1/8 This ECB study notes that if US tariffs force China to redirect exports from the US to the EU, "the euro area could see imports from China rise by up to 10% in 2026."
2/8 The report also notes that "additional Chinese exports could bring down headline inflation by around 0.15 percentage points in 2026," which would, in turn, allow the ECB to cut interest rates.
3/8 But that's not the end of the story. An ECB interest-rate cut designed to prevent a rise in EU unemployment will nonetheless shift the structure of EU production from tradable goods to non-tradables, i.e. a shift out of manufacturing and into services.
4/8 This shift would not occur because EU citizens, EU governments or the ECB wanted it to occur. It would be an automatic structural shift in the EU economy caused by an expansion in manufacturing that was engineered by Beijing for wholly domestic reasons and diverted away...
5/8 from the US economy by Washington, also for wholly domestic reasons. This is an example of how, in a hyperglobalized world, policies which change the internal imbalances in countries that choose to control their trade and capital accounts also automatically change internal...
6/8 imbalances in countries that choose not to. To put it another way, this is an example of how one country's industrial policies can also become the industrial policies (in reverse) of another country, whether that benefits or harms the latter. carnegieendowment.org/china-financia…
7/8 This obviously isn't sustainable. Either we need to reform the global trading system so as to limit the ability of major economies to externalize their internal imbalances, or all economies will eventually choose to protect themselves by raising trade and capital barriers.
8/8 If the latter happens (and it almost certainly is happening), the result will be the global contraction in trade that Joan Robinson said was the inevitable consequence of a world of beggar-thy-neighbor trade imbalances.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1/8 Reuters: "China's top leaders have pledged to support an economy that is facing various risks, by managing what is viewed as disorderly competition and beefing up capacity cuts in key industries in the second half of the year."
2/8 Like the promise to boost consumption, the promise to cut capacity in industries suffering from overcapacity is based on a failure to understand the causes of the problem. Neither weak domestic consumption nor excess capacity is caused by administrative oversight.
3/8 Each is the structural consequence of a growth model in which excessively high GDP growth targets must be met, with the main driver of this growth being transfers from the household sector to subsidize investment and manufacturing.
1/7 China Banking News says that Beijing's top economic policy focus in the second half of 2025 will be boosting domestic demand. Second, it will focus on cracking down on "involuted" competition, and third, it will try to stabilize property markets. chinabankingnews.com/p/chinas-top-3…
2/7 I agree, but it's worth noting how difficult each of these will be. China cannot boost the role of domestic demand in driving growth simply by wishing for more consumption. The only way to do it sustainably is to implement income transfers that either undermine...
3/7 manufacturing competitiveness in the short term or sharply reduce the local-government share of the economy, neither of which Beijing has been eager to do. That's why several years of talking about boosting consumption has left Chinese consumption as weak as ever.
1/5 This very good FT article on China's inability stop expanding its already-excess reliance on manufacturing makes what I think are two especially important points.
2/5 First, that the surge in manufacturing investment in the past 3-4 years had nothing to do with Chinese or global manufacturing needs but was instead driven by the need to externalize the cost of China's property-sector collapse. As property investment plunged, this was...
3/5 matched almost RMB for RMB by an increase in manufacturing investment which, in turn, led to a surge in China's trade surpluses. The decline in China's domestic demand, in other words, was made up for by acquiring a greater share of foreign demand.
1/6 Yicai: "Weak domestic demand has been the main cause of the Chinese yuan’s 15 percent depreciation since 2022, so robust and timely counter‑cyclical policies are needed to restore the currency to fair value."
2/6 According to Zhang Bin of the China Finance 40 Forum, "the exchange rate is mainly determined by how yuan assets stack up against overseas assets in terms of returns, rather than the amount of foreign exchange obtained by exports."
3/6 He goes on to note "the stark divergence between China’s record trade surpluses and the yuan’s depreciation since 2022, evidence that the currency is now undervalued," and warns "against relying on currency devaluation to offset tariff strains."
1/10
Industrial profits in China were down 4.3% year on year in June, and down 1.8% during the first half of 2025, even as revenues rose 2.5%. The drop was led by SOEs, down 7.6% in the first half, while private-sector companies saw profits rise by 1.7%. english.news.cn/20250727/7b9bb…
2/10
Beijing wants to prevent what it sees as disruptive pricing competition by limiting the ability of businesses to compete on prices, but I don’t see how they can succeed. Price cutting is not the problem—it is simply a symptom of the problem.
3/10
Businesses are not cutting prices out of malice, but because they produce far more than they can sell domestically, and although they are aggressively turning to increasingly reluctant foreign markets, they still rely on domestic demand for the bulk of their sales.
1/9 This $400 billion investment fund deal with Japan may indeed be "unprecedented", but its hard to see how it helps to address any of the reasons for the US trade imbalances. nytimes.com/2025/07/23/bus…
2/9 It does not change the demand-supply imbalances in Japan or the rest of the world, and it does not change the US role in absorbing the resulting savings imbalances.
In other words it will have no impact on the US trade deficit.
3/9 Some might argue that by converting a portion of Japan's export of capital to the US from portfolio investment to direct investment, it is in fact increasing the total amount of investment in the US economy, and that is a good thing.