Blog Post

Italian and German adjustment in the eyes of the Commission

The European Commission today publishes its “Recommendation for a Council recommendation” on national reform programmes. Such recommendations are in principle published for all EU countries in the framework of the European Semester (see my colleague Benedicta on this). Arguably, the recommendations are particularly important for countries that have been identified as potentially facing particularly large […]

By: Date: May 30, 2012 Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance

The European Commission today publishes its “Recommendation for a Council recommendation” on national reform programmes. Such recommendations are in principle published for all EU countries in the framework of the European Semester (see my colleague Benedicta on this). Arguably, the recommendations are particularly important for countries that have been identified as potentially facing particularly large challenges in the context of the Macroeconomic Imbalances Procedure (MIP). Italy is among those. So what is the Commission’s assessment of how adjustment in Italy and Germany is addressed?

I would argue that the problem of competitiveness adjustment and what it implies for growth and wage developments is central to Italy, Germany and to the euro area as a whole. The following table shows the simple numbers of compensation per employee in Italy and Germany measured in euros.

1999

2007

2011

2013

IT

28,188

35,370

38,719

39,864

DE

30,911

33,569

36,032

38,024

diff

-2,723

1,801

2,688

1,839

These numbers are extraordinary. In fact, in 1999, an Italian worker earned 2723 euros less than a German worker. In 2007, he or she earned 1801 euros more and in 2011 even 2688. Assume for a moment that labour productivity growth has been equal in the two countries, then the relative adjustment need amounts to 20%. Unit labour cost developments support this picture with the gap between Italy and Germany raising by 25%. Interestingly, nominal unit labour cost developments in Germany increased only slightly by 6% whereas Italian’s increased by 32% compared to the euro area’s average 20,7% increase.

The numbers suggest that the Italian wage setting processes has allowed wages in Italy to grow far above productivity developments whereas German wages have been somewhat below productivity. Correspondingly, employment developments have been very different, in particular during the last 4 years when the re-adjustment processes started. Since 2007, German employment increased by 1.7 million whereas Italian employment dropped by 0.25 million.

The adjustment challenge is thus daunting and in a recent policy contribution I have shown that also the forecast is worrying. To close the competitiveness gap and get employment increased in Italy, the eurozone would need a 5 percentage point gap between Italy and Germany during 5 years if we assume that 1999 prices were adequate. There are good arguments that in 1999, Germany was slightly overvalued whereas Italy was slightly undervalued so my guess is that the actual gap is smaller. Probably, 4-5 years of 4% differences would do the job. If we assume 0.7% productivity growth in both countries, German wages would need to settle at around 4.7% whereas Italian wages would settle at 0.7%. This would imply 0% inflation in Italy and 4% inflation in Germany with average euro area inflation somewhere in between and close to the ECB target.

The European Commission forecast on inflation does not provide such numbers. In fact, the Commission predicts Italian inflation to remain far above the euro area average. For Germany, recent wage settlements show some developments towards the numbers outlined above with recent wage agreements of 4.3 and 4.5% for the metal and chemical industry. So adjustment in Germany appears to happen. The Commission should monitor that no measures are taken that would counter this wage adjustment in Germany. The Commission’s working document on Germany is disappointing in this regard as wage developments do not figure in the executive summary. Certainly the MIP procedure is not sufficiently symmetric and the Commission therefore misses the adjustment process in Germany.

So what are the policy descriptions to Italy in the Commission document? The Commission assesses progress since last year’s recommendations and finds that the 28 June 2011 reforms of the wage bargaining process in Italy have been important. However, the Commission underlines that implementation is central for reforms to succeed. Indeed, according to the Commission, “social partners will have to effectively apply” the new rules and “There is also scope to further improving the wage setting framework with a view to quickly regaining external competitiveness.” Given the numbers I show above, I could not agree more. Adjusting wages and prices is absolutely central to restoring growth and competitiveness. It is for the Commission to judge and evaluate carefully progress made on the labour and product market reforms. The leaked document that circulated the last days suggests that the assessment of labour market reforms is quite complicated and highly disputed. It is important to get the assessment right as the euro area cannot sustain such permanent divergences.

In a Bruegel video, Guntram Wolff discusses the findings of the policy contribution "Arithmetic is absolute: euro area adjustment" and presents his assessment of price adjustment in the euro area and the forecast of consumer price inflation for the years to come.


Republishing and referencing

Bruegel considers itself a public good and takes no institutional standpoint. Anyone is free to republish and/or quote this post without prior consent. Please provide a full reference, clearly stating Bruegel and the relevant author as the source, and include a prominent hyperlink to the original post.


Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /home/bruegelo/public_html/wp-content/themes/bruegel/content.php on line 449
View comments
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

The latest European growth-rate estimates

The quarterly growth rate of the euro area in Q1 2018 was 0.4% (1.5% annualized), considerably higher than the low growth rates of the previous two quarters. This blog reviews the reaction to the release of these numbers and the discussion they have triggered about the euro area’s economic challenges.

By: Konstantinos Efstathiou Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: May 20, 2019
Read about event More on this topic

Upcoming Event

May
21
10:30

Europe after Sibiu: Towards differentiated integration?

A comprehensive follow-up to the Informal European Council in Sibiu, Romania.

Speakers: Andrew Duff, John Erik Fossum, Paweł Karbownik and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels
Read about event More on this topic

Upcoming Event

May
28
12:30

The Ukrainian economy: the way forward after a year of political turbulence

What can Ukraine do to foster economic growth? How can the EU and other international partners help Ukraine with this process?

Speakers: Olena Carbou, Marek Dabrowski, Elena Flores, Ivan Miklos and Hlib Vyshlinsky Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels
Read article Download PDF More by this author

Book/Special report

Bruegel annual report 2018

The Bruegel annual report provides a broad overview of the organisation's work in the previous year.

By: Bruegel Topic: Energy & Climate, European Macroeconomics & Governance, Finance & Financial Regulation, Global Economics & Governance, Innovation & Competition Policy Date: May 16, 2019
Read about event More on this topic

Past Event

Past Event

CANCELLED: Future of taxation in the EU

Due to a previously unannounced air traffic controllers strike in Belgium, the Prime Minister Morawiecki is unable to land in time for the event. We apologise for any inconvenience.

Speakers: Marie Lamensch, Mateusz Morawiecki and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: May 16, 2019
Read article More on this topic

Blog Post

Germany’s even larger than expected fiscal surpluses: Is there a link with the constitutional debt brake?

Germany is having a political debate on the adjustment of its budgetary plans due to revised forecasts, and an academic debate on the debt brake. Yet, since 2011, general government revenues and surpluses have been systematically and significantly higher than forecast. The German surplus reached 1.7% of GDP in 2018. This bias did not exist from 1999-2008 before the introduction of the debt brake. While the IMF also got its forecasts of German surpluses wrong, the extent of the bias is larger for the German government’s forecasts. These data suggest that the political debate should focus on the debt brake and its implementation rather than on how to close the budgetary ‘hole’.

By: Catarina Midoes and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: May 13, 2019
Read about event More on this topic

Upcoming Event

Jun
17
12:30

Role of national structural reforms in enhancing resilience in the Euro Area

At this event Gita Gopinath, Chief Economist at the IMF will discuss the role of national structural reforms in enhancing resilience in the Euro Area

Speakers: Maria Demertzis, Gita Gopinath and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels
Read article More by this author

Blog Post

Spitzenkandidaten visions for the future of Europe's economy

What are the different political visions for the future of Europe’s economy? Bruegel and the Financial Times organised a debate series with lead candidates from six political parties in the run-up to the 2019 European elections.

By: Giuseppe Porcaro Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, Global Economics & Governance, Innovation & Competition Policy Date: May 8, 2019
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Opinion

When facts change, change the pact

“When facts change, I change my mind,” John Maynard Keynes famously said. With long-term interest rates currently near zero, the European Union should reform its fiscal framework to allow member states to increase their debt-financed public investments.

By: Jean Pisani-Ferry Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: May 1, 2019
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

EU enlargement 15th anniversary: Upward steps on the income ladder

Since their accession to the EU 15 years ago, the incomes of most central Europeans have increased faster than the incomes of longer-standing members and, thereby, they moved upwards in the EU distribution of income. Yet the very poorest people have not progressed in some countries.

By: Zsolt Darvas Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: April 30, 2019
Read article Download PDF More on this topic

Working Paper

What drives national implementation of EU policy recommendations?

The authors use a newly-compiled dataset to investigate whether and why European Union countries implement the economic policy recommendations they receive from the EU.

By: Konstantinos Efstathiou and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: April 25, 2019
Read article Download PDF More by this author

External Publication

European Parliament

Taking stock of the Single Resolution Board: Banking union scrutiny

The Single Resolution Board (SRB) has had a somewhat difficult start but has been able to learn and adapt, and has gained stature following its first bank resolution decisions in 2017-18. It must continue to build up its capabilities, even as the European Union’s banking union and its policy regime for unviable banks continue to develop.

By: Nicolas Véron Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, European Parliament, Testimonies Date: April 18, 2019
Load more posts