Inflation (Economics)

More stories

  • 125 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    Prices for Some Goods Are Actually Falling This Holiday Season

    by

    As inflation slows, prices for some physical goods are falling outright, which could lift consumers’ spirits.American shoppers, burned by more than two years of rapid inflation, are getting some welcome relief this holiday season: Prices on many products are falling.Toys are almost 3 percent cheaper this Christmas than last, government data shows. Sports equipment is down nearly 2 percent. Bigger-ticket items are also showing price declines: Washing machines cost 12 percent less than a year ago, for example. And eggs, whose meteoric rise in prices last winter became a prime example of the country’s inflation problem, are down 22 percent over the past year.Consumer prices, in the aggregate, are still rising, though not nearly as quickly as a year ago. Most groceries still cost more than they did a year ago. So do most services, such as restaurant meals, haircuts and trips to the dentist. And housing costs, the biggest monthly expense for most Americans, are still rising for both renters and home buyers. Overall, the price of physical goods is flat over the past year, while the price of services is up a bit more than 5 percent.Still, economists view the moderation in goods prices as an important step toward putting the high inflation of the past two and a half years more firmly in the rearview mirror. They expect it to continue: Most forecasters say prices for physical products will keep falling next year, especially prices for longer-lasting manufactured goods, where the recent declines have been largest. That should help price increases overall to ease.“We’re just kind of in the beginning of that phase, and we should continue to see downward pressure on prices in this category,” said Michelle Meyer, chief economist for Mastercard.For consumers, who have been dour about the economy despite low unemployment, falling prices on many goods could provide a psychological lift. After the rapid inflation of the past few years, a mere slowdown in price increases might not feel like much to celebrate. But seeing prices fall could be a different story — especially because some of the biggest recent declines have been in categories that consumers tend to pay the most attention to, such as gasoline. (The price of regular gas, which topped $5 a gallon nationally in June 2022, has fallen to just over $3 on average, according to AAA.)Most groceries still cost more than they did a year ago. Maansi Srivastava/The New York Times“People will key in on certain prices,” said Neale Mahoney, a Stanford University economist who recently left a role in the Biden administration. “We know that people will overweight certain things.”The price of many goods soared in 2021, fed by a surge in demand from consumers flush with pandemic relief checks and by supply chain disruptions that limited supplies of many products, especially those from overseas.Many economists initially expected a quick reversal, but instead prices kept rising. Supply chains took longer to return to normal than expected, and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine led to a spike in energy prices in 2022. At the same time, consumer demand for goods remained high, and many companies took advantage of the opportunity to push through price increases and pad their profit margins.Now, however, many of those forces are beginning to fade. Supply chains have largely returned to normal. Oil prices have fallen. Economic weakness in China and other countries has held down demand for many raw materials, which feeds through to consumer prices.Softer demand from American consumers could also be playing a role. The Federal Reserve has raised interest rates repeatedly since early last year in an effort to curb spending and control inflation. Consumers have so far proved remarkably resilient, but retailers in recent months have reported that shoppers have increasingly traded down to cheaper items or waited for sales before buying — trends that could accelerate if the economy cools further next year.