More stories

  • in

    Another Jolt of Uncertainty for a Global Economy Mired in It

    The U.S. presidential election result has ensured a sharp turn in economic policy expected to upend global commerce and diverge from decades of American norms.The U.S. presidential election is over. What remains is a disorienting miasma of fresh economic uncertainty.Despite reams of campaign proposals, just how President-elect Donald J. Trump’s administration will handle policy decisions that are crucial to the global economy’s path — on trade, technology, climate, industrial policy and more — is still unclear.Meanwhile, pre-election sources of instability keep spinning. War rumbles on in Ukraine. Escalating conflict in the Middle East could reignite a rise in food and energy prices. China, a vital engine of global growth, is trying to resuscitate its flattened economy. Many poor and middle-income countries face an unscalable wall of debt.Increasing bouts of extreme weather continue to destroy crops, wreck cities and swell the flow of migrants from economically devastated regions. And advances in artificial intelligence are poised to eliminate, create and reconfigure tens of millions of jobs.Then there is the hangover from the pandemic. Philip N. Jefferson, the vice chair of the Federal Reserve, has said policymakers are still trying to understand the economic aftereffects of this “once-in-a-century disturbance of worldwide consequence.”Inflation, in particular, has become harder to predict in the pandemic’s aftermath as political and military tensions have risen, he noted.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Trump Eyes Bigger Trade War in Second Term

    The former president’s past tariffs raised prices for consumers and businesses, economists say. His next plan could tax 10 times as many imports.In March 2018, a day after announcing sweeping tariffs on metals imported from America’s allies and adversaries alike, President Donald J. Trump took to social media to share one of his central economic philosophies: “Trade wars are good, and easy to win.”As president, Mr. Trump presided over the biggest increase in U.S. tariffs since the Great Depression, hitting China, Canada, the European Union, Mexico, India and other governments with stiff levies. They hit back, imposing tariffs on American soybeans, whiskey, orange juice and motorcycles. U.S. agricultural exports plummeted, prompting Mr. Trump to send $23 billion to farmers to help offset losses.Now, as he runs for president again, Mr. Trump is promising to ratchet up his trade war to a much greater degree. He has proposed “universal baseline tariffs on most foreign products,” including higher levies on certain countries that devalue their currency. In interviews, he has floated plans for a 10 percent tariff on most imports and a tariff of 60 percent or more on Chinese goods. He has also posited cutting the federal income tax and relying on tariffs for revenue instead.Mr. Trump, who once proclaimed himself “Tariff Man,” has long argued that tariffs would boost American factories, end the gap between what America imported and what it exported and increase American jobs.His first round of levies hit more than $400 billion worth of imports, including steel, solar panels, washing machines and Chinese goods like smart watches, chemicals, bicycle helmets and motors. His rationale was that import taxes would revive American manufacturing, reduce reliance on foreign goods and allow U.S. companies to better compete against cheap products from China and other countries.Economists say the tariffs did reduce imports and encouraged U.S. factory production for certain industries, including steel, semiconductors and computer equipment. But that came at a very high cost, one that most likely offset any overall gains. Studies show that the tariffs resulted in higher prices for American consumers and factories that depend on foreign inputs, and reduced U.S. exports for certain goods that were subject to retaliation.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    World Bank Sees Rosier Growth Outlook

