Politics and Government

More stories

  • 113 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    Fragile Global Economy Faces New Crisis in Israel-Gaza War

    by

    A war in the Middle East could complicate efforts to contain inflation at a time when world output is “limping along.”The International Monetary Fund said on Tuesday that the pace of the global economic recovery is slowing, a warning that came as a new war in the Middle East threatened to upend a world economy already reeling from several years of overlapping crises.The eruption of fighting between Israel and Hamas over the weekend, which could sow disruption across the region, reflects how challenging it has become to shield economies from increasingly frequent and unpredictable global shocks. The conflict has cast a cloud over a gathering of top economic policymakers in Morocco for the annual meetings of the I.M.F. and the World Bank.Officials who planned to grapple with the lingering economic effects of the pandemic and Russia’s war in Ukraine now face a new crisis.“Economies are at a delicate state,” Ajay Banga, the World Bank president, said in an interview on the sidelines of the annual meetings. “Having war is really not helpful for central banks who are finally trying to find their way to a soft landing,” he said. Mr. Banga was referring to efforts by policymakers in the West to try and cool rapid inflation without triggering a recession.Mr. Banga said that so far, the impact of the Middle East attacks on the world’s economy is more limited than the war in Ukraine. That conflict initially sent oil and food prices soaring, roiling global markets given Russia’s role as a top energy producer and Ukraine’s status as a major exporter of grain and fertilizer.“But if this were to spread in any way then it becomes dangerous,” Mr. Banga added, saying such a development would result in “a crisis of unimaginable proportion.”Oil markets are already jittery. Lucrezia Reichlin, a professor at the London Business School and a former director general of research at the European Central Bank, said, “the main question is what’s going to happen to energy prices.”Ms. Reichlin is concerned that another spike in oil prices would pressure the Federal Reserve and other central banks to further push up interest rates, which she said have risen too far too fast.As far as energy prices, Ms. Reichlin said, “we have two fronts, Russia and now the Middle East.”Smoke rising from bombings of Gaza City and its northern borders by Israeli planes.Samar Abu Elouf for The New York Times Pierre-Olivier Gourinchas, the I.M.F.’s chief economist, said it’s too early to assess whether the recent jump in oil prices would be sustained. If they were, he said, research shows that a 10 percent increase in oil prices would weigh down the global economy, reducing output by 0.15 percent and increasing inflation by 0.4 percent next year. In its latest World Economic Outlook, the I.M.F. underscored the fragility of the recovery. It maintained its global growth outlook for this year at 3 percent and slightly lowered its forecast for 2024 to 2.9 percent. Although the I.M.F. upgraded its projection for output in the United States for this year, it downgraded the euro area and China while warning that distress in that nation’s real estate sector is worsening.“We see a global economy that is limping along, and it’s not quite sprinting yet,” Mr. Gourinchas said. In the medium term, “the picture is darker,” he added, citing a series of risks including the likelihood of more large natural disasters caused by climate change.Europe’s economy, in particular, is caught in the middle of growing global tensions. Since Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, European governments have frantically scrambled to free themselves from an over-dependence on Russian natural gas.They have largely succeeded by turning, in part, to suppliers in the Middle East.Over the weekend, the European Union swiftly expressed solidarity with Israel and condemned the surprise attack from Hamas, which controls Gaza.Some oil suppliers may take a different view. Algeria, for example, which has increased its exports of natural gas to Italy, criticized Israel for responding with airstrikes on Gaza.Even before the weekend’s events, the energy transition had taken a toll on European economies. In the 20 countries that use the euro, the Fund predicts that growth will slow to just 0.7 percent this year from 3.3 percent in 2022. Germany, Europe’s largest economy, is expected to contract by 0.5 percent.High interest rates, persistent inflation and the aftershocks of spiraling energy prices are also expected to slow growth in Britain to 0.5 percent this year from 4.1 percent in 2022.Sub-Saharan Africa is also caught in the slowdown. Growth is projected to shrink this year by 3.3 percent, although next year’s outlook is brighter, when growth is forecast to be 4 percent.Staggering debt looms over many of these nations. The average debt now amounts to 60 percent of the region’s total output — double what it was a decade ago. Higher interest rates have contributed to soaring repayment costs.This next-generation of sovereign debt crises is playing out in a world that is coming to terms with a reappraisal of global supply chains in addition to growing geopolitical rivalries. Added to the complexities are estimates that within the next decade, trillions of dollars in new financing will be needed to mitigate devastating climate change in developing countries.One of the biggest questions facing policymakers is what impact China’s sluggish economy will have on the rest of the world. The I.M.F. has lowered its growth outlook for China twice this year and said on Tuesday that consumer confidence there is “subdued” and that industrial production is weakening. It warned that countries that are part of the Asian industrial supply chain could be exposed to this loss of momentum.In an interview on her flight to the meetings, Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen said that she believes China has the tools to address a “complex set of economic challenges” and that she does not expect its slowdown to weigh on the U.S. economy.“I think they face significant challenges that they have to address,” Ms. Yellen said. “I haven’t seen and don’t expect a spillover onto us.” More

  • 125 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    Can Ghana’s Debt Trap of Crisis and Bailouts Be Stopped?

