans.WASHINGTON — China, under growing pressure from top international policymakers, appeared to indicate this week that it is ready to make concessions that would unlock a global effort to restructure hundreds of billions of dollars of debt owed by poor countries.China has lent more than $500 billion to developing countries through its lending program, making it one of the world’s largest creditors. Many of those countries, including several in Africa, have struggled economically in the wake of the pandemic and face the possibility of defaulting on their debt payments. Their problems have been compounded by rising interest rates and disruptions to supplies of food and energy as a result of Russia’s war in Ukraine.The United States, along with other Western nations, has been pressing China to allow some of those countries to restructure their debt and reduce the amount that they owe. But for more than two years, China has insisted that other creditors and multilateral lenders absorb financial losses as part of any restructuring, bogging down a critical loan relief process and threatening to push millions of people in developing countries deeper into poverty.A breakthrough would offer an economic lifeline to vulnerable nations at a time of sluggish growth and uncertain financial stability, and it would signal a renewed interest from China in economic diplomacy.Economists and development experts are watching carefully to determine if China is serious about easing the loan forgiveness logjam and if its talk will be followed by action. By some calculations, the world’s poor countries owe around $200 billion to wealthy nations, multilateral development banks and private creditors. Leaders of the world’s advanced economies have been grappling in recent months with how to avert financial crises in teetering markets such as Zambia, Sri Lanka and Ghana.Africa’s private and public external debt has increased more than fivefold over the last two decades to about $700 billion and Chinese lenders account for 12 percent of that total, according to Chatham House, the London policy institute. Researchers for the Debt Relief for Green and Inclusive Recovery Project estimated in a recent report that 61 emerging market and developing economies were facing debt distress, and that more than $800 billion in debt must be restructured.Leaders of the world’s advanced economies have been grappling in recent months with how to avert financial crises in teetering markets such as Sri Lanka.Dinuka Liyanawatte/Reuters“China is facing increasing pressure from every quarter, including from other emerging market economies, to play a more constructive role in the negotiations over debt restructuring,” said Eswar Prasad, a former head of the International Monetary Fund’s China division, who said China’s intransigence had left it “increasingly isolated.”There were indications this week that China was prepared to end that isolation as top economic officials from around the world convened at the spring meetings of the I.M.F. and World Bank. Participants expressed optimism that representatives from Beijing appeared to be ready to back off its insistence that multilateral lenders such as the World Bank, which provides low-interest loans and grants to poor countries, accept losses in the debt restructuring.“My sense from the current context is we’re moving on to new steps,” David Malpass, the departing World Bank president, said at a news conference on Thursday, pointing to “progress on equal burden sharing.”Kristalina Georgieva, the I.M.F.’s managing director, said she was “very encouraged” that a “common understanding” had been reached that could accelerate relief for countries such as Zambia, Ghana, Ethiopia and Sri Lanka.“I always say the proof of the pudding is in the eating,” Ms. Georgieva said.To restructure a country’s debt, creditors generally must agree to a combination of lowering the interest rate on the loan, extending the duration of the loan or writing off some of what is owed. China, which has faced an array of domestic economic challenges over the last three years, has been reluctant to take losses on debt and has pushed for other lenders, such as the World Bank, to incur losses.The urgency for a resolution was palpable among countries that are most in need of relief. Zambia defaulted in 2020 and has been trying to restructure $8.4 billion that it owes through a program established by the Group of 20 nations. It owes about $6 billion to Chinese lenders, and its total debt to foreign lenders is approaching $20 billion.On Friday, Ghana’s finance minister, Ken Ofori-Atta, lamented that 33 African nations were saddled with interest