“We think that the consumer is going to be looking for value, and that’s because they are very sensitive to price,” Carlos E. Alberini, chief executive of Guess, the fashion retailer, told investors last month. The company has “revisited some of the pricing structure we have in all brands,” he added.The price of services is up a bit more than 5 percent for such things as restaurant meals, haircuts and trips to the dentist.Hiroko Masuike/The New York TimesSome toy manufacturers and retailers that sell toys have also said they expect sales this season to be less robust than in years past and have leaned into advertising their products’ affordability.At many companies, price cuts have taken the form of Black Friday sales and holiday promotions that are larger for some categories of items than in past years. At Signet Jewelers, the big diamond retailer, sales fell in the third quarter, and the company recently said that it expected sales to be lower this holiday season than last year in part because of “elevated promotional activity.”“It’s been a different holiday season,” Virginia C. Drosos, Signet’s chief executive, told investors on a conference call this month. Instead of shopping early, customers are waiting to make their purchases and are looking for deals, she said.Matt Pavich, senior director of innovation and strategy for Revionics, a company that uses artificial intelligence to help retailers set prices, said companies were trying to cut prices before their competitors do.“As prices come down, there’s going to be the race to bring prices down more, get the credit for that,” he said. “We’re going to see retailers really trying to win back consumers’ trust.”Still, prices for most products remain well above where they were before the pandemic. A dozen eggs cost about 50 cents more than in February 2020. Used car prices, another prominent example of pandemic sticker shock, have fallen more than 10 percent from their peak early last year but are 37 percent above where they were in February 2020.Services prices are still climbing more quickly than before the pandemic. Some economists say that goods prices will need to fall further for overall inflation to return to the Federal Reserve’s target of 2 percent a year.“We need pretty substantial deflation, and I wouldn’t call what we’re seeing ‘substantial,’” said Wendy Edelberg, director of the Hamilton Project, an economic policy division of the Brookings Institution. “It’s not even substantial in a historical context.”Indeed, prices of durable goods fell much of the two decades that preceded the pandemic. Long-term trends such as globalization and automation have tended to push down manufacturing costs. Intense competition among retailers, especially with the rise of online shopping, meant those savings were mostly passed on to consumers.Services prices, on the other hand, rarely fall, in part because wages account for a much larger share of the cost of most services. During the decade before the pandemic, services prices gradually rose while goods prices were flat or fell, resulting in an extended period of stable, moderate inflation.Economists don’t expect to see outright deflation, in which prices fall for both goods and services. That’s a good thing: Overall price declines are generally viewed as economically dangerous, if they last.“When demand in the economy is weak, the last thing you want is someone to say, ‘I’m not going to buy that car today because it’s going to be $600 less expensive in six months,’” said Karen Dynan, an economist at Harvard.Brittany Greeson for The New York TimesThere are a few reasons. For starters, in theory, deflation could prompt consumers to hold off on spending, touching off a downward spiral. People may be unlikely to buy today what they expect to be cheaper tomorrow. Once deflation takes hold, it can be difficult to escape: Japan has been stuck in a deflationary pattern since the late 1990s.“When demand in the economy is weak, the last thing you want is someone to say, ‘I’m not going to buy that car today because it’s going to be $600 less expensive in six months,’” said Karen Dynan, an economist at Harvard.For another, companies are unlikely to raise wages in a world where they cannot charge more. And if wages are not going up — or are even going down — it will be harder for households to keep up with fixed bills, like mortgage interest payments.But while broad-based price declines are a problem, most economists view the more limited declines happening now as a sign that the economy is gradually moving past the disruptions of the pandemic.“Supply chains have basically normalized,” said Neil Dutta, head of economic research at Renaissance Macro. “Household demand behavior has basically normalized, the dollar is still pretty strong. I wouldn’t see a reason why goods prices would go higher.” More

