流言终结者：有关贸易的5个误解揭秘

1、Debunking five key misconceptions about tradeMythbustersThe recent backlash around the impact of free trade has led to a resurgence in protectionist measures globallyWe argue that such measures are misguided and ineffectiveas other factors are more prominent drivers of trade imbalances and job displ

2、acement, not liberalisation13 February 2020EconomicsGlobalChallenging free tradeFree trade has come under increased fire in recent years, spurred by growing discontentaround the impacts of trade liberalisation on workers, the environment, and national sovereignty. A key reason for this is that the c

3、hallenges of trade openness (e.g. worker displacement) tend to be more visible than the benefits, and are often concentrated in certain sectors or regions. Conversely, the gains from free trade (e.g. greater choice of products at more competitive prices) are more diffuse and may take longer to manif

4、est.Fact versus fictionIn the US, these concerns have led to a persistent focus on goods trade imbalances in recent years, and have been used to justify new tariffs and regulatory restrictions on imports. But attributing job losses or trade deficits wholly to trade liberalisation is misleading. In r

5、eality, trade imbalances are driven by other macroeconomic factors like aShanella Rajanayagam Trade Economist HSBC Bank plc HYPERLINK mailto:shanella.l.rajanayagam shanella.l.rajanayagam+44 20 3268 4118Doug LippoldtChief Trade Economist HSBC Bank plc HYPERLINK mailto:douglas.lippoldt douglas.lippold

6、t+44 20 7992 0375Debalika Sarkar Associate Bangalorelow savings rate and strong currency. Technology advances are a more prominent driver of manufacturing job losses than trade liberalisation. And local businesses andconsumers often pay the price of punitive US tariffs not foreign exporters.In this

7、report, we debunk five misconceptions about international trade that are commonly used to rationalise trade protectionism:Trade deficits are bad, trade surpluses are good (p. 2)Open markets increase trade deficits (p. 6)Foreign exporters pay the price of additional tariffs (p. 9)Freer trade leads to

8、 net job losses domestically (p. 12)Goods trade is independent of services trade (p. 16)Commercial implicationsTrade protectionism ultimately hurts businesses and any perceived benefits from protectionist policies are likely to be short-lived. Higher tariffs and stringent regulations can lead to hig

9、her input costs, distort supply chains, and erode competitiveness. And in many cases, the impact of protectionism, such as foregone welfare gains, may be long- term. Businesses could embrace strategies that help open up new and diverse trading opportunities, and improve agility in order to mitigate

10、protectionist risks. For instance, by making the most of trade deals and investing in new technologies.Disclosures & DisclaimerThis report must be read with the disclosures and the analyst certifications in the Disclosure appendix, and with the Disclaimer, which forms part of it.Issuer of report: HS

11、BC Bank plcView HSBC Global Research at:https: HYPERLINK / /Myth 1: Trade deficits are bad, trade surpluses are goodA key priority of the current US Government is to reduce trade imbalancesbut focusing on reducing trade deficits disregards the importance of importsand does not consider factors such

12、as the low US savings rate that is a key driver of the countrys overall deficitRenewed focus on trade deficitsFocusing on lowering trade deficits crucially disregards the importance of importsUS trade actionsWhile misconceptions around trade imbalances are not new, the new US trade policy orientatio

13、n has renewed focus on this issue. In fact, a key priority of the current US Government is to reduce the countrys trade deficit with the world and particularly with China. As a result, the Trump Administration has pursued a number of policies to increase US exports (e.g. via Chinese commitments to b

14、oost US agricultural purchases) or limit US imports (e.g. via stricter regional content rules and minimum wage requirements regarding autos imports from North American partners under the revised NAFTA accord) in order to improve the countrys overall trade balance.So have these protectionist measures

15、 worked? On the face of it, it may appear so. The overall US trade deficit in goods and services narrowed by 1.7% annually to USD617bn in 2019, while the US goods trade deficit with China narrowed by over 17% to USD346bn last year (Chart 1). On the other hand, however, US merchandise trade deficits