    by

    Emmanuel Cherry, the chief executive of an association of Ghanaian construction companies, sat in a cafe at the edge of Accra Children’s Park, near the derelict Ferris wheel and kiddie train, as he tallied up how much money government entities owe thousands of contractors.Before interest, he said, the back payments add up to 15 billion cedis, roughly $1.3 billion. “Most of the contractors are home,” Mr. Cherry said. Their workers have been laid off.Like many others in this West African country, the contractors have to wait in line for their money. Teacher trainees complain they are owed two months of back pay. Independent power producers that have warned of major blackouts are owed $1.58 billion.The government is essentially bankrupt. After defaulting on billions of dollars owed to foreign lenders in December, the administration of President Nana Akufo-Addo had no choice but to agree to a $3 billion loan from the lender of last resort, the International Monetary Fund.It was the 17th time Ghana has been compelled to turn to the fund since it gained independence in 1957.This latest crisis was partly prompted by the havoc of the coronavirus pandemic, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and higher food and fuel prices. But the tortuous cycle of crisis and bailout has plagued dozens of poor and middle-income countries throughout Africa, Latin America and Asia for decades.Joshua Teye, a teacher in Suhum, Ghana. The government’s fiscal crisis has cut investment in schools dangerously short.Francis Kokoroko for The New York TimesThese pitiless loops will be discussed at the latest United Nations General Assembly, which begins on Tuesday. The debt load for developing countries — now estimated to top $200 billion — threatens to upend economies and unravel painstaking gains in education, health care and incomes. But poor and low-income countries have struggled to gain sustained international attention.In Ghana, the I.M.F. laid out a detailed rescue plan to get the country back on its feet — reining in debt and spending, raising revenue and protecting the poorest — as Accra negotiates with foreign creditors.Still, a nagging question for Ghana and other emerging nations in debt persists: Why will this time be any different?The latest rescue plan outlined for Ghana addresses key problems, said Tsidi M. Tsikata, a senior fellow at the African Center for Economic Transformation in Accra. But so did many of the previous ones, he said, and still crises recurred.The last time Ghana turned to the fund was in 2015. Within three years, the country was on its way to paying back the loan, and was among the world’s fastest-growing economies. Ghana was held up as a model for the rest of Africa.Agricultural production was up, and major exports — cocoa, oil and gold — were rising. The country had invested in infrastructure and education, and had begun a cleanup of the banking industry, which was riddled with distressed lenders.Yet Accra is again desperately in need. The I.M.F. loan agreement, and the delivery of a $600,000 installment in May, have helped stabilize the economy, settle wild fluctuations in currency levels and restore a modicum of confidence. Inflation is still running above 40 percent but is down from its peak of 54 percent in January.Cocoa pods at a cocoa farm. Ghana’s economy is dependent on exports of raw materials like cocoa, oil and gold, which rise and fall wildly in price.Francis Kokoroko for The New York TimesDespite the I.M.F.’s blueprint, though, Mr. Tsikata, previously a division chief at the fund for three decades, said the chance that Ghana wouldn’t be in a similar position a few years down the road “rests on a wing and a prayer.”The effects of devastating climate change loom over the problem. Within the next decade, a United Nations analysis estimates, trillions of dollars in new financing will be needed to mitigate the impact on developing countries.In Ghana, the government owed $63.3 billion at the end of 2022 not just to foreign creditors but also to homegrown lenders — pension funds, insurance companies and local banks that believed the government was a safe investment. The situation was so unusual that the I.M.F. for the first time made settling this domestic debt a prerequisite for a bailout. A partial restructuring, which cut returns and extended the due dates, was completed in February. While the haircut may have been necessary, it undermined confidence in the banks.As for foreign lenders, there are thousands of private, semipublic and governmental creditors, including China, which have different objectives, loan arrangements and regulatory controls.The magnitude and type of debt means “this crisis is much deeper than the type of economic difficulties Ghana has faced in the past,” said Stéphane Roudet, the I.M.F.’s mission chief to Ghana.The dizzying proliferation of lenders now characterizes much of the debt burdening distressed countries around the globe — making it also more complex and difficult to resolve.“You don’t have six people in a room,” said Joseph E. Stiglitz, a Nobel Prize winner and a former chief economist at the World Bank. “You have a thousand people in a room.”Victoria Chrappah, a trader, recounts the unfavorable business climate, as fluctuating exchange rates affect prices of imported goods from China.Francis Kokoroko for The New York Times‘Last Year Was the Worst of All.’Outside Victoria Chrappah’s narrow stall in Makola Market, snaking lines of sellers hawked live chickens, toilet paper packs and electronic chargers from giant baskets balanced on their heads. As restructuring negotiations with foreign lenders continue, households and businesses are doing their best to cope. Ms. Chrappah has been selling imported bathmats, shower curtains and housewares for more than 20 years.“Last year was the worst of all,” she said.Inflation surged, and the cedi lost more than half its value compared with the U.S. dollar — a blow to consumers and businesses when a country imports everything from medicine to cars. The Bank of Ghana jacked up interest rates to cope with inflation, hurting businesses and households that rely on short-term borrowing or want to invest. The benchmark rate is now 30 percent.Because of the rapidly depreciating currency, Ms. Chrappah explained, “you can sell in the morning at one price, and then you have to think of changing the price the following day.”Purchasing power as well as the value of savings has been halved. Doreen Adjetey, product manager for Dalex Swift, a finance company based in Accra, said a bottle of Tylenol to soothe her 19-month-old baby’s teething pain cost 50 cedis last year. Now it’s 110.A month’s worth of groceries cost more than 3,000 cedis compared with 1,000. Before, she and her husband had a comfortable monthly income of 10,000 cedis, worth about $2,000 when the exchange rate