1/15
Since the 1960s few arguments in international finance have been as exciting as "the coming demise of the dollar", but these arguments seem always to founder on the same set of mistakes.
2/15
That is why it is hard to find anyone who specializes in international financial flows, and who is fully familiar with the mechanisms and history of the global balance of payments, making this argument.
3/15
Pozsar argues, for example, that countries like China are running their biggest surpluses ever (true) but are recycling less and less of these surpluses into dollars (not true) and more into geopolitical investments such as funding the BRI and other developing countries.
4/15
In fact for all the over-excited talk of China's debt-trap diplomacy, China's developing countries lending peaked in 2015-16 when it learned, thanks in large part to Venezuela, just how risky this kind of lending can be, and has since then reduced flows substantially.
5/15
He also discusses the PBoC's digital currency as a major indicator of this change, but here too he is very mistaken. Anyone who lives in China knows that for all practical purposes money was digitalized years ago. No one except the very elderly carries cash.
6/15
And yet no one uses China's digital payment system abroad simply because Beijing refuses to give up control of its capital account (and with it, inevitably, its trade account). Digital currency won't change that.
7/15
The irony is that while Pozsar correctly notes that China's trade surplus is bigger than ever, he doesn't realize that this makes China even more dependent, and not less dependent, on the willingness of China and the rest of the world to hold dollars.
8/15
The key to global currency "domination" is not how excited the political elite say they are about having their currency dominate. It is how willing they are to allow clear and transparent foreign ownership of domestic assets and, even more importantly, how...
9/15
...willing and able they are to give up control of their capital and trade accounts. Beijing has made it clear it wants none of those things, and while I think they are right to reject these, it also means that the RMB cannot really act as a major international currency.
10/15
So can we at least agree that China is reducing the dollar component of its reserves? Even that is questionable. China's reserve accumulation since 2017 has occurred indirectly, through state-bank purchases of dollars. Without knowing the precise currency composition ...
11/15
...of these assets, we have no idea whether or not the amount of dollars China is holding has increased or decreased, but simple B-o-P arithmetic tells us that China's rising accumulation of foreign assets was mostly matched by rising foreign accumulation of US assets.
12/15
Poszar argues that the US is about to lose its "exorbitant privilege" to countries like China. He is wrong on two counts. First, the US does not benefit from the dollar's global role. Wall Street, owners of movable capital and the foreign affairs establishment do benefit.
13/15
But their exorbitant privilege comes at an exorbitant burden for American farmers, workers and producers. The dollar's global role is simply the obverse of its role of absorber of last resort of excess savings, mainly through soaring debt.
14/15
Second, and related, is that this why conditions won't change until Washington itself takes much-needed steps to reduce the global role of the dollar. Pozsar argues countries like China, Russia and Saudi Arabia want to lead the way to a world less dependent on the dollar.
14/15
In fact those countries really want a world in which they can maintain the very high trade surpluses that boost domestic growth and especially benefit the exporting elites within their domestic economies.
15/15
That means that what they require above all is someone to run the correspondent deficits. As long as the US, and only the US, is willing and able to play this role (not for much longer, I hope), the dollar will dominate the world of international trade and capital.
A friend just reminded me that I published this piece nearly a year ago.
1/2 An article in today's Reuters confirms one of the points that I make in this thread: "Commitments made to 100 developing nations by China EximBank and the China Development Bank have fallen every year since hitting a record in 2016 as the lenders...
2/2 ...scaled back financing even before the COVID-19 pandemic hit in 2020."
1/14
Much interesting stuff in this new paper by Tamim Bayoumi and Joseph E. Gagnon, including their claim that "the persistence of the US current account deficit reflects inflows associated with the size of US financial markets and perceived safety of its...
2/14
assets, with net inflows ebbing and waning depending on financial sentiment about prospects for the US economy."
The idea that capital account imbalances can drive trade imbalances may seem counterintuitive to many, but it is implicit in how the balance of payments works.
3/14
It is important to work out the implications on the US economy, which have to do with far more than just whether or not the US runs a trade deficit. Because every country's internal account must be perfectly consistent with its external account, changes in...
1/10
According to Bloomberg, China’s share of US imports fell to 7.1% in May, the lowest since 2001, and less than half of the 14.8% in September 2024.
But while that may seem like progress on the trade front, in fact it isn't.
2/10
The US trade problem is not a China problem so much as a problem with the role of the US in accommodating global imbalances. It does this as much through its capital account as through its trade account. What matters is the overall imbalance, not the bilateral imbalance.
3/10
To confuse the two means failing to note that even as the US deficit with China contracts, the overall US deficit continues to rise.
And what's more, the overall Chinese surplus also continues to rise. That's not just a coincidence.
1/8 Robert Skidelsky, who has written great books on Keynes' life and work, wrote (with Vijay Joshi) a really good essay—way back in 2010—on the problems of unbalanced trade, and why Keynes' bancor proposal at Bretton Woods made so much sense.
@RSkidelsky robertskidelsky.com/2010/06/23/key…
2/8 As the revival of interest in Keynes' bancor proposal gathers pace, it is worth pointing out the similarities to his proposal and to more recent proposals in the US and elsewhere that deficit countries place a kind of Tobin tax on all capital inflows.
3/8 The way bancor worked was by taxing the capital flow component of persistent surpluses. Surplus countries, of course have to acquire foreign assets to balance their surpluses, in the same way that deficit countries must give up claims on assets.
1/6 Reuters: "Chinese government advisers are stepping up calls to make the household sector's contribution to broader economic growth a top priority at Beijing's upcoming five-year policy plan."
2/6 Reuters continues: "Household consumption currently accounts for 40% of gross domestic product - some advisers propose China should aim for 50% over the next two five-year cycles."
3/6 It's worth noting that China is such an outlier, that even if it does raise the household consumption share of GDP by ten percentage points, it will still have among the lowest household consumption shares of any major economy in the world.
1/6 Good Caixin article on developer debt resolution: "As China’s real estate slump drags on with no recovery in sight, distressed developers are shifting toward more aggressive debt restructuring for survival, forcing creditors to swallow deep losses."
2/6 "For three years," Caixin continues, "developers relied on an “extend and pretend” approach, rolling over debt in hopes of a market rebound. But home sales have collapsed, worsening property companies’ finances."
3/6 This is the classic debt resolution process, familiar to me from my early years running LDC bond-trading desks. At first, both creditors and obligors pretend that what they have is a liquidity problem, not a solvency problem, and that all is needed is time and forbearance.
1/12
A Tsinghua-related think tanks argues that "China should issue 30 trillion yuan in treasury bonds to swap local governments’ hidden liabilities to re-energise growth momentum and cut off financial risks at their root."
via @scmpnewssc.mp/gz8bj?utm_sour…
2/12
This would help in two ways, according to the report. It would transfer debt from local government balance sheets to the central government balance sheet, giving them more breathing space to prop up the economy, and it would reduce interest payments.
3/12
But this is what comes of treating a systemic issue incrementally. The problem is not that local governments have too much debt. The excessive debt burden of local governments is actually a symptom of the real problem. ft.com/content/630f82…