16、with Mexico and the EU hit record highs in 2019, growing by 26% and 5.5%, respectively over the past year (Chart 2). To note, the US recorded a bilateral trade surplus in services with China of USD39bn in 2018.But as economists have long argued, it is not appropriate to use trade policy as a tool to

17、 lower trade deficits. This is because doing so 1) disregards the importance of imports, and 2) does not consider macroeconomic factors, such as exchange rates, savings, investment and government spending, that are more prominent drivers of trade deficits.Chart 1. US goods and services trade balance

18、, and savings rateChart 2. US bilateral goods trade balance with China, EU and MexicoUSDbn800700600500400300200Savings rate, %161412108640-100-200-300-400-5002009 2011 2013 2015 2017 20190-100-200-300-400-5001000200020032006200920122015202018USDbnUS-Mainland China balance US-EU balance US-Mexico bal

19、anceUSDbnUS overall trade deficit (LHS)US average personal savings rate (RHS)Note: Personal savings rate = personal saving as a percentage of disposable personal income.Source: HSBC and US Bureau of Economic AnalysisSource: RefinitivImports matterImports can help plug the domestic production- consum

20、ption gap and matter for global supply chainsThe US trade deficit is driven mainly by a services- investment imbalanceTrade is a positive sum gameThe idea that trade deficits (i.e. when the value of imports exceeds the value of exports) are bad but trade surpluses are good is based on the notion tha

21、t trade is a zero sum game. That is, one countrys gain (exports) is another countrys loss (imports). Some policymakers also believe that bilateral trade deficits are the result of unfair trading practices, such as regulatory trade barriers and subsidies, in some large exporting countries.Despite bei

22、ng represented as an outflow of national income in key economic statistics such as GDP, imports are not a bad thing. Imports can help supplement domestic production to meet consumer demand. For example, China accounts for half of the worlds consumption of whole milk powder (WMP) and relies on import

23、s from countries like New Zealand, which exports around 90% of its total WMP supply, to satisfy domestic demand. And freer access to imports also provides local businesses and consumers with access to a greater choice of goods and services, often at lower cost, which could lead to productivity gains

24、 and enhance welfare.Supply chainsMoreover, production today increasingly takes place along global supply chains which means that imports are critical to the manufacturing of exports. For example, China has long played an important role in the assembly of final products such as the Apple iPhone. But

25、 countries such as South Korea and Japan supply more than 45% of the parts used in the production of the iPhone X compared to around 25% supplied by China.1What actually drives the US trade deficit?Savings-Investment imbalanceAs set out in Trade deficits: truth, fiction and beyond (19 March 2018) an

26、d Trump, trade and jobs (20 January 2017), the US trade deficit is not driven primarily by trade. Instead, it is a result of other macroeconomic factors such as the low US savings rate, which requires the US to borrow or attract investment from abroad (Chart 1). In other words, US demand for investm

27、entis greater than total US savings that is used to finance national investment. Capital inflows from overseas help to fund this gap, and essentially enable the US to consume more than it produces hence the trade deficit. Therefore, attempts to reduce the trade deficit without tackling these underly

28、ing macroeconomic imbalances could reduce US economic growth without significantly affecting the trade balance in the long-term.2Strong currencyA strong currency can also increase a countrys trade deficit. The US dollar is regarded as the worlds de facto reserve currency and currently accounts for a

29、round 62% of the worlds allocated currency reserves.3 Foreign investors tend to seek the USD as a safe investment during times of economic turbulence. This, coupled with higher net investment flows into the US, drives demand higher for US dollars and USD-denominated assets which can lead to a strong

30、er USD relative to other currencies. A stronger USD can increase the relative cost of US exports to foreign consumers, while making imports into the US more affordable. Such changes in relative prices may cause exports to fall and imports to rise leading to a widening of the US trade deficit. Howeve