was 5 cedis to the dollar. At today’s rate, it’s worth $889.Joe Jackson, the director of business operations at Dalex, said default rates for small and medium-size enterprises “are through the roof,” jumping to 70 percent from 30 percent.The real estate and construction market has also tanked. “There’s been a drastic drop in the number of homes in the first-buyer segment of the market,” said Joseph Aidoo Jr., executive director of Devtraco Limited, a large real estate developer.Construction of an apartment complex in Accra. The real estate and construction market has suffered along with the rise in the cost of borrowing. Francis Kokoroko for The New York TimesWhen the pandemic struck in 2020, paralyzing economies, shrinking revenues and raising health care costs, fear of a global debt crisis mounted. Ghana, like many developing countries, had borrowed heavily, encouraged by years of low commercial rates.As the Federal Reserve and other central banks raised interest rates to combat inflation, developing countries’ external debt payments — priced in dollars or euros — unexpectedly ballooned at the same time that prices of imported food, fuel and fertilizer shot up.As Ghana’s foreign reserves skidded toward zero, the government began paying for refined oil imports directly with gold bought by the central bank.Even so, while the series of unfortunate global events may have supercharged Ghana’s debt crisis, they didn’t create it.The current government, like previous ones, spent much more than it collected in revenues. Taxes as a share of total output are also lower than the average across the rest of Africa.To make up the shortfall, the government kept borrowing, offering higher and higher interest rates to attract foreign lenders. And then it borrowed more to pay back the interest on previous loans. By the end of last year, interest payments on debt were gobbling up more than 70 percent of government revenues.“The government is bloated and inefficient,” said E. Gyimah-Boadi, the board chair of Afrobarometer, a research network. Half-completed schools, hospitals and other projects are abandoned when a new administration comes in. Corruption and mismanagement are also problems, several economists and business leaders in Ghana said.More fundamentally, Ghana’s economy is not set up to generate the kind of jobs and incomes needed for broad development and sustainable growth.“Ghana’s success story is real,” said Aurelien Kruse, the lead country economist in the Accra office of the World Bank. “Where it may have been a bit oversold,” though, is that “the fast growth has not been diversified.” The economy is primarily dependent on exports of raw materials like cocoa, oil and gold, which peak and swoop in price.Manufacturing accounts for a mere 10 percent of the country’s output — a decline from 2013. Without a thriving industrial sector to provide steady employment and produce exportable goods, Ghana has no other streams of revenue from abroad, which can build wealth and pay for needed imports.This model — the import of expensive goods and the export of cheap resources — characterized the colonial system.Senyo Hosi, executive chairman of Kleeve & Tove, an investment company based in Accra, said he had an agribusiness that produced rice in the Volta region and worked with more than 1,000 growers. He can’t do required upgrades to equipment, though, because 30 percent interest rates make borrowing impossible. “I stopped production,” he said.Delivery riders for an online food delivery app. Francis Kokoroko for The New York Times‘For Us It Means Shutdown.’As the global financial system struggles to restructure hundreds of billions of dollars in existing debt, the question of how to avoid the debt trap in the first place remains more urgent than ever. Large chunks of money are required to invest in desperately needed roads, technology, schools, clean energy and more. But dozens of countries lack the domestic savings needed to pay for them, and grants and low-cost loans from international institutions are scarce.Road works continue on sections of the National Route Six, a carriageway connecting Ghana’s capital to its second largest city, Kumasi.Francis Kokoroko for The New York Times“The fundamental issue is the need for financing,” said Brahima S. Coulibaly, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.So governments turn to international capital markets, where investors are foraging the world for high returns. Both political leaders and investors often look for short-term wins, whether in the next election or earnings call, said Martin Guzman, a former finance minister of Argentina who handled his country’s debt restructuring in 2020.This free flow of capital around the globe has resulted in a flood of financial crises. “Inequality is embedded in the international financial architecture,” a United Nations Global Crisis Response Group concluded in an analysis.Even worthy investments — and not all of them are — don’t always generate enough revenue to repay the loans. When bad times hit or foreign lenders get spooked, governments are left in the lurch. This process can be accelerated in Africa, where research has found there is an exaggerated perception of risk, which lowers credit ratings and raises financing costs.Without a safety cushion to fall back on, a small government cash crunch can turn into a disaster. Think of a household in a tough stretch that can’t cover next month’s rent and is evicted. Now instead of being a few hundred dollars in debt, the members of the household are homeless.“For us,” said Ken Ofori-Atta, Ghana’s finance minister, a credit downgrade “means shutdown.”Ghana’s finance minister, Ken Ofori-Atta, at his home in Accra: “For us, a credit downgrade means shutdown.”Francis Kokoroko for The New York TimesSeveral organizations have sketched out escape routes from the debt trap, including more low-cost lending from multilateral banks like the World Bank.Debt Justice, which advocates for debt forgiveness, along with many economists, argues that some of the $200 billion in debt must be erased. It has also called for governments and lenders to publicly reveal the amount and terms of loans, and what the money was used for so it can be better tracked and audited.Other research groups have looked at ways to stabilize the evolving African bond market and help governments survive short-term shortfalls as well as boom-and-bust swings in commodity prices.Mr. Ofori-Atta said he had “extreme confidence” that Ghana would have strong growth after it emerged from this debt tunnel.But the problem of finding manageable amounts of low-cost investment capital remains.Where does an African country — or any developing country — get the type of financing it needs to grow? Mr. Ofori-Atta asked.Before the cycle of debt crises is broken, that question will have to be answered. More