  • 113 Shares129 Views

    in Economy

    Is Jerome Powell’s Fed Pulling Off a Soft Landing?

    by

    It’s too soon to declare victory, but the economic outlook seems sunnier than it did a year ago, and many economists are predicting a surprising win.The Federal Reserve appears to be creeping closer to an outcome that its own staff economists viewed as unlikely just six months ago: lowering inflation back to a normal range without plunging the economy into a recession.Plenty could still go wrong. But inflation has come down notably in recent months — it is running at 3.1 percent on a yearly basis, down from a 9.1 percent peak in 2022. At the same time, growth is solid, consumers are spending, and employers continue to hire.That combination has come as a surprise to economists. Many had predicted that cooling a red-hot job market with far more job openings than available workers would be a painful process. Instead, workers returned from the labor market sidelines to fill open spots, helping along a relatively painless rebalancing. At the same time, healing supply chains have helped to boost inventories and ease shortages. Goods prices have stopped pushing inflation higher, and have even begun to pull it down.The Fed is hoping for “a continuation of what we have seen, which is the labor market coming into better balance without a significant increase in unemployment, inflation coming down without a significant increase in unemployment, and growth moderating without a significant increase in unemployment,” Jerome H. Powell, the Fed chair, said Wednesday.As Fed policymakers look ahead to 2024, they are aiming squarely for a soft landing: Officials are trying to assess how long they need to keep interest rates high to ensure that inflation is fully under control without grinding economic growth to an unnecessarily painful halt. That maneuver is likely to be a delicate one, which is why Mr. Powell has been careful to avoid declaring victory prematurely.But policymakers clearly see it coming into view, based on their economic projections. The Fed chair signaled on Wednesday that rates were unlikely to rise from their 5.25 to 5.5 percent setting unless inflation stages a surprising resurgence, and central bankers predicted three rate cuts by the end of 2024 as inflation continues to cool and joblessness rises only slightly.Consumers continue to spend, and growth in the third quarter was unexpectedly hot.Tony Cenicola/The New York TimesIf they can nail that landing, Mr. Powell and his colleagues will have accomplished an enormous feat in American central banking. Fed officials have historically tipped the economy into a recession when trying to cool inflation from heights like those it reached in 2022. And after several years during which Mr. Powell has faced criticism for failing to anticipate how lasting and serious inflation would become, such a success would be likely to shape his legacy.“The Fed right now looks pretty dang good, in terms of how things are turning out,” said Michael Gapen, head of U.S. Economics at Bank of America.Respondents in a survey of market participants carried out regularly by the research firm MacroPolicy Perspectives are more optimistic about the odds of a soft landing than ever before: 74 percent said that no recession was needed to lower inflation back to the Fed’s target in a Dec. 1-7 survey, up from a low of 41 percent in September 2022.Fed staff members began to anticipate a recession after several banks blew up early this year, but stopped forecasting one in July.People were glum about the prospects for a gentle landing partly because they thought the Fed had been late to react to rapid inflation. Mr. Powell and his colleagues argued throughout 2021 that higher prices were likely to be “transitory,” even as some prominent macroeconomists warned that it might last.The Fed was forced to change course drastically as those warnings proved prescient: Inflation has now been above 2 percent for 33 straight months.Once central bankers started raising interest rates in response, they did so rapidly, pushing them from near-zero at the start of 2022 to their current range of 5.25 to 5.5 percent by July of this year. Many economists worried that slamming the brakes on the economy so abruptly would cause whiplash in the form of a recession.But the transitory call is looking somewhat better now — “transitory” just took a long time to play out.Much of the reason inflation has moderated comes down to the healing of supply chains, easing of shortages in key goods like cars, and a return to something that looks more like prepandemic spending trends in which households are buying a range of goods and services instead of just stay-at-home splurges like couches and exercise equipment.In short, the pandemic problems that the Fed had expected to prove temporary did fade. It just took years rather than months.“As a charter member of team transitory, it took a lot longer than many of us thought,” said Richard Clarida, the former Fed vice chair who served until early 2022. But, he noted, things have adjusted.Fed policies have played a role in cooling demand and keeping consumers from adjusting their expectations for future inflation, so “the Fed does deserves some credit” for that slowdown.While higher interest rates didn’t heal supply chains or convince consumers to stop buying so many sweatpants, they have helped to cool the market for key purchases like housing and cars somewhat. Without those higher borrowing costs, the economy might have grown even more strongly — giving companies the wherewithal to raise prices more drastically.Now, the question is whether inflation will continue to cool even as the economy hums along at a solid clip, or whether it will take a more marked economic slowdown to drive it down the rest of the way. The Fed itself expects growth to slow substantially next year, to 1.4 percent from 2.6 percent this year, based on fresh projections.“Certainly they’ve done very well, and better than I had anticipated,” said William English, a former senior Fed economist who is now a professor at Yale. “The question remains: Will inflation come all the way back to 2 percent without more slack in the labor and goods markets than we’ve seen so far?”To date, the job market has shown little sign of cracking. Hiring and wage growth have slowed, but unemployment stood at a historically low 3.7 percent in November. Consumers continue to spend, and growth in the third quarter was unexpectedly hot.While those are positive developments, they keep alive the possibility that the economy will have a little too much vim for inflation to cool completely, especially in key services categories.“We don’t know how long it will take to go the last mile with inflation,” said Karen Dynan, a former Treasury chief economist who teaches at Harvard. Given that, setting policy next year could prove to be more of an art than a science: If growth is cooling and inflation is coming down, cutting rates will be a fairly obvious choice. But what if growth is strong? What if inflation progress stalls but growth collapses?Mr. Powell acknowledged some of that uncertainty this week.“Inflation keeps coming down, the labor market keeps getting back into balance,” he said. “It’s so far, so good, although we kind of assume that it will get harder from here, but so far, it hasn’t.”Mr. Powell, a lawyer by training who spent a chunk of his career in private equity, is not an economist and has at times expressed caution about using key economic models and guides too religiously. That lack of devotion to the models may come in handy over the next year, Mr. Gapen of Bank of America said.It may leave the Fed chief — and the institution he leads — more flexible as they react to an economy that has been devilishly tricky to predict because, in the wake of the pandemic, past experience is proving to be a poor precedent.“Maybe it was right to have a guy who was skeptical of frameworks manage the ship during the Covid period,” Mr. Gapen said. More