payments that approached or exceeded what their governments spent on health and education.Yuri Gripas for The New York Times“Zambia urgently needs debt relief,” Situmbeko Musokotwane, Zambia’s finance minister, told The New York Times. “Delay on debt restructuring puts our currency under pressure, excludes Zambia from capital markets and makes it difficult to attract much-needed foreign direct investment.”Ghana appealed to the Group of 20 nations this year for debt relief through a fledgling program known as the Common Framework after securing preliminary approval for a $3 billion loan from the I.M.F. That money is contingent on Ghana’s receiving assurances that it can restructure the approximately $30 billion that it owes to foreign lenders. Officials from Ghana have been meeting with their Chinese counterparts about restructuring the $2 billion that it owes China.On Friday, Ghana’s finance minister, Ken Ofori-Atta, lamented that 33 African nations were saddled with interest payments that approached or exceeded what their governments spent on health and education and expressed disappointment that advanced economies had been slow to act.“Honestly, it is disheartening to watch Africa struggle in this way, especially considering the potential loss of productivity over the next decade should African economies buckle under the weight of suffocating debts,” Mr. Ofori-Atta said at an Atlantic Council event on Friday.But it remains uncertain how far China is willing to go.Brad Setser, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, said that it was not clear what financial terms Beijing would accept when restructuring debt but that it appeared to be taking a “positive step” that would remove “a financially unwarranted roadblock to any progress.”Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen at a farm in Zambia in January. She said this week that she would continue to press her Chinese counterparts to make the restructuring process work better.Fatima Hussein/Associated PressBut given the grinding pace of the talks, big investors in emerging markets are not counting on quick resolutions.“We are starting to see tokens of flexibility from China on their stance in sovereign debt restructuring, but complexities abound,” said Yacov Arnopolin, emerging markets portfolio manager at PIMCO. “Near term, we don’t expect a clear-cut solution on China’s willingness to take losses.”China’s reluctance has been another source of tension with the United States, which has expressed concern that Beijing’s onerous lending terms and refusal to renegotiate have amplified the financial problems that developing countries are facing. Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen said this week that she would continue to press her Chinese counterparts to improve the restructuring process but that she was encouraged that China had recently expressed a willingness to help Sri Lanka restructure its debt.People familiar with Chinese economic policymaking said domestic politics had made it hard for China to make difficult decisions last autumn and over the winter about accepting possible losses on its loans.In October, the Communist Party held its once-in-five-years national congress and chose a new team of senior party officials to work with Xi Jinping, the country’s top leader. Maneuvering then began to reshuffle the government’s senior ranks, which had been expected during the annual session of the National People’s Congress in early March, although some changes of financial policymakers were unexpectedly delayed.China is now ready to focus on addressing a wide range of economic issues, including international debt, the people said. However, Beijing still faces other challenges that may limit its willingness to bargain, including a commercial banking system that faces very heavy losses on loans to real estate developers and does not want to accept large losses on loans to developing countries at the same time.Chinese officials offered support for the debt relief initiatives in broad terms this week.Wang Wenbin, a spokesman for the Chinese Foreign Ministry, said on Friday that China had put forward a three-point proposal that included calling for the I.M.F. to more quickly share its debt sustainability assessments for countries that need relief, and for creditors to detail how they will carry out the restructurings on “comparable terms.”After a meeting in Washington between Yi Gang, China’s central bank governor, and Mr. Musokotwane of Zambia, the Chinese central bank released a brief statement.“They exchanged views on issues of common concern including bilateral financial cooperation,” it said.Keith Bradsher More