  • 150 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Will Restart of Student Loan Payments Be the Last Straw for Consumers?

    by

    Americans have continued spending despite dwindling savings and inflation. But retailers worry resuming loan payments could push some over the edge.Mykail James has a plan for when payments on her roughly $75,000 in student loans restart next month. She’ll cut back on her “fun budget” — money reserved for travel and concerts — and she expects to limit her holiday spending.“With the holidays coming up — I have a really big family — we will definitely be scaling back how much we’re spending on Christmas and how many things we can afford,” Ms. James said. “It’s just going to be a tighter income overall.”In October, roughly 27 million borrowers like Ms. James will once again be on the hook for repaying their federal student loans after a three-year hiatus. President Biden tried to use his executive powers to forgive about $400 billion in student debt last year, but the Supreme Court overruled that decision in June, and payments kick in again in October.Now, there are big questions about how those people — many of whom had expected to have at least some of their debt erased — may change their spending habits as they budget for student loan payments again. It could crimp the economy if a large share of consumers cut back simultaneously, especially because the resumption in payments comes just as the retail and hospitality industry begin to eye the crucial holiday shopping season.Most economists think that while the hit could be substantial, it will not be so big that it would plunge America into a recession. Goldman Sachs analysts expect renewed student loan payments to cost households about $70 billion per year. That would probably be enough to subtract 0.8 percentage points from consumer spending growth in the fourth quarter, helping to slow it to 1.4 percent, they estimate.Yet major uncertainties remain. Such estimates of just how big the drag will be are rough at best, it is unclear when exactly it will bite and economists are unsure what it will do to consumer confidence. There are factors that could make the impact smaller: The Biden administration has taken steps to ease the pain, allowing for people with lower incomes to repay their loans more slowly and creating a one-year grace period in which missed payments will not be reported to credit rating agencies.But the student loan payments will also restart at the same time consumers face a number of other headwinds, including shrinking savings piles, a cooler job market and higher price levels after two years of rapid inflation. It could also coincide with major strikes — Hollywood actors and writers have been locked in a work stoppage all summer, and the United Auto Workers began a targeted strike on Friday, one that economists warn could be disruptive if it lasts. Adding another source of looming uncertainty, Congress could fail to reach a funding agreement by the end of this month, forcing a government shutdown.Retailers have begun to publicly fret that the resumption of student loan payments could collide with those other developments, pushing their shoppers closer to a breaking point. Executives from companies like Walmart, Macy’s, Best Buy and Gap have all warned analysts and investors that student loan payments may put pressure on shoppers’ budgets, eating into some of their sales in the process.“I don’t think we have a very good grasp” on how the hit to consumers will play out, said Julia Coronado, the founder of MacroPolicy Perspectives, a research firm. “It’s still very unclear exactly what the impact will be.”Consumers have, so far, been surprisingly resilient in the face of rapid inflation, higher Federal Reserve interest rates and a gradually cooling economy.Retail sales came in stronger than many economists had expected in August, data released Thursday showed. Companies have regularly predicted a pullback that has been more modest than expected, as still-low unemployment and decent pay gains have proved enough to buoy shoppers.But some companies worry that student loans could pile on — finally cracking the American consumer.Marc Rosen, the chief executive of J.C. Penney said, “I do think that student loans are going to have an impact.”Gene J. Puskar/Associated PressThe resumption of student loan payments for a retailer like J.C. Penney, which caters to middle-income consumers, would be the latest, unwelcome squeeze on their budgets. Their core customer makes an annual income of $55,000 to $75,000 and has had their monthly household expenses increase by $700 from two years ago. The department-store chain said 17 percent of its credit card customers have student loans.“I do think that student loans are going to have an impact,” Marc Rosen, the chief executive of J.C. Penney, said in an interview. “It’s another thing that comes into that family that puts another stress on their budget and, again, brings back trade-offs, forces them to make other trade-offs.”Ms. James is among the many American consumers expecting to make tough decisions. The 27-year-old, who works in aerospace defense and whose parents owe additional student loans on her behalf, said she had been spending hours doing research on her options for debt relief. She’s even contemplating a job switch to the public sector, which might require a pay cut but offers a clearer path to loan forgiveness.In addition to cutting back on travel and concerts, she plans to work more on her side jobs to earn extra cash. In the past, she’s driven for UberEats and Instacart. (She said she would also continue expanding her financial education business.)Phil Esempio, a 65-year-old high school chemistry and biology teacher in Nazareth, Pa., who owes around $150,000 in student loans, also expects to rein in his budget. Coming out of the pandemic, he excitedly returned to attending live shows in places like New York City — 78 concerts last year — and eating out while he’s there with his friends.But Mr. Esempio said that his period of big spending might have been an overreaction to the end of the pandemic. As the restart of student loan payments looms, “a lot of that is being throttled back,” he said. He expects to make it to 35 shows this year. He thinks he’ll have to start paying $1,100 a month on his federal loans, which is equivalent to what he’s been paying for his private loans.If other consumers behave similarly, it could come as an unpleasant surprise to companies including Live Nation, which owns Ticketmaster. Live Nation executives on a recent earnings call predicted that people’s excitement for live events would outweigh any additional financial burdens.Still, it is possible that other retailers are being overly glum, given the Biden policies and a few other factors that could help to limit the impact of student loans restarting. In fact, Alec Phillips, a Goldman Sachs economist, said that he thought his projection for a $70 billion annual cost from the payment restart was probably pessimistic.“I don’t think that there’s a scenario where it turns out to be substantially worse,” Mr. Phillips said.Among the factors that could limit the hit, borrowers may enroll in a new income-based repayment program offered by the administration, which would decrease monthly payments for people earning low and moderate incomes. If everyone who is eligible did so, it could reduce student loan payments by around $14 billion per year, Mr. Phillips estimates.Supporters of student debt forgiveness demonstrated outside the Supreme Court in June.Olivier Douliery/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesAnd some borrowers may simply not pay, at least for a while. Because missing payments will not be reported to credit reporting agencies for a year — the so called “on-ramp” period — households have wiggle room, said Constantine Yannelis, an economist at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business.Finally, debt holders are more heavily middle- and high-earning workers. Those people may have more budgetary leeway to help deal with the renewed payments, Mr. Phillips said.That is not to say that no groups will suffer. Many low-income people do have outstanding balances, just smaller ones, and Black borrowers in particular hold an outsize chunk of student debt. And the hit could come at a moment when some household budgets are already coming under stress amid high prices and high interest rates. Delinquencies on credit cards have recently jumped back above their levels from before the pandemic.The result may be a painful strain on some families — but a more muted one for the economy as a whole.The upshot is that “it will matter economically,” Mr. Yannelis said of the student loan resumption. “It is most likely not going to be huge, though, and it’s not likely to be the type of thing that would tip us into recession.” More