    But rising trade barriers pose a long-term threat to global output as protectionist policies spread, the bank said.The World Bank on Tuesday raised its outlook for the world economy this year but warned that the rise of new trade barriers and protectionist policies posed a long-term threat to global growth.In its latest Global Economic Prospects report, the World Bank projected global growth to hold steady at 2.6 percent this year, an upgrade from its January forecast of 2.4 percent, and predicted that output would edge higher to 2.7 percent in 2025. The forecasts showed the global economy stabilizing after being rocked in recent years by the pandemic and the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East.“Four years after the upheavals caused by the pandemic, conflicts, inflation and monetary tightening, it appears that global economic growth is steadying,” Indermit Gill, the World Bank’s chief economist, said in a statement accompanying the report.However, sluggish growth continues to haunt the world’s poorest economies, which are still grappling with inflation and the burdens of high debt. The bank noted that over the next three years, countries that account for more than 80 percent of the world’s population would experience slower growth than in the decade before the pandemic.The slightly brighter forecast was led by the resilience of the U.S. economy, which continues to defy expectations despite higher interest rates. Overall, advanced economies are growing at an annual rate of 1.5 percent, with output remaining sluggish in Europe and Japan. By contrast, emerging market and developing economies are growing at a rate of 4 percent, led by China and Indonesia.Although growth is expected to be a bit stronger than previously forecast, the World Bank said prices were easing more slowly than it projected six months ago. It foresees global inflation moderating to 3.5 percent in 2024 and 2.9 percent next year. That gradual decline is likely to lead central banks to delay interest rate cuts, dimming prospects for growth in developing economies.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Europe Has Fallen Behind the U.S. and China. Can It Catch Up?

    A “competitiveness crisis” is raising alarms for officials and business leaders in the European Union, where investment, income and productivity are lagging.Europe’s share of the global economy is shrinking, and fears are deepening that the continent can no longer keep up with the United States and China.“We are too small,” said Enrico Letta, a former Italian prime minister who recently delivered a report on the future of the single market to the European Union.“We are not very ambitious,” Nicolai Tangen, head of Norway’s sovereign wealth fund, the world’s largest, told The Financial Times. “Americans just work harder.”“European businesses need to regain self-confidence,” Europe’s association of chambers of commerce declared.The list of reasons for what has been called the “competitiveness crisis” goes on: The European Union has too many regulations, and its leadership in Brussels has too little power. Financial markets are too fragmented; public and private investments are too low; companies are too small to compete on a global scale.“Our organization, decision-making and financing are designed for ‘the world of yesterday’ — pre-Covid, pre-Ukraine, pre-conflagration in the Middle East, pre-return of great power rivalry,” said Mario Draghi, a former president of the European Central Bank who is heading a study of Europe’s competitiveness.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    How China Pulled So Far Ahead on Industrial Policy

    For more than half a century, concerns about oil shortages or a damaged climate have spurred governments to invest in alternative energy sources.In the 1970s, President Jimmy Carter placed solar panels on the roof of the White House as a symbol of his commitment to developing energy from the sun. In the 1990s, Japan offered homeowners groundbreaking subsidies to install photovoltaic panels. And in the 2000s, Germany developed an innovative program that guaranteed consumers who adopted a solar energy system that they would sell their electricity at a profit.But no country has come close to matching the scale and tenacity of China’s support. The proof is in the production: In 2022, Beijing accounted for 85 percent of all clean-energy manufacturing investment in the world, according to the International Energy Agency.Now the United States, Europe and other wealthy nations are trying frantically to catch up. Hoping to correct past missteps on industrial policy and learn from China’s successes, they are spending huge amounts on subsidizing homegrown companies while also seeking to block competing Chinese products. They have made modest inroads: Last year, the energy agency said, China’s share of new clean-energy factory investment fell to 75 percent.The problem for the West, though, is that China’s industrial dominance is underpinned by decades of experience using the power of a one-party state to pull all the levers of government and banking, while encouraging frenetic competition among private companies.China’s unrivaled production of solar panels and electric vehicles is built on an earlier cultivation of the chemical, steel, battery and electronics industries, as well as large investments in rail lines, ports and highways.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Europe Wants to Build a Stronger Defense Industry, but Can’t Decide How