  • 125 Shares129 Views

    in Economy

    What to Watch at the Fed’s Final Meeting of 2023

    by

    Federal Reserve officials are widely expected to leave interest rates unchanged, but economists will watch for hints at what’s next.Federal Reserve officials will wrap up a year of aggressive inflation fighting on Wednesday afternoon, when they are expected to use their final policy decision of 2023 to leave interest rates at their highest level in 22 years.The Fed is finishing the year on pause after the most intense campaign of interest rate increases in decades, one meant to snuff out the rapid price gains that have been bedeviling consumers since 2021.Because inflation has now moderated substantially, central bankers have increasingly signaled that they may be done raising borrowing costs, which are set to a range of 5.25 to 5.5 percent. The question investors will be focused on Wednesday is how much rates are expected to come down in 2024 — and when those cuts might begin.The Fed will release its statement and a fresh set of quarterly economic projections at 2 p.m., followed by a news conference with Jerome H. Powell, the Fed chair, at 2:30 p.m. Here’s what to watch.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?  More

  • 100 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    Inflation Holds Roughly Steady Ahead of Fed Meeting

    by

    Consumer prices rose 3.1 percent in the year through November, and a closely watched core index was roughly the same rate as the previous month.Inflation data released on Tuesday showed that price increases remained moderate in November, the latest sign that inflation has cooled substantially from its June 2022 peak. That’s likely to keep the Federal Reserve on track to leave interest rates unchanged at its final meeting of the year, which takes place this week.The Consumer Price Index came out just hours before the Fed began its two-day gathering, which will conclude with the release of an interest rate decision and a fresh set of quarterly economic projections at 2 p.m. on Wednesday. Jerome H. Powell, the Fed chair, is then scheduled to hold a news conference.Central bankers have embraced a recent slowdown in price increases, and Tuesday’s data largely suggested that inflation remains lower than earlier this year. Overall inflation climbed 0.1 percent on a monthly basis, making for a 3.1 percent increase compared to a year earlier.That was cooler than 3.2 percent in October, and it is down notably from a peak above 9 percent in the summer of 2022.But some of the report’s underlying details could keep Fed officials wary as they contemplate what to do next with interest rates. Investors expect central bankers to begin lowering borrowing costs within the first half of 2024, though officials have been trying to keep their options open.After stripping out volatile food and fuel to give a clearer sense of underlying inflation trends, so-called core inflation climbed more quickly on a monthly basis. And a closely watched measure that tracks housing expenses also climbed more quickly; that measure is called “owners’ equivalent rent” because it estimates how much it would cost someone to rent a home that they own, and economists have been expecting it to decline.“It reinforces this idea that it’s going to be a bumpy road to disinflation,” said Blerina Uruci, chief U.S. economist at T. Rowe Price. “The Fed cannot cut interest rates too soon in the face of resilient services inflation.”Core inflation was up by 4 percent compared to a year earlier, holding steady from October. That pace remains well above the roughly 2 percent pace that was normal before the onset of the pandemic. More

  • 125 Shares119 Views

    in Economy

    What’s Next for Interest Rates? An Era of ‘Peak Uncertainty.’

    by

    Federal Reserve officials could keep all options on the table at their meeting this week, even as data shape up according to plan.When Jerome H. Powell, the Federal Reserve chair, takes the stage at his postmeeting news conference on Wednesday, investors and many Americans will be keenly focused on one question: When will the Fed start cutting interest rates?Policymakers raised borrowing costs sharply between March 2022 and July, to a 22-year high of 5.25 to 5.5 percent, in a bid to wrestle rapid inflation under control by cooling the economy. They have paused since then, waiting to see how the economy reacted.But with inflation moderating and the job market growing at a more modest pace, Wall Street increasingly expects that the Fed could start cutting interest rates soon — perhaps even within the first three months of 2024.Fed officials have been hesitant to say when that might happen, or to even promise that they are done raising interest rates. That’s because they are still worried that the economy could pick back up or that progress taming inflation could stall. Policymakers do not want to declare victory only to have to walk that back.Mr. Powell is likely to strike a noncommittal tone this week given all the uncertainty, economists said. After their decision on Wednesday, Fed officials will release a fresh quarterly Summary of Economic Projections showing where they think rates will be at the end of 2024, which will indicate how many rate cuts they expect to make, if any. But the projections will offer few hints about when, exactly, any moves might come.And both the Fed’s forecasts and Wall Street’s expectations could mask a stark reality: There is a wide range of possible outcomes for interest rates next year, depending on what happens in the economy over the next couple of months.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?  More