  • 113 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    Wally Adeyemo, the Deputy Treasury Secretary, to Visit Nigeria

    by

    Wally Adeyemo, the highest-ranking member of the African diaspora in the Biden administration, emigrated from Nigeria to the United States as a child.The Biden administration is dispatching Wally Adeyemo, the deputy Treasury secretary, to Nigeria next week as it seeks to deepen economic ties with Africa and counter China’s influence on the continent.The visit comes as Nigeria’s new president, Bola Tinubu, is embarking on reforms to revive his country’s sluggish economy and months after President Biden pledged to deepen the United States’ involvement with Africa with an investment of more than $50 billion over the next three years. The United States has been trying to make up lost ground in the geopolitical contest with China and Russia to cultivate relations in Africa.Nigeria, which is Africa’s largest economy, is key to those efforts. The Biden administration believes Nigeria, a democracy that is rich with natural resources, has the potential to be an economic anchor for the United States on the continent.Several Biden administration officials, including Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken, have visited Nigeria during Mr. Biden’s first term. However, Mr. Adeyemo is a unique emissary: He was born in Ibadan, one of Nigeria’s largest cities, and emigrated with his family to California when he was 2 years old.The trip will be Mr. Adeyemo’s first time going back to Nigeria in decades, he said, and he will be returning as the highest-ranking member of the African diaspora in the Biden administration. His ascension to the top ranks of the U.S. government has been watched with joy in Nigeria in recent years.“It’s one of those opportunities to go to a place that means a lot to me personally, but also to go to a place that means a lot to me professionally, just given that Nigeria is Africa’s largest economy with a huge demographic boom,” Mr. Adeyemo said in an interview with The New York Times. “It’s just a great chance for me to talk about how we can deepen the economic relationship and the strategic relationship at a moment when Nigeria has a government that’s already taken really important steps in terms of economic reform.”While in Lagos, Mr. Adeyemo plans to meet with government officials and executives from the technology, entertainment and finance sectors. He also plans to meet with American companies that operate in Nigeria and visit a local project that has received financing from the U.S. government.The Biden administration views Nigeria as an opportunity because of its large population of young workers. Nigeria’s government has tried to make the country more attractive to foreign investors by easing currency controls and removing fuel subsidies, which have for years strained its public finances.Mr. Adeyemo said that his message in Nigeria will be that “the United States wants to be your partner, not only to provide development assistance, but to think about how we deepen our investment and trade relationship.”While he is there, Mr. Adeyemo plans to talk to Nigerian officials about tackling corruption and protecting the financial system from illicit finance risks. He will also encourage Nigerian officials to continue to pursue ways of diversifying the economy away from its reliance on petroleum and embracing renewable energy.The outreach from the United States comes as Nigeria is grappling with the highest levels of inflation in nearly two decades and, like many African nations, a heavy debt burden.According to government statistics, Nigeria owes more than $20 billion to international financial institutions such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. It also owes $4.7 billion to China, which is Nigeria’s largest bilateral creditor.The Biden administration has been pressuring China to offer debt relief to African countries. However, Nigeria has yet to seek debt relief through the “common framework” initiative that was established by the Group of 20 nations.Biden administration officials have been careful to avoid explicitly characterizing U.S. interests in Africa in the context of competition with China. During a trip to South Africa last year, Mr. Blinken said the administration’s Africa strategy was not centered on rivalry with China and Russia. But a White House document on Mr. Biden’s strategy in sub-Saharan Africa released the same day said the effort to strengthen “open societies” was partly intended to “counter harmful activities” by China, Russia and “other foreign actors.”Asked about China’s influence in Nigeria, Mr. Adeyemo underscored what the country shares with the United States and noted that both are large, multiethnic democracies with similar values. He pointed out that African countries are increasingly aware of China’s reluctance to restructure debt and that the United States is taking a different approach to its economic relationship with Nigeria.“We’re talking about investment and foreign direct investment in Nigerian companies, in Nigerian infrastructure, in a way that allows Nigerians to be able to build a thriving economy that isn’t overly reliant on external debt,” Mr. Adeyemo said. More

  • 138 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    Raimondo Heads to China to Both Promote Trade, and Restrict It