31、r, research by the St. Louis Fed found that adjustments to the exchange rate have not shifted the US trade balance in the long-run.4Petroleum tradeTraditionally, trade in petroleum products has been a key determinant of the overall US trade imbalance (Chart 3). However, growth in US petroleum export

32、s resulted in the US switching from being a net importer of these products, to a net exporter position in the last four months of 2019. As a result, the US trade deficit in petroleum products declined by 73% in 2019, while its deficit in non-petroleum products (mainly manufactured products) increase

33、d by 2%.Chart 3. Composition of US goods trade deficit, petroleum vs. non-petroleum goodsShare of US goods tradedeficit100%80%60%40%20%0%-20%Share of US goods tradedeficit100%80%60%40%20%0%-20%2000200220042006200820102012201420162018Petroleum goodsNon-petroleum goodsSource: HSBC and Refinitiv2 Congr

34、essional Research Services, “U.S Trade Policy Primer: Frequently Asked Questions”, 29 January 2019; and PIIE, “Five Reasons Why the Focus on Trade Deficits Is Misleading”, March 2018.3 IMF Currency Composition of Official Foreign Exchange Reserves data for Q3 2019.4 Federal Reserve of St. Louis, “Th

35、e FRED Blog: Dollar strength and the trade balance”, 25 September 2017.Trade balances and trade statisticsTraditional trade data can overstate bilateral trade deficitsCompilation and measurement differencesIn addition, trade deficits may not be an appropriate yard stick of economic success due to sh

36、ortcomings in traditional trade data. The magnitude or even direction of bilateral trade balances can vary due to differences in how trade statistics are measured and compiled between countries. For example, according to their respective national data sources, the US and UK both report bilateral tra

37、de surpluses in goods and services with each other (Chart 4).Traditional trade statistics measure gross export and import flows only and therefore fail to capture complex supply chain linkages. Using a unique dataset developed by the OECD and WTO that captures trade in value-added, we show that bila

38、teral trade balances can change significantly when supply chain linkages are considered. For example, the bilateral US trade surplus with China is over USD30bn smaller if imported intermediate inputs used in the production of final exports are considered, than in gross terms (Chart 5). Similarly, US

39、 trade deficits with Canada and Mexico are USD22bn and USD39bn smaller, respectively in value-added terms.Chart 4. Bilateral US-UK trade balance, 2018Chart 5. Selected bilateral trade deficits in gross and value-added terms, 2015USDbn70USDbn70MainlandUS - Mainland China -Mexico -Mainland China -Sout

40、hUS -Mainland60605050404030302020101000US-UK trade balanceUK-US trade balance Goods and services balance Goods balance0-50-100-150-200-250-300USDbnChinaTaiwanKoreaMexicoChina0-50-100-150-200-250-300USDbnServices balanceGross trade balanceValue added trade balanceSource: HSBC, ONS and Bureau of Econo

41、mic AnalysisNotes: The chart shows the five largest bilateral trade deficits in gross terms, among countries in the OECD database, and the comparable balances on a value-added basis. The US-Canada trade deficit was the 13th largest bilateral deficit in gross terms in 2015. The value-added trade bala

42、nce measures the difference between domestic value-added in foreign final demand and foreign value-added in domestic final demand.Source: HSBC and OECDNot all trade deficits are badTrade deficits can become unsustainable if persistent borrowing is used to fund consumption, not investmentTherefore, t

43、rade deficits are not necessarily a bad thing. An overall trade deficit may reflect, among the other macroeconomic forces discussed above, strong economic growth and high employment. It could also enhance welfare if “the borrowing is used to finance productive investments that will eventually help t

44、he economy to repay the money with a profit”.5 But a trade deficit can become unsustainable if a country continues to borrow for spending on consumption (e.g. clothing, household purchases) rather than on investment.Either way, however, greater imports should not be regarded as an economic cost. Imp

