Happy to answer the @sdonnan question.

Quick answer:

1) Europe/ Germany has benefited from the U.S. stimulus;

2) U.S. isn't the entire global economy. Germany hurt by the fall in Turkey's imports, and the slowdown in Italy and China. Plus the decline of diesel.

1/x
On the first point, let's start with the data for the world --

over the course of Trump's term, real import of manufactures are up 1.3 pp of US GDP, and real exports of manufactures are up 0.2 pp of GDP (best I can tell)

so a net stimulus to the world of ~ 1 pp of US GDP
the rise in real imports in the last 2ys stems from an increase in US demand (e.g. the stimulus) not a structural increase in the openness of the US economy (or a big dollar move, the dollar move was in 14/15)
The bilateral data can be problematic (if the US imports more from China, China may buy more German machinery, etc). But the bilateral data shows a strong rise in US imports from the Euro area.
If you disaggregate the rise, it comes more from rising imports of capital goods (which helps Germany) than from rising imports of autos (which would help Germany too, but it isn't in the data)

Think the shift in US auto demand toward SUVs has limited overall auto imports
US nominal goods imports from the EA are up about 15% over the last 7qs ($50b) - a positive impulse to the slow growing EA. Helps explain strong growth in late 17 in particular.

But US exports to EA also up, net impulse is more like $20b (noticeable, but not huge)
Drilling down even further, U.S. imports from Germany are also up by about 10% over the 7qs of Trump in dollar terms. Capital goods imports in particular have increased. But relatively weak demand for German autos has limited the impact
German imports are also up (German demand growth has been ok recently), so the net impulse appears smaller (tho as I mentioned Germany also benefits indirectly from the impulse the US provides to global demand)
Now a word about magnitudes --

German goods exports to the US (mostly manufactures) are about 3 pp of German GDP, so the 10% rise = + impulse of 0.3 pp of GDP (over 7qs)

for comparison US manufactured exports to the entire world are only around 5 pp of US GDP
you just don't get huge net impulses from trade most of the time -- a net drag/ contribution of 1 pp from trade is huge, so to speak and the most you typically see from any region is 10-20 bp in a year.
I have looked pretty carefully at the China shock for example, and you see a deterioration in the US trade balance with China (and Asia) of about 20 bp a year for 4-5 years. And is now recognized as a big shock.
And yes I have looked at the papers challenging Autor Dorn and Hansen. I just don't find them all that convincing (the key impact found by Autor Dorn and Hansen was a large regional shock in manufacturing centric parts of the country).

But that's for another time ...
Now for why the downturn in Germany -

a) important to note the data lags. last data point for the US is q3, and the way I have done the data shows the change over the last 4qs, so it basically shows what happened in q4 17 to q2 18.
b) higher frequency indicators suggest that the growth in US capital goods imports (which helps Germany in particular) may have already slowed
and finally, the US is only 25% of the world economy, and Germany really sells to everyone --

German exports undoubtedly hurt by the big collapse in Turkish imports.

and by the slowdown in the rest of Europe

and -- while I haven't confirmed this in the data yet - by China.
Germany export about 1 pp of its GDP worth of autos and auto parts to China (data is on real exports here, not the sales of German marks in China). so the big year/year falls in Chinese auto demand in q4 likely hurt Germany too ...
All for now.

Have some data feeds at work that I will look at tomorrow ...

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Brad Setser

Brad Setser Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Brad_Setser

Nov 9, 2020
China released its preliminary current account surplus data for q3 last week. Even with the unusual surge in imports in September (which was reversed in October) the surplus was about $50b higher than in 2019 (over $90b v $40b)

The trailing 4q sum rose to ~ $200b
But the $200b trailing 4q sum includes (obviously) a very weak q1, and a q4 that was no doubt influenced by trade war uncertainties. The Oct trade data hints that the rise in the surplus will be sustained in q4, which will pull the surplus into the $250-300b range for the year.
The current (s. adjusted) quarterly surplus (recognizing q2 may be a bit high and q3 a bit low) is ~ $90-100b. So broadly speaking, in dollar terms the surplus should rise to its pre-trade war highs and as a share of GDP it should rise to well over 2% of China's GDP
Read 5 tweets
Nov 8, 2020
Who charted it better ....

Bloomberg?

bloomberg.com/news/articles/…
or yours truly?
My vote is for Bloomberg. Has been a while since I did a chart that included gold (I have started looking at gold and fx reserves separately). But do think I was among the pioneers of substracting swaps from reported net reserves in a time series ...
Read 4 tweets
Nov 8, 2020
The 2008 financial shock, which hit investment and imports hard and led China to respond with a big stimulus, tended to reduce trade imbalances.

The COVID-19 shock, to the surprise of many, is increasing transpacific trade imbalances (bigly)

1/x

wsj.com/articles/china…
China's October trade surplus, annualized, was around $700b. The surplus typically doesn't hit its seasonal peak until December either. The trailing 12m sum of monthly surpluses is sure to soon top $500b, and is on a trajectory that takes it back to its $600b peak

2/x
Mechanically, the October surplus stemmed from a fall in imports from the usually high (no doubt inflated by Huawei's chip stockpiling) levels of September.

But the bigger story is that exports have remained relatively strong even as the global economy has been weak

3/x
Read 16 tweets
Nov 6, 2020
The Council on Foreign Relations' graphics team has put together some good charts to support my recent piece warning about a loss of momentum in the global recovery.

cfr.org/article/global…
Plotting output relative to its 2019 average immediately puts the q3 recovery into context.

A look at the (still incomplete) data for a broader set of countries also highlights just how much of an outlier China's reportedly near complete recovery really is
A plot of (estimated) monthly US output highlights how the pace of the recovery slowed over the course of the third quarter (as the large initial stimulus was not sustained).

The chart also shows how services led this particular downturn
Read 9 tweets
Nov 5, 2020
The WSJ (Cezary Podkul and Megumi Fujikawa) on the search for global yield from Japan's financial institutions -- through the lens of Nochu's (Japan's financial cooperative for fishers and farmers) purchases of US CLOs

wsj.com/articles/how-a…
Podkul and Fujikawa allude to the centrality of the Caymans in the global flow of CLOs -- something the Fed highlighted last year

federalreserve.gov/econres/notes/…
The accounting here is interesting as it illustrates the role of tax centers in a range of capital flows, and illustrates the difference between gross and new flows too.

The Fed started categorizing US managed. Caymans domiciled CLOs as "foreign" in 17 and 18
Read 8 tweets
Nov 3, 2020
The IMF needs to junk its current metric for assessing reserves.

It simply doesn't work. It dilutes what should be strong signals of extreme vulnerability.

cfr.org/blog/it-time-s…
The IMF's metric (without adjustments) suggested that Turkey had a slightly stronger reserve position that China going into 2020. Which is absurd.

(and yes, I do read the details of the IMF's ESR!)
The reason is simple: measures of reserve need based on broad money (m2) imply that countries with big domestic deposit bases (China, Korea and the like) need a ton of reserves, while countries with small banking systems (like Argentina) need far fewer
Read 9 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(