    by

    The commerce secretary’s trip may be the clearest demonstration yet of the balancing act the Biden administration is trying to pull off in its relations with China.Gina Raimondo, the secretary of commerce, is heading to China on Saturday with two seemingly contradictory responsibilities: a mandate to strengthen U.S. business relations with Beijing while also imposing some of the toughest Chinese trade restrictions in years.The head of the Commerce Department is traditionally the government’s biggest champion for the business community both at home and abroad, promoting the kind of extensive ties U.S. firms have with China, the world’s second-largest economy.But U.S.-China relations have turned chillier as China has become more aggressive in flexing its economic and military might. While China remains an important economic partner, American officials have increasingly viewed the country as a security threat and have imposed a raft of new restrictions aimed at crippling Beijing’s access to technology that could be used to strengthen the Chinese military or security services.The bulk of those restrictions — which have stoked anger and irritation from the Chinese government — have been imposed by Ms. Raimondo’s agency.The Commerce Department has issued extensive trade restrictions on sales of chips, software and machinery to China’s semiconductor industry and is mulling an expansion of those rules that could be issued soon after Ms. Raimondo returns to Washington.Her visit could be the biggest test yet of whether the Biden administration can pull off the balancing act of promoting economic ties with China while clamping down on some trade in the interest of national security.Ms. Raimondo will be the fourth administration official to travel to China in recent months, following John Kerry, the president’s special envoy for climate change; Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen; and Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken.Ms. Raimondo is expected to reiterate what her counterparts have told Chinese officials: that there is no contradiction between the administration’s goals for encouraging commercial engagement with China and protecting U.S. national security. They argue that the United States can maintain economic ties with China that benefit both countries and encourage peace, while also setting narrow but tough restrictions on China’s access to advanced technology in the interest of national defense.But the approach faces skepticism in both countries. In the United States, some Republicans argue that even more innocuous business ties with China could undercut U.S. industries and leave the nation vulnerable to influence from Beijing. And in China, many view what the U.S. government describes as narrow, national-security-related actions as a poorly disguised effort to hold back the Chinese economy.“I think the Commerce Department has tried to be very targeted,” said Samm Sacks, a senior fellow at Yale Law School’s Paul Tsai China Center. “Now, the Chinese side won’t see it that way.”For Chinese officials, Ms. Raimondo simultaneously represents some of their best opportunities for engagement with the United States and their biggest source of frustration.Experts say her visit presents a chance for Chinese leaders to strengthen trade relations and signal that their country is still open to international business at a moment when the Chinese economy has stumbled, foreign investment has declined and a series of raids on companies with foreign ties have set executives on edge.But Chinese officials have also harshly criticized the technology curbs issued by her department, a condemnation they are likely to repeat in the week ahead. Officials in Beijing have also been highly critical of the new restrictions on American investment in certain high-tech Chinese industries, which the Biden administration proposed earlier this month.At a summit in South Africa this week, a Chinese official delivered a prepared statement from Chinese leader Xi Jinping that called for the world to avoid “the abyss of a new Cold War” and blamed “some country, obsessed with maintaining its hegemony” for working to cripple emerging markets and developing countries.In addition to export controls, Ms. Raimondo is overseeing the distribution of $50 billion to chip companies that build facilities in the United States. Any company that accepts that funding must agree not to build new factories for making advanced chips in China for at least a decade.“The Biden administration is probing for a way to engage the Chinese in a very difficult environment,” said Myron Brilliant, a senior counselor at Dentons Global Advisors-ASG who was formerly the executive vice president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. “It’s a balancing act for sure, between the national security agenda they are enforcing, while also recognizing that a lot of trade between the countries doesn’t touch on national security considerations and should therefore not be restricted.”Ms. Raimondo is set to meet with high-level Chinese officials and representatives of American businesses in Beijing and Shanghai between Monday and Wednesday. People familiar with the government’s planning say those talks may result in the creation of working groups to discuss export controls and commercial issues that arise between China and the United States.American businesses are also hoping that the Biden administration will push for additional intellectual property protections for pharmaceutical companies, more access to the Chinese market for Visa and Mastercard and the completion of a longstanding Chinese order of Boeing airplanes, among other goals, people familiar with the talks said.But those gains, while important for American firms, would still seem trivial compared with the mounting pressures U.S. companies can now face in China.China’s sputtering economy and harsh lockdowns during the pandemic are giving pause to businesses considering their presence in the country. The Chinese government has also restricted companies sending data from China abroad, making it more difficult for multinationals to do business.Chinese authorities have responded to increasing technology restrictions from the United States by barring the U.S. chip-maker Micron from sales to companies that handle critical Chinese information and by scuttling a proposed merger between Intel and an Israeli chip-maker with operations in China. And companies exporting from China still face nearly the full suite of tariffs imposed by the Trump administration, in addition to the new export controls.The port in Yingkou, China. Experts say Ms. Raimondo’s visit presents an opportunity for Chinese leaders to strengthen trade relations and signal that their country is still open to foreign business.Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesThe Biden administration has acknowledged the tensions in the U.S.-China relationship, saying that China poses a threat to U.S. national security but that it is still one of the country’s most integral economic partners.“This isn’t about, you know, holding China back or denying them commodity technology,” Ms. Raimondo said of the export controls at an event at the American Enterprise Institute in July. “Certainly not about denying U.S. companies revenue. It’s about being honest about the fact that China has a military civil fusion strategy, which includes getting our most sophisticated technology and using it to advance their military. And we’re not going to allow that.”The United States has for decades imposed export controls on the types of technology that can be sent to China, including restricting sales of satellites and other technology following Beijing’s crackdown in Tiananmen Square in 1989.But limits on technology trade with China have increased substantially in recent years, since the Trump administration imposed restrictions on the Chinese telecom firm Huawei. In October, the Biden administration expanded the limits to all firms using advanced chips in China. Chip firms, which earn a third or more of their global revenue through sales to China, have also pushed back, saying that the new restrictions are resulting in less money to invest in new research and innovation.In July, the chief executives of Nvidia, Qualcomm and Intel met with Ms. Raimondo in Washington to make that case.It’s not clear how much influence, if any, their lobbying will have on the rules. Ms. Raimondo, a former venture capitalist and governor of Rhode Island, has a long reputation as a business-friendly and pragmatic political actor. But as commerce secretary, she has repeatedly argued that the United States could not compromise on issues of national security.“We are not seeking the decoupling of our economy from that of China’s,” Ms. Raimondo said in a speech at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in November. “We want to continue to promote trade and investment in those areas that do not undermine our interests or values.” More

