Just a reminder as we head toward tomorrow's advance trade data (for September) and the more detailed release next week:
US exports to China of goods covered by the deal normally pick up in the last third of the year.
That is as predictable as the timing of the harvest ...
1/x
Everything has kind of been mucked up for the last two years, though, as China (famously) didn't buy any beans in 2018 (showing the power of the state importing companies).
This year though should be ... more or less normal
2/x
As Chad Bown's detailed numbers* show, ag exports (the sept data for China now comes out early) will be back in line with their 2017 levels (helped by pork) -- but no where close to the big gains promised
*I am shocked @ChadBown included lobsters. Shocked
3/x
But with manufacturing weak*, total U.S. exports are still unlikely to reach 2017 levels, let alone far exceed them.
* There is no advance data for aircraft, and I think the "deal" cheated a bit by allowing orders to count toward the total.
For fun, I plotted covered exports (so no aircraft) to China as a share of US GDP over the last 10ys. To me the big story is still how undynamic they have been both before and after the "deal"
(they were about 0.4% of US GDP back in 17 ...)
5/x
To paraphrase a bit, China's rapid growth shows up everywhere except in its import data
(especially of manufactures)
6/x
The most dynamic large manufacturing export to China is semiconductor manufacturing equipment, and that one is complicated, as, well China's imports here are a function of an industrial policy designed to reduce China's imports of chips*
7/x
*/ there may be a pull forward effect from the threat of export controls as well
8/8
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
US imports of pharmaceuticals from the world's low tax jurisdictions have more than tripled since the (Pharma) Tax Cuts and (Irish) Jobs Act was passed ...
1/
The US trade deficit in pharmaceuticals has gone from $50b to around $200b (close to 0.7 pp of US GDP)
I liked Trump's term one trade policy a lot better than Trump's current trade policy.
Back then, the bulk of the tariff increase was on goods from China.
Now, not so much
1/
Gearing up for the May trade data release
In April, tariff revenue was around $20b, equally split between China and the rest of the world.
During Trump's first term the increase in monthly tariff revenue (to $5/6b) was essentially from tariffs on China going from $1b to $4b
2/
Tariff revenue from countries other than China, for future reference ...
Taiwan so far has gotten off relatively lightly, largely b/c of the semiconductor exclusion from the reciprocal/ base tariffs (expected future 232 sector)
Foreign demand for US bonds was a bit too strong in 2023 and 2024; it has pushed the dollar up to untenable levels.
But there is a some risk of a real reversal now
2/
Not sure that Trump's comments over the weekend about the future path of US rates (and issuing bills until he installs a compliant Fed chair) will increase global appetite for US bonds
Just a reminder that Saudi Arabia runs a current account deficit these days -- and its break even oil price (for the balance of payments) is around $90 a barrel ...
1/
The latest balance of payments data only runs though q1 -- but the difference between the oil price and Saudi's breakeven implies a much larger deficit in q2 than in the past few quarters
2/
Saudi external asset accumulation over the last 4 quarters has been financed by debt, not out of its oil proceeds
One of the surprises of the first half of the year was that China held the yuan stable even in the face of significant new US tariffs.
China's q1 BoP data helps explain why -- China was in a quite strong underlying position
1/
in the past few quarters, China's reported current account surplus jumped up to $150b a quarter (it is still understated, I think it is really ~ $200b a quarter) and the state banks have added $50-100b a quarter to their foreign assets.
2/
The balance of payments signal from China's state bank flows (plus PBOC flows) isn't as strongly as in 2020 and 2021, but it has been pretty consistent ...
Not sure the issue will come to a head on July 9th (it is always possible to provide more time for the negotiations) but have long thought that the "232" sectors would be the hardest part of the negotiations with the EU (and other allies)
1/
Pharma frankly should be easy -- as the US trade deficit in pharmaceuticals is made in America, as it stems from a flawed US tax policy. But that isn't how the Trump administration sees it ... and the real negotiations probably cannot start before the US case.
2/
And with autos, the Trump administration's push for a quick deal with the UK set a baseline (10% tariff and tariff rate quota for 2024 export levels) that all the big auto exporters now needs to match ...
3/