  • 125 Shares179 Views

    in Economy

    Corporate America Is Testing the Limits of Its Pricing Power

    by

    Alexander MacKay coleads the Pricing Lab at Harvard Business School, a research center devoted to studying how companies set prices. Since the pandemic, he has watched how businesses have become more willing to experiment with what they charge their customers.Big companies that had previously pushed through one standard price increase per year are now raising prices more frequently. Retailers increasingly use digital price displays, which they can change with the touch of a button. Across the economy, executives trying to maximize profits are effectively running tests to see what prices consumers will bear before they stop buying.Huge disruptions to supply chains pushed up corporate costs during the pandemic and forced many companies to think more creatively about their pricing strategies, Mr. MacKay said. That supercharged a trend toward more rigorous pricing, and showed many companies that they could more boldly play with prices without chasing shoppers away. The experimentation continues even as costs ease.“We may have prices changing more quickly than they have before,” he said. That could mean up or down, though companies are generally more eager to raise prices than cut them. Firms are trying to figure out how to protect the profits they have built since the pandemic. For big companies in the S&P 500 index, the average profit margin — the percentage of profit relative to revenue — soared in late 2020 and into 2021, as government stimulus and the Federal Reserve’s emergency interventions stoked consumer demand. At the same time, companies raised their prices so much that they more than covered higher costs for energy, transportation, labor and other inputs, which have recently started to come down.Corporations as varied as Apple and Williams-Sonoma recently reported their highest-ever margins for the third quarter, while Delta Air Lines said its international routes generated record profitability over the summer.Margins eased somewhat last year, but have recently recovered to levels that would have set records before the pandemic. Average margins in nearly every sector in the S&P 500 are running near or above 10-year highs, according to Goldman Sachs.“Companies are maintaining or even expanding margins because they are not passing these cost cuts onto consumers,” said Albert Edwards, a strategist at Société Générale, who called recent moves in margins “obscene.”

    .dw-chart-subhed {
    line-height: 1;
    margin-bottom: 6px;
    font-family: nyt-franklin;
    color: #121212;
    font-size: 15px;
    font-weight: 700;
    }

    Quarterly net profit margin of S&P 500 companies
    Source: FactSetBy The New York TimesNow, companies are trying to figure out how to set prices to protect profits at what could prove to be a turning point. High interest rates and waning savings are making some — though by no means all — shoppers more price sensitive.Many companies may be able to protect profits just by holding prices steady as their own costs come down. But some are still thinking about whether they can push prices up further as demand cools and overall inflation abates.“I don’t think companies have the monopoly power to just willy-nilly raise prices,” said Ed Yardeni, president of the research firm Yardeni Research.There’s a focus on margins over market share.Many corporations are talking on earnings calls about how they are prioritizing profit margins — even when that translates into less growth.Take Sysco, the food wholesaler. Its local market business has turned slower recently, Kevin Hourican, the company’s chief executive, said on an October earnings call.But “Sysco is not reacting by leading with price to win share,” he said, referring to the tactic of cutting prices to gain more customers, which is commonly used during downturns. “Instead, we are focused on profitable growth.”Lennox, a heating and air-conditioning company, is working to perfect its pricing strategy based on years of data, Alok Maskara, the firm’s chief executive, said at an investor event this summer.People in the industry are “margin-dollar focused versus revenue-dollar focused,” he said, implying that fewer, more-profitable sales are preferred to many, less-profitable ones.That’s a shift from post-2009 practice.The focus on higher margins — even if it means selling less — is in some cases a shift away from the conventional wisdom in the years during and after the 2009 recession. Back then, some executives felt compelled to compete on price for cost-sensitive shoppers. For hotels, that meant a focus on filling every room.“If you remember back in the Great Recession, there was this view of let’s just drop rates until we get people to heads in beds,” Leeny Oberg, Marriott’s chief financial officer, said in a September meeting with investors. She added that “it wasn’t necessarily the right strategy all the time.”Now “the industry has clearly learned some lessons,” she said. Over the past few years, the company has aimed for more of a balance between maximizing revenue and profit, she noted.Retailers, which have been caught out by shifting consumer tastes in recent years, are talking more lately about “inventory discipline,” or keeping less product in stock, so that they can avoid selling things at clearance prices. The logic is that it’s better to sacrifice a few sales by running out of products than being forced to slash prices in a way that hits the bottom line.The clothing chain American Eagle Outfitters has been expanding its margins by “maintaining tight inventory and promotional discipline,” Jay Schottenstein, the company’s chief executive, said on a November earnings call.Companies learned they can charge more than they thought.While consumers are pulling back from some purchases as prices rise, that is not universally true — hence the value of experimentation. Robert J. Gamgort, the chief executive of Keurig Dr Pepper, said recently that consumers have shown little reaction to higher costs for carbonated drinks.That suggests “it was too good of a value at the start at this,” he said at an investor conference in September, referring to the recent inflationary period. “It was underpriced.”The company, which raised prices at its U.S. beverage unit by 7 percent last quarter, highlighted “strong gross margin expansion” at the top of its latest earnings report.Some executives also find that they can charge more by branding something as a luxury product or experience.“Despite the current economic environment, we continue to see consumers trade up to premium amenities,” Melissa Thomas, chief financial officer at the movie theater chain Cinemark, said on a November earnings call.But price sensitivity may return.Kellogg, the cereal company, had been passing through substantial price increases without losing customers — a situation economists call low price elasticity. It’s like if you snap a rubber band (raise prices) but it doesn’t react (shoppers keep buying).But recently, consumers are beginning to pull back in response to sticker shock.“Price elasticity has hit the market pretty meaningfully,” Gary Pilnick, Kellogg’s chief executive, said on a call with analysts last month. “You might recall that there’s been about 35 percent of price increases over the last couple of years for us, and the elasticities were fairly benign for quite some time.”Price sensitivity is also showing up at brands that cater to lower-income consumers, like Walmart and McDonald’s, which have seen business expand as wealthier people look for deals.“We continue to gain share with both the middle- and higher-income consumers,” Ian Borden, chief financial officer of McDonald’s, said on an October earnings call, although he noted that the company was seeing its lower-income customers struggle.The ability to raise prices — or keep them high — may not last.Even as companies are getting creative to protect their margins, the economy has also held up better than many expected. Overall growth has remained rapid, consumer spending has expanded, and a long-warned-about recession has remained at bay.The question is whether companies will be able to protect profits in an environment where that momentum slows.“Customers are rebelling,” said Paul Donovan, chief economist at UBS Global Wealth Management. “We have reached that point of resistance.” More