  • 100 Shares129 Views

    in Economy

    A Crisis of Confidence Is Gripping China’s Economy

    by

    China’s economy, which once seemed unstoppable, is plagued by a series of problems, and a growing lack of faith in the future is verging on despair.Earlier this year, David Yang was brimming with confidence about the prospects for his perfume factory in eastern China.After nearly three years of paralyzing Covid lockdowns, China had lifted its restrictions in late 2022. The economy seemed destined to roar back to life. Mr. Yang and his two business partners invested more than $60,000 in March to expand production capacity at the factory, expecting a wave of growth.But the new business never materialized. In fact, it’s worse. People are not spending, he said, and orders are one-third of what they were five years ago.“It is disheartening,” Mr. Yang said. “The economy is really going downhill right now.”For much of the past four decades, China’s economy seemed like an unstoppable force, the engine behind the country’s rise to a global superpower. But the economy is now plagued by a series of crises. A real estate crisis born from years of overbuilding and excessive borrowing is running alongside a larger debt crisis, while young people are struggling with record joblessness. And amid the drip feed of bad economic news, a new crisis is emerging: a crisis of confidence.A growing lack of faith in the future of the Chinese economy is verging on despair. Consumers are holding back on spending. Businesses are reluctant to invest and create jobs. And would-be entrepreneurs are not starting new businesses.“Low confidence is a major issue in the Chinese economy now,” said Larry Hu, chief China economist for Macquarie Group, an Australian financial services firm.Mr. Hu said the erosion of confidence was fueling a downward spiral that fed on itself. Chinese consumers aren’t spending because they are worried about job prospects, while companies are cutting costs and holding back on hiring because consumers aren’t spending.In the past few weeks, investors have pulled more than $10 billion out of China’s stock markets. On Thursday, China’s top securities regulator summoned executives at the country’s national pension funds, top banks and insurers to pressure them to invest more in Chinese stocks, according to Caixin, an economics magazine. Last week, stocks in Hong Kong fell into a bear market, down more than 20 percent from their high in January.From its resilience to past challenges, China forged a deep belief in its economy and its state-controlled model. It rebounded quickly in 2009 from the global financial meltdown, and in spectacular fashion. It weathered a Trump administration trade war and proved its indispensability. When the pandemic dragged down the rest of the world, China’s economy bounced back with vigor. The Global Times, a mouthpiece for the Chinese Communist Party, declared in 2022 that China was the “unstoppable miracle.”China’s president, Xi Jinping, speaking at in Shanghai in 2018, when he gave a rousing defense of the economy: “You have every reason to be confident.”Pool photo by Johannes EiseleOne factor contributing to the current confidence deficit is the prospect that China’s policymakers have fewer good options to fight the downturn than in the past.In 2018, with the economy in a trade war with the United States and its stock market nose-diving, Xi Jinping, China’s leader, gave a rousing speech.Mr. Xi was addressing an international trade fair in Shanghai and sought to quell the uncertainty: No one should ever waver in their confidence about the Chinese economy, despite some ups and downs, he said.“The Chinese economy is not a pond, but an ocean,” Mr. Xi said. “The ocean may have its calm days, but big winds and storms are only to be expected. Without them, the ocean wouldn’t be what it is. Big winds and storms may upset a pond, but never an ocean. When you talk about the future of the Chinese economy, you have every reason to be confident.”But in recent months, Mr. Xi has said little about the economy.Unlike past crises that were international in nature, a convergence of long-simmering domestic problems is confronting China — some a result of policy changes carried out by Mr. Xi’s government.After the 2008 financial crisis, China unleashed a huge stimulus package to get the economy moving again. In 2015, when its real estate market was teetering, Beijing handed out cash to consumers to replace run-down shacks with new apartments as part of an urban redevelopment plan that gave rise to another building boom in smaller Chinese cities.Now, policymakers are confronting a far different landscape, forcing them to rethink the usual playbook. Local governments and businesses are saddled with more debt and less leeway to borrow heavily and spend liberally. And after decades of infrastructure investments, there isn’t as much need for another airport or bridge — the types of big projects that would spur the economy.China’s policymakers are also handcuffed because they introduced many of the measures that precipitated the economic problems. The “zero Covid” lockdowns brought the economy to a standstill. The real estate market is reeling from the government’s measures from three years ago to curb heavy borrowing by developers, while crackdowns on the fast-growing technology industry prompted many tech firms to scale back their ambitions and the size of their work forces.When China’s top leaders gathered in July to discuss the rapidly deteriorating economy, they did not deliver a bazooka-style spending program as some had anticipated. Coming out of the meeting, the Political Bureau of the Chinese Communist Party presented a laundry list of pronouncements — many rehashed from previous statements — without any new announcements. It focused, however, on the need to “boost confidence,” without detailing the measures that showed policymakers were ready to do that.“Whether you have confidence in the Chinese economy is actually whether you have confidence in the Chinese government,” said Kim Yuan, who lost his job in the home decoration industry last year. He has struggled to find another job, but he said the economy was unlikely to worsen significantly as long as the government maintained control.

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

    China consumer confidence index
    Source: China National Bureau of Statistics via CEIC DataBy The New York TimesConfronted with dwindling confidence, the government has fallen back on a familiar pattern and stopped announcing troubling economic data.This month, China’s National Bureau of Statistics said it would stop releasing youth unemployment figures, a closely watched indicator of the country’s economic troubles. After six straight months of rising joblessness among the country’s 16- to 24-year-olds, the agency said the collection of those figures needed “to be further improved and optimized.”The bureau this year also stopped releasing surveys of consumer confidence, among the best barometers of households’ willingness to spend. Confidence rebounded modestly at the start of the year, but started to plummet in the spring. The government’s statistics office last announced the survey results for April, discontinuing a series it began 33 years ago.Instead of giving people less to worry about, the sudden removal of closely followed data has left some on Chinese social media wondering what they might be missing.Laurence Pan, 27, noticed that something was beginning to go awry in 2018 when customers at the international advertising agency in Beijing where he worked started to scale back budgets. Over the next few years, he hopped from one agency to another, but the caution from clients around spending was the same.He resigned from his last employer three months ago. Mr. Pan said that he had secured new jobs quickly in the past, but that he was struggling to find a position this time. He has applied for nearly 30 jobs since last month and has not received an offer. He said he was considering part-time work at a convenience store or a fast-food restaurant to make ends meet. With so many uncertainties, he has cut back on his spending.“Everyone is having a hard time now, and they have no money to spend,” he said. “This might be the most difficult time I’ve ever been through.”The Shanghai skyline. Consumers in China are holding back on spending, and businesses are reluctant to invest and create jobs. Alex Plavevski/EPA, via Shutterstock More

  • 113 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Could U.S. Toughness on Chinese Business Have Unintended Consequences?