45、orts provide domestic businesses and consumers with access to a greater range of goods and services. And imported intermediate inputs are essential to the functioning of global supply chains. Access to high-quality, cost-effective imports may also enhance the competitiveness of a countrys exports.5

46、PIIE, “Five Reasons Why the Focus on Trade Deficits Is Misleading”, March 2018.Myth 2: Open markets increase trade deficitsProtectionist actions may not reduce trade deficits if underlying macroeconomic imbalances are not also addressedLiberalisation via trade deals could help to promote exports by

47、lowering trade barriers faced abroadTrade deals may also be an effective tool for tackling unfair trade practices that can distort trade balances in specific goodsProtectionism and unbalanced tradeThe US is using trade policy to reduce its trade deficit but this may be ineffectiveThe current US admi

48、nistration has resorted to using trade policy measures to help improve the countrys bilateral trade deficits. For example, a key reason for ongoing US-China tariff tensions is US grievances with the bilateral trade imbalance. And US-EU trade negotiations have largely stalled, with United States Trad

49、e Representative (USTR) Robert Lighthizer noting that the US has a “very unbalanced” trade relationship with the bloc.6 Moreover, the US renegotiated its existing trade deals with South Korea and North American partners, in part, to include provisions to effectively limit some US vehicle imports and

50、 raise exports.7But as we explained above, macroeconomic factors not trade policy are the key drivers of trade deficits. And even if freer trade leads to more imports, this is not a bad thing.So why might protectionism not lead to a reduction in the trade deficit? Slower growth: Pursuing protectioni

51、st trade policies is likely to lead to higher import prices,as protectionist tradepolicies could ultimately lead to slower economic growthincreased costs of production for domestic businesses, higher domestic inflation, and may reduce the purchasing power of consumers. These effects are likely to we

52、igh on domestic consumption, investment and employment resulting in slower economic growth, reduced welfare, and could ultimately lead to a widening of the trade deficit.Savings-investment balance needs to change: Recent research by the IMF found that higher tariffs do not necessarily lead to an imp

53、rovement in the trade balance due to the offsetting impact of an exchange rate appreciation stemming from higher import duties.8 As noted above, protectionist measures may curtail imports to a certain extent but are unlikely6 Robert Lighthizer interview with Fox Business, 17 December 2019.7 Notable

54、provisions under the revised US-South Korea FTA: Doubling of the South Korean import cap on US vehicles (built to US standards) to 50,000 per manufacturer per year; US vehicle exports will be exempted from South Koreas stricter emission requirements; and the US will prolong the elimination of its 25

55、% tariff on light-truck imports from 2021 to 2041. The new USMCA agreement also includes provisions to address US concerns with fair trade issues such as labour standards and minimum wages in the Mexican auto sector.8 D. Furceri et al., Macroeconomic Consequences of Tariffs, IMF Working Paper, 15 Ja

56、nuary 2019.to affect a countrys overall trade balance unless the balance of savings and investment changes materially.Risk of retaliation: Protectionist actions may provoke retaliation from trading partners such as higher tariffs on certain goods, which could limit exports and not lead to any improv

57、ement in a countrys trade balance.Substitutability with local goods matters: The extent to which local producers may benefit from trade protectionist measures depends on how substitutable the foreign goods are with domestically manufactured products.9 Domestic producers may not reap any gains if pre

58、viously imported inputs cannot be easily replaced with locally manufactured alternatives. For instance, if local goods are more expensive.Trade diversion: The degree of substitutability with imports from other countries also matters. For example, imposing protectionist measures that target imports f

59、rom specific markets could lead to trade diversion, rather than a substitution of imports with local products. This may simply result in a shift in bilateral trade deficits, as imports from one country (e.g. China) are replaced with imports from another (e.g. Vietnam), without a substantial change i

60、n a countrys overall trade deficit.10 Shifts in value chain production can also lead to some loss of competitiveness in cases where comparable alternative suppliers are not available, as well as to adjustment costs.FTAs and trade balancesLiberalising trade via FTAs may help improve a countrys trade