  • 150 Shares179 Views

    in Economy

    Europe and Asia React to U.S. Push for Tech and Clean Energy

    by

    Other governments, particularly in Europe, are trying to counter the Biden administration’s industrial policies with their own incentives.The United States has embarked on the biggest industrial policy push in generations, dangling tax breaks, grants and other financial incentives to attract new factories making solar panels, semiconductors and electric vehicles.That spending is aimed at jump-starting the domestic market for crucial products, but it has implications far outside the United States. It is pushing governments from Europe to East Asia to try to keep up by proposing their own investment plans, setting off what some are calling a global subsidy race.Officials, particularly in Europe, have accused the United States of protectionism and have spent months complaining to the Biden administration about its policies. Governments in the European Union, in Britain and elsewhere are debating how to counteract America’s policies by offering their own incentives to attract investment and keep their companies from relocating to the United States.“I think we all deny that there is a subsidy race, but up to a certain extent, it’s happening,” said Markus Beyrer, the director general of BusinessEurope, Europe’s largest trade association.The United States is deploying nearly $400 billion in spending and tax credits to bolster America’s clean energy industry through the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. Another $280 billion is aimed at facilities that manufacture and research semiconductors, as well as broader technological research.The Biden administration says the full agenda will unleash $3.5 trillion in public capital and private investment over the next decade. It is both a response to the hefty subsidies offered by governments in China and East Asia and an attempt to rebuild an American factory sector that has been hollowed out by decades of offshoring.Fredrik Persson, left, and Markus Beyrer, executives of BusinessEurope, a large trade group. “I think we all deny that there is a subsidy race, but up to a certain extent, it’s happening,” Mr. Beyrer said.Virginia Mayo/Associated PressThe administration says the investments will put the United States in a better position to deal with climate change and make it less dependent on potentially risky supply chains running through China.But the spending has sparked concerns about taking government resources away from other priorities, and adding to the debt loads of countries when high interest rates make borrowing riskier and more expensive. Gita Gopinath, the first deputy managing director of the International Monetary Fund, said in an interview in October that the spending race was “a matter of concern.”Ms. Gopinath pointed to statistics showing that whenever the United States, the European Union or China enacts subsidies or tariffs, there is a very high chance that one of the other two will respond with its own subsidies or tariffs within a year.“We are seeing a tit-for-tat there,” Ms. Gopinath said.The spending competition is also straining alliances by giving the companies that make prized products like batteries, hydrogen and semiconductors the ability to “country shop,” or play governments against one another other as they try to find the most welcoming home for their technologies.Freyr Battery, a company founded in Europe that develops lithium ion batteries for cars, ships and storage systems, was partway through building a factory in Norway when its executives learned that the Inflation Reduction Act was under development. In response to the law, the company shifted production to a factory in Georgia.“We think it is a really ingenious piece of modern industrial policy, and consequently, we’ve shifted our focus,” Birger Steen, Freyr’s chief executive officer, said in an interview. “The scaling will happen in the United States, and that’s because of the Inflation Reduction Act.”Mr. Steen said the company was keeping the Norwegian factory ready for a “hot start,” meaning that production could scale up there if local policies become friendlier. The company is talking to policymakers about how they can compete with the United States, he said.Some countries are reaping direct benefits from U.S. spending, including Canada, which is included in some of the clean energy law’s benefits and has mining operations that the United States lacks.Canada’s lithium industry stands to benefit as battery manufacturing moves to the United States and companies look for nearby sources of raw material.Brendan George Ko for The New York TimesKillian Charles, the chief executive at Brunswick Exploration in Montreal, said in an interview that Canada’s lithium industry stood to benefit as battery manufacturing moved to the United States and companies looked for nearby sources of raw material.But in most cases, the competition seems more zero-sum.David Scaysbrook, the managing partner of the Quinbrook Infrastructure Partners Group, which has helped finance some of the largest solar and battery projects in the United States, said that America’s clean energy bill was the most influential legislation introduced by any country and that other governments were not able to replicate “the sheer scale” of it.