    by

    Businesses fear that efforts to look tough on Beijing, which have the potential to be more expansive than moves by the federal government, could have unintended consequences.At a moment when Washington is trying to reset its tense relationship with China, states across the country are leaning into anti-Chinese sentiment and crafting or enacting sweeping rules aimed at severing economic ties with Beijing.The measures, in places like Florida, Utah and South Carolina, are part of a growing political push to make the United States less economically dependent on China and to limit Chinese investment over concerns that it poses a national security risk. Those concerns are shared by the Biden administration, which has been trying to reduce America’s reliance on China by increasing domestic manufacturing and strengthening trade ties with allies.But the state efforts have the potential to be far more expansive than what the administration is orchestrating. They have drawn backlash from business groups over concerns that state governments are veering toward protectionism and retreating from a longstanding tradition of welcoming foreign investment into the United States.Nearly two dozen mostly right-leaning states — including Florida, Texas, Utah and South Dakota — have proposed or enacted legislation that would restrict Chinese purchases of land, buildings and houses. Some of the laws could potentially be more onerous than what occurs at the federal level, where a committee led by the Treasury secretary is authorized to review and block transactions if foreigners could gain control of American businesses or real estate near military installations.The laws being proposed or enacted by states would go far beyond that, preventing China — and in some cases other “countries of concern” — from buying farmland or property near what is broadly defined as “critical infrastructure.”The restrictions coincide with a resurgence of anti-China sentiment, inflamed in part by a Chinese spy balloon that traveled across the United States this year and by heated political rhetoric ahead of the 2024 election. They are likely to pose another challenge for the administration, which has dispatched several top officials to China in recent weeks to try to stabilize economic ties. But while Washington may see a relationship with China as a necessary evil, officials at the state and local levels appear determined to try to sever their economic relationship with America’s third-largest trading partner.“The federal government in the United States, across branches with strong bipartisan support, has been quite forceful in sharpening its China strategy, and regulating investments is only one piece,” said Mario Mancuso, a lawyer at Kirkland & Ellis focusing on international trade and national security issues. “The shift that we have seen to the states is relatively recent, but it’s gaining strength.”One of the biggest targets has been Chinese landownership, despite the fact that China owns less than 400,000 acres in the United States, according to the Agriculture Department. That is less than 1 percent of all foreign-owned land.Such restrictions have been gathering momentum since 2021 after Fufeng USA, the American subsidiary of a Chinese company that makes components for animal feed, faced backlash over plans to build a corn mill in Grand Forks, N.D. The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, a powerful interagency group known as CFIUS that can halt international business transactions, reviewed the proposal but ultimately decided that it did not have the jurisdiction to block the plan. However, the Air Force, citing the mill’s proximity to a U.S. military base, said this year that China’s involvement was a national security risk, and local officials scuttled the project.Since then, states have been developing or trying to bolster their restrictions on foreign investment, in some cases blocking land acquisitions from a broad set of countries, including Iran and North Korea. In other instances, they have targeted China specifically.The state moves, some of which also include investments coming from Russia, Iran and North Korea, have raised the ire of business groups that fear the rules will be too onerous or opponents who view them as discriminatory. Some of the proposals wound up being watered down amid the backlash.This year, Texas lawmakers proposed expanding a ban that was enacted in 2021 on the development of infrastructure projects funded by investors with direct ties to China and blocking Chinese citizens and companies from buying land, homes or any other real estate. Despite the support of Gov. Greg Abbott of Texas, a Republican, the proposal was scaled back to prohibit purchases of just agricultural land, quarries and mines by individuals or companies with ties to China, Iran, North Korea and Russia. The bill ultimately expired in the Texas Legislature in May.In South Dakota, Gov. Kristi Noem, a Republican, has been pushing for legislation that would create a state version of CFIUS to review and investigate agricultural land purchases, leases and land transfers by foreign investors. Ms. Noem has argued that the federal government does not have sufficient reach to keep South Dakota safe from bad actors at the state level.The legislation failed amid pushback from farming groups that were concerned about restrictions on who could buy or rent their land, along with lawmakers who said it would hand too much power to the governor.One of the most provocative restrictions has been championed by Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, a Republican who is running for president. In May, Mr. DeSantis signed a law prohibiting Chinese companies or citizens from purchasing or investing in properties that are within 10 miles of military bases and critical infrastructure such as refineries, liquid natural gas terminals and electrical power plants.“Florida is taking action to stand against the United States’ greatest geopolitical threat — the Chinese Communist Party,” Mr. DeSantis said when he signed the law, adding, “We are following through on our commitment to crack down on Communist China.”Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, a Republican presidential candidate, signed into law one of the most provocative restrictions against Chinese investments.David Degner for The New York TimesBut the legislation is written so broadly that an investment fund or a company that has even a small ownership stake from a Chinese company or a Chinese investor and buys a property would be violating the law. Business groups and the Biden administration have criticized the law as overreach, while Republican attorneys general around the country have sided with Mr. DeSantis.The Florida legislation, which targets “countries of concern” and imposes special restrictions on China, is being challenged in federal court. A group of Chinese citizens and a real estate brokerage firm in Florida that are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union sued the state in May, arguing that the law codifies and expands housing discrimination. The Justice Department filed a “statement of interest” arguing that Florida’s landownership policy is unlawful.A U.S. district judge, who heard arguments about the case in July, said last week that the law could continue to be enforced while it was being challenged in court.The restrictions are creating uncertainty for investors and fund managers that want to invest in Florida and now must decide whether to back away from those plans or cut out their Chinese investors.“It creates a lot of thorny issues not just for the foreign investors but for the funds as well, because some of these laws try to make them choose between keeping investors and being able to invest in those states,” said J. Philip Ludvigson, a partner at King & Spalding. “It’s really a gamble for the states that are passing some of these very broad laws.”Mr. Ludvigson, a former Treasury official who helped lead the office that chairs CFIUS, added: “You might want to get tough on China, but if you don’t really think through what the second- and third-order effects might be, you could just end up hurting your state revenues and your property market while also failing to solve an actual national security problem.”The state investment restrictions also coincide with efforts in Congress to block businesses based in China from purchasing farmland in the United States and place new mandates on Americans investing in the country’s national security industries. The Senate voted overwhelmingly in favor of the measures in July, which still need to clear the House to become law.The combination of measures is likely to complicate diplomacy with China and could draw retaliation.“Officials in Beijing are quite concerned about the hostility to Chinese investments at both the national and state levels in the U.S., viewing these as another sign of rising antipathy toward China,” said Eswar Prasad, a former head of the International Monetary Fund’s China division. “The Chinese government is especially concerned about a proliferation of state-level restrictions on top of federal limitations on investments from China.”He added, “Their fear is that such actions would not just deprive Chinese investors of good investment opportunities in the U.S., including in real estate, but could eventually limit Chinese companies’ direct access to American markets and inhibit technology transfers.” More