  • 100 Shares109 Views

    in Economy

    IMF Lowers Growth Outlook Amid Financial System Tremors

    by

    The International Monetary Fund says a painful slowdown, which could include a recession, has become a bigger risk for the global economy.WASHINGTON — The world economy faces the increasing risk of a painful slowdown amid worries about the global banking system and concerns that rising interest rates could force banks to curtail lending, the International Monetary Fund said on Tuesday.The warning follows weeks of turmoil in the global banking sector, which included two bank failures in the United States and UBS’s takeover of Credit Suisse, brokered by the Swiss government. Fears that bank runs would ripple through the financial system have abated in recent weeks, but concerns that additional bank failures and tightening lending standards could slow economic output around the world remain.In its latest World Economic Outlook report, the I.M.F. made a slight reduction to its growth forecast for 2023, lowering it to 2.8 percent, from 2.9 percent in January. Growth for the year is expected to be much slower than the I.M.F. predicted a year ago, when it projected output of 3.4 percent.Growth projections for Japan, Germany and India were all lowered since the start of the year, when the I.M.F. said a global recession would most likely be avoided.The I.M.F. and the World Bank have both raised alarms in recent weeks that the global economy is facing a period of extended stagnation. The I.M.F. expects growth to hover around 3 percent for the next five years, which is its weakest medium-term growth forecast since 1990.On Tuesday, the I.M.F. expressed optimism that a financial crisis could be averted, but it lamented that inflation was still elevated and that the global economy remained fragile, facing a “rocky” road ahead. It suggested that a so-called hard landing, which could entail economies around the world tipping into recession, was increasingly plausible.“A hard landing — particularly for advanced economies — has become a much larger risk,” the I.M.F. report said, adding, “The fog around the world economic outlook has thickened.”Pierre-Olivier Gourinchas, the I.M.F.’s chief economist, said hopes for stronger growth hinged partly on China’s reopening after strict Covid-19 regulations.How Hwee Young/EPA, via ShutterstockThe dimmer forecast comes as top economic officials from around the world are convening in Washington this week for the spring meetings of the I.M.F. and World Bank. The gathering is taking place at a moment of high uncertainty, with Russia’s war in Ukraine grinding on, prices around the world remaining stubbornly high and debt burdens in developing countries raising unease about the possibility of defaults.Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen is expected to meet with other international regulators this week to assess the state of the global financial system. On Tuesday, she expressed confidence in the U.S. banking system and the health of the economy, explaining that she continues to believe that the outlook is brighter than what many economists predicted last fall.“Here at home, the U.S. banking system remains sound, with strong capital and liquidity positions,” Ms. Yellen said during a news conference. “The global financial system also remains resilient due to the significant reforms that nations took after the financial crisis.”Ms. Yellen said she remained “vigilant” to the risks facing the economy, pointing to recent pressures on banking systems in the United States and Europe and the potential for more fallout from Russia’s war in Ukraine. She is not currently seeing evidence that credit is contracting, she added, but acknowledged that it was a possibility.“I’m not anticipating a downturn in the economy, although, of course, that remains a risk,” Ms. Yellen said.Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen expressed confidence on Tuesday in the strength of the U.S. economy but acknowledged that a downturn remained possible.Yuri Gripas for The New York TimesThe I.M.F. made a small upgrade to its projection for U.S. output, which is now expected to be 1.6 percent for 2023.Economists are still working to assess what effects the bank failures might have on the broader U.S. economy. Analysts at Goldman Sachs wrote in a research note this week that bank stress could reduce lending by as much as six percentage points and that small businesses, which rely heavily on small and midsize banks, could bear the brunt of tighter lending.The I.M.F. attributed the strain on the financial sector to banks with business models that relied heavily on a continuation of low interest rates and failed to adjust to the rapid pace of increases in the last year. Although it appears that the turbulence in the banking sector might be contained, the I.M.F. noted that investors and depositors remained highly sensitive to developments in the banking sector.Unrealized losses at banks could lead to a “plausible scenario” of additional shocks that could have a “potentially significant impact on the global economy” if credit conditions tighten further and businesses and households have an even harder time borrowing.“The risks are again heavily weighted to the downside and in large part because of the financial turmoil of the last month and a half,” Pierre-Olivier Gourinchas, the I.M.F.’s chief economist, said at a briefing ahead of the report’s release.In the most severe scenario, in which global credit conditions tighten sharply, the I.M.F. projected that global growth could slow to 1 percent this year.Mr. Gourinchas noted that the financial system was not the only cloud hanging over the global economy. Hopes for stronger growth have been hinging on China’s reopening after strict pandemic regulations, and changes to that policy could slow output and disrupt international commerce, he said. At the same time, Russia’s war in Ukraine continues to threaten the reliability of food and energy supply chains.Last month, the I.M.F. approved a $15.6 billion loan package for Ukraine, the first such financing program for a country involved in a major war.Emile Ducke for The New York TimesThe I.M.F. has been playing a leading role in trying to stabilize the Ukrainian economy, and last month it approved a $15.6 billion loan package for Ukraine, the first such financing program for a country involved in a major war. But despite the efforts by Western nations to buttress Ukraine and weaken Russia, the I.M.F. raised its outlook for the Russian economy, projecting it will grow 0.7 percent this year and 1.3 percent in 2024.The I.M.F. noted that Russia’s energy exports continued to be robust, allowing it to support its economy through government spending. The impact of efforts by the United States and Europe to cap the price of Russian oil at $60 a barrel remains unclear because global oil prices have been falling amid recession fears. I.M.F. officials said that because of lower oil prices, Russian oil was no longer trading at as much of a discount and that Russia had been successful at finding ways to circumvent the price cap.Even as it underscored the risks facing the global economy, the I.M.F. urged central banks to maintain their efforts to contain prices while standing ready to stabilize the financial system, noting that inflation is still too elevated relative to their targets.Despite the I.M.F.’s warnings about a hard landing, Ms. Yellen sought to open this week’s meetings with a note of optimism. She pointed to signs that inflation is diminishing and the resilience of the financial system as reasons for hope.“I wouldn’t overdo the negativism about the global economy,” Ms. Yellen said. “I think we should be more positive.”She added: “I think the outlook is reasonably bright.” More