“Other countries can’t match that fiscal firepower,” he said. “Obviously, that’s a threat to the E.U. or other countries.”The United States has sought to allay some of its allies’ concerns by signing new trade agreements allowing foreign partners to share in some of the clean energy law’s benefits. A minerals agreement signed with Japan in March will allow Japanese facilities to supply minerals for electric vehicles receiving U.S. tax credits. American officials have been negotiating with Europe for a similar agreement since last year.But at a meeting in October, the United States and Europe clashed over a U.S. proposal to allow labor inspections at mines and facilities producing minerals outside the United States and Europe. Officials are continuing to work toward completing a deal in the coming weeks, but in the meantime, the lack of agreement has cast a further pall over the U.S.-E.U. relationship.Biden administration officials have continued to defend their approach, saying that the Inflation Reduction Act does not signal a turn toward American protectionism and that climate spending is badly needed. Even with such significant investments, the United States is likely to fall short of international goals for curbing global warming.John Podesta, the senior adviser to the president for clean energy innovation, said in a conversation at the Brookings Institution in October that foreign governments had been doing “a certain amount of bitching.” But he said the U.S. spending had ultimately spurred action from other partners, including a green industrial policy that Europe introduced early this year.“So with the bitching comes a little bit more shoulder to the wheel, so that’s a good thing,” he added.Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, presented the European Union’s Green Deal Industrial Plan in Brussels in February after the United States enacted the Inflation Reduction Act.Yves Herman/ReutersIn addition to the Green Deal Industrial Plan, which the European Union proposed in February, the bloc has approved a significant green stimulus program as part of an earlier pandemic recovery fund, and additional spending for green industries in its latest budget.Japan and South Korea have proposed their own plans to subsidize green industries. In the technology industry, South Korea and Taiwan both approved measures this year offering more tax breaks to semiconductor companies, and Japan has been setting aside new subsidies for major chipmakers like TSMC and Micron.Europe also proposed a “chips act” last year, though its size is significantly smaller than the American program’s. And China has been pumping money into manufacturing semiconductors, solar panels and electric vehicles to defend its share of the global market and prop up its weakening economy.The competition has also given rise to anxieties in smaller economies, like Britain, about the ability to keep up.“The U.K. is never going to compete on money and scale at the same level as the U.S., E.U. and China because we are firstly under fiscal constraints but also just the size of the economy,” said Raoul Ruparel, the director for Boston Consulting Group’s Center for Growth and a former government special adviser.British officials have made it clear that they don’t intend to offer a vast array of subsidies, like the United States, and are instead relying on a more free-market approach with some case-by-case interventions.Some economists and trade groups have criticized this approach and Britain’s resistance to creating a sweeping industrial strategy to shape the economy more clearly toward green growth, with the assistance of subsidies.“The question is, do you want to capture the economic benefits along the way and do you want to tap into these sources of growth?” Mr. Ruparel asked.TSMC is building a $7 billion plant in Kikuyo, Japan. Japan has been setting aside new subsidies for major chipmakers like TSMC and Micron.Kyodo News, via Getty ImagesSome experts insist fears of a subsidy race are overblown. Emily Benson, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said the scale of overall spending by the United States and the European Union was not significantly different, though European spending was spread out over time.“I don’t see some huge kickoff to this massive subsidy race that will completely upend global relations,” Ms. Benson said.Business leaders and analysts said the frustration in the European Union stemmed partly from broader economic concerns after the conflict with Russia. The combination of higher energy prices and tougher competition from the United States and China has pushed down foreign direct investment in Europe and sparked other fears.Fredrik Persson, the president of BusinessEurope, said the companies his group represented had “a very strong reaction” to the Inflation Reduction Act.“We fully support the underlying direction with the green transition, but it came at a sensitive moment,” he said.Madeleine Ngo More