    Conflicting political visions, competitive jockeying and American dominance stand in the way of a more coordinated and efficient military machine.France and Germany’s recent agreement to develop a new multibillion-dollar battlefield tank together was immediately hailed by the German defense minister, Boris Pistorius, as a “breakthrough” achievement.“It is a historic moment,” he said.His gushing was understandable. For seven years, political infighting, industrial rivalry and neglect had pooled like molasses around the project to build a next-generation tank, known as the Main Combat Ground System.Russia’s invasion of Ukraine more than two years ago jolted Europe out of complacency about military spending. After defense budgets were cut in the decades that followed the Soviet Union’s collapse, the war has reignited Europe’s efforts to build up its own military production capacity and near-empty arsenals.But the challenges that face Europe are about more than just money. Daunting political and logistical hurdles stand in the way of a more coordinated and efficient military machine. And they threaten to seriously hobble any rapid strengthening of Europe’s defense capabilities — even as tensions between Russia and its neighbors ratchet up.“Europe has 27 military industrial complexes, not just one,” said Max Bergmann, a program director at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.The North Atlantic Treaty Organization, which will celebrate its 75th anniversary this summer, still sets the overall defense strategy and spending goals for Europe, but it doesn’t control the equipment procurement process. Each NATO member has its own defense establishment, culture, priorities and favored companies, and each government retains final say on what to buy.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    U.S. and Europe Move Closer to Using Russian Assets to Help Ukraine

    Finance ministers from the G7 nations are hoping to finalize a plan ahead of the group’s leaders meeting next month.The United States and Europe are coalescing around a plan to use interest earned on frozen Russian central bank assets to provide Ukraine with a loan to be used for military and economic assistance, potentially providing the country with a multibillion-dollar lifeline as Russia’s war effort intensifies.Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen said in an interview on Sunday that several options for using $300 billion in immobilized Russian assets remained on the table. But she said the most promising idea was for Group of 7 nations to issue a loan to Ukraine that would be backed by profits and interest income that is being earned on Russian assets held in Europe.Finance ministers from the Group of 7 will be meeting in Italy later this week in hopes of finalizing a plan that they can deliver to heads of state ahead of the group’s leaders meeting next month. The urgency to find a way to deliver more financial support to Ukraine has been mounting as the country’s efforts to fend off Russia have shown signs of faltering.“I think we see considerable interest among all of our partners in a loan structure that would bring forward the stream of windfall profits,” Ms. Yellen said during her flight to Germany, where she is holding meetings ahead of the Group of 7 summit. “It would generate a significant up-front amount that would help meet needs we anticipate Ukraine is going to have both militarily and through reconstruction.”For months, Western allies have been debating how far to go in using the Russian central bank assets. The United States believes that it would be legal under international law to confiscate the money and give it to Ukraine, but several European countries, including France and Germany, have been wary about the lawfulness of such a move and the precedent that it would set.Although the United States recently passed legislation that would give the Biden administration the authority to seize and confiscate Russian assets, the desire to act in unison with Europe has largely sidelined that idea.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Few Chinese Electric Cars Are Sold in U.S., but Industry Fears a Flood

    Automakers in the United States and their supporters welcomed President Biden’s tariffs, saying they would protect domestic manufacturing and jobs from cheap Chinese vehicles.The Biden administration’s new tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles won’t have a huge immediate impact on American consumers or the car market because very few such cars are sold in the United States.But the decision reflects deep concern within the American automotive industry, which has grown increasingly worried about China’s ability to churn out cheap electric vehicles. American automakers welcomed the decision by the Biden administration on Tuesday to impose a 100 percent tariff on electric vehicles from China, saying those vehicles would undercut billions of dollars of investment in electric vehicle and battery factories in the United States.“Today’s announcement is a necessary response to combat the Chinese government’s unfair trade practices that endanger the future of our auto industry,” Senator Gary Peters, a Michigan Democrat, said in a statement. “It will help level the playing field, keep our auto industry competitive and support good-paying, union jobs here at home.”On Tuesday, President Biden announced a series of new and increased tariffs on certain Chinese-made goods, including a 25 percent duty on steel and aluminum and 50 percent levies on semiconductors and solar panels. The tariff on electric vehicles made in China was quadrupled from 25 percent. Chinese lithium-ion batteries for electric cars will now face a 25 percent tariff, up from 7.5 percent.The United States imports only a few makes — electric or gasoline — from China. One is the Polestar 2, an electric vehicle made in China by a Swedish automaker in which the Chinese company Zhejiang Geely has a controlling stake. In a statement, Polestar said it was evaluating the impact of Mr. Biden’s announcement.“We believe that free trade is essential to speed up the transition to more sustainable mobility through increased E.V. adoption,” the company said.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More