http://news.ft.com/cms/s/c5ed952a-6f06-11d9-94a8-00000e2511c8.html

Don't rely on the dollar to reduce the deficit
By David Hale
Published: January 25 2005 20:31 | Last updated: January 25 2005 20:31

US economyThere is now a consensus in the financial markets that the
US dollar is headed for a prolonged slump in order to reduce America's
large current account deficit.

There are two ways the falling dollar can reduce the external deficit.
It can encourage an upsurge of exports or import substitution. What
pundits have not noticed is that the US does not have adequate
manufacturing capacity to eliminate the external deficit.

The US economy produces about $1,500bn per annum of output in its
manufacturing industry and has a capacity utilisation rate of nearly
79 per cent. The current account deficit is equal to 40 per cent of
American manufacturing output. If the US were to reduce the external
deficit by $150bn through an improvement in the merchandise trade
account for goods, the manufacturing capacity utilisation rate would
increase by 7 per cent to 86 per cent. If the US were to seek to
eliminate the deficit entirely through a boom in exports or massive
import substitution, the utilisation rate would exceed 100 per cent.

As the Federal Reserve regards a rate above 85 per cent as inflationary,
there is little doubt that it would tighten monetary policy if changes
in the trade account were to produce such a big swing in the utilisation
rate. In this scenario, the US might ultimately reduce the deficit
through a domestic recession, not an export boom.

The US has inadequate capacity to control the external deficit because
its manufacturing capital stock has been declining in relative terms
for several years. In 2003, this stock was equal to 7.3 per cent of
total fixed assets, compared with 8.4 per cent in 1985. The share of US
private employment in manufacturing has also shrunk from 22.4 per cent
in early 1985 to 13 per cent recently. The recovery in capital spending
after the 2001 recession was the most subdued in modern business cycle
history. Between mid-2002 and 2003, capital spending increased by only 5
per cent compared with an average gain of 15 per cent during the first
year of the five previous business expansions. It appears that companies
were cautious early in the current recovery because of the corporate
scandals of 2001-02 and the Sarbanes-Oxley legislation.

Companies are now prepared to bolster capital spending. There has been
a dramatic recovery in corporate profitability since 2002 and the US
corporate sector has a highly liquid balance sheet. Cash flow exceeded
capital spending in the first quarter of 2004, compared with a $300bn
deficit in 2000.

Congress has also recently enacted legislation to allow US companies
to repatriate foreign profits on favourable tax terms. The tax rate
on repatriated profits is to be reduced from 35 per cent to 5.25 per
cent for one year. Many analysts think American companies might bring
home as much as $150bn-$200bn of the $669bn of foreign profits they
have accumulated since 2000. This could help fund the domestic capital
spending boom needed to reduce the external deficit.

The other big corporate tax change now occurring will be negative
for capital spending. In 2003, Congress introduced a 50 per cent tax
allowance for purchases of new capital goods, but it expired on December
31 2004. President George W. Bush has appointed a commission to propose
new tax reforms. If the commission focuses on manufacturing capacity, it
could decide to restore tax allowances for capital goods or even expand
them to 100 per cent, as Britain did during the 1960s and 1970s.

The other way for the US to revitalise manufacturing is to promote
foreign direct investment. After a wave of takeover bids, FDI shot up to
$250bn-$300bn during 1999 and 2000 before slumping back to only $50bn
during 2002 and barely $30bn last year. Foreign companies use their
American manufacturing plants to satisfy both domestic demand and export
back to their home countries. Intra-corporate trade accounts for 33 per
cent of US exports and 40 per cent of imports. The cheap dollar should
enhance the attractiveness of American investment for international
companies.

The decline of the dollar is only the first step in the process of
adjusting America's balance of payments. There will also have to be
a significant reallocation of resources from domestic consumption to
tradeable goods manufacturing. The great question is whether the US
will be able to reduce the deficit through a gradual manufacturing
revival or, dramatically, through a domestic spending recession. But
the basic direction of the US economy is clear. There will have to be a
significant expansion of output in tradeable goods industries to reduce
the large current account deficit.

The writer is a Chicago-based economist

_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to