  • 138 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    At COP28, More Than 20 Nations Pledge to Triple Nuclear Capacity

    by

    The group, including Britain, France and the United States, said the agreement was critical to meeting nations’ climate commitments.The United States and 21 other countries pledged on Saturday at the United Nations climate summit in Dubai to triple nuclear energy capacity by 2050, saying the revival of nuclear power was critical for cutting carbon emissions to near zero in the coming decades.Proponents of nuclear energy, which supplies 18 percent of electricity in the United States, say it is a clean, safe and reliable complement to wind and solar energy. But a significant hurdle is funding.Last month, a developer of small nuclear reactors in Idaho said it was canceling a project that had been expected to be part of a new wave of power plants. The cost of building the reactors had risen to $9.3 billion from $5.3 billion because of increasing interest rates and inflation.Britain, Canada, France, Ghana, South Korea, Sweden and the United Arab Emirates were among the 22 countries that signed the declaration to triple capacity from 2020 levels.Tripling nuclear energy capacity by 2050, which would also help Europe reduce its dependence on Russia oil and gas, would require significant investment. In advanced economies, which have nearly 70 percent of global nuclear capacity, investments has stalled as construction costs have soared, projects have run over budget and faced delays. On top of cost, another hurdle to expanding nuclear capacity is that plants are slower to build than many other forms of power.Addressing the issue of financing, John Kerry, President Biden’s climate envoy, said that there were “trillions of dollars” available that could be used for investment in nuclear. “We are not making the argument to anybody that this is absolutely going to be the sweeping alternative to every other energy source — no, that’s not what brings us here,” he said. But, he added, the science has shown that “you can’t get to net-zero 2050 without some nuclear.”Nuclear power does not emit carbon, and an International Energy Agency report last year that said nuclear was crucial to helping to reduce carbon emissions in line with the Paris Agreement goals outlined in 2015. President Emmanuel Macron of France said nuclear energy, including small modular reactors, was an “indispensable solution” to efforts to curb climate change. France, Europe’s biggest producer of nuclear power, gets about 70 percent of its own electricity from nuclear stations.Mr. Macron and other leaders, including Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson of Sweden, called on the World Bank and international financial institutions to help finance nuclear projects. Mr. Kristersson said that governments must “assume a role in sharing the financial risks to strengthen the conditions and provide additional incentives for investments in nuclear energy.”While world leaders on Saturday called nuclear the most effective alternative to fossil fuels, some climate activists said nuclear energy was not a panacea.David Tong, a researcher at Oil Change International, said the pledge was divorced from the reality of nuclear energy — that it was too costly and too slow. “It’s a self-serving political pledge that doesn’t reflect the role that nuclear is likely to play in the energy transition, which is menial,” he said. “There is very small growth in nuclear — certainly nothing like tripling.” He said he rejected the stance that there was no pathway to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels, a goal set in the Paris Agreement to avoid the worst effects of global warming, without nuclear. Masayoshi Iyoda, an activist from Japan with 350.org, an international climate action campaign, cited the nuclear disaster at Fukushima in 2011 and said that nuclear power was a dangerous distraction from decarbonization goals. “It is simply too costly, too risky, too undemocratic, and too time-consuming,” he said in a statement.“We already have cheaper, safer, democratic, and faster solutions to the climate crisis, and they are renewable energy and energy efficiency,” Mr. Iyoda said.All but four of the 31 reactors that have begun construction since 2017 were designed by Russia or China, with China poised to become the leading nuclear power producer by 2030, the International Energy Agency said. This year, Germany shut its last three nuclear plants.Nuclear capacity rose in the 1980s, particularly in Europe and North America, but dropped sharply over the subsequent years after accidents at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania in 1979 and Chernobyl in 1986. New technology and tighter regulations have been put in place since then. Americans are conflicted about nuclear power, but a growing number favor expansion compared with a few years ago, according to a Pew Research Center study published in August. More