Blog Post

Oil and the dollar will complicate the U.S. revival

At the start of 2015, two familiar features dominate the global economic outlook: continuing turbulence in financial markets and the relative strength of the U.S. recovery. One  aspect of America's superior performance, though, has received surprisingly little attention, and that's the marked decline in the country's external deficit.

By: Date: January 22, 2015 Global Economics & Governance Tags & Topics

This article originally appeared in Bloomberg View

At the start of 2015, two familiar features dominate the global economic outlook: continuing turbulence in financial markets and the relative strength of the US recovery. One  aspect of America’s superior performance, though, has received surprisingly little attention, and that’s the marked decline in the country’s external deficit.

The shrinking of the current-account deficit — from its peak of almost 6 percent of US gross domestic product in 2006 to 2.3 percent in 2013 — ought to be a big story. Bear in mind, it happened even though the US has enjoyed stronger growth in domestic demand than either Europe or Japan, and despite the recent strength of the dollar. That took some doing.

JO acct def % gdp

In my early years of learning international economics, it was banged into my brain that the U.S. would always see its imports rise significantly when its domestic demand grew more strongly than that of other developed economies. Ten years ago many economists believed that the U.S. external deficit would persist until domestic demand gave way or the dollar collapsed (or both).

What concerns me as 2015 gets under way is that this little-noticed but highly significant adjustment could now be under threat.

One crucial variable is the price of oil. The US is a net oil importer, so the collapse in crude-oil prices has squeezed the current-account deficit. In the short term, it will continue to do so; in the longer term, however, other forces will come into play. Cheap oil will boost the real incomes of U.S. consumers, allowing them to spend more on imports. In addition, if the price of oil stays down, the recent surge of investment in the domestic production of shale oil and gas may stall or even go into reverse. The technological opportunity afforded by fracking — and the prospect of a permanent improvement in the U.S. balance of trade in oil — could be undone.

Another big factor is the aforementioned strength of the dollar. Over the past year, the dollar has appreciated against almost all the main currencies. Even if the connection isn’t apparent yet, a stronger dollar will slow the decline of the US deficit.

On the one hand, if the dollar were to strengthen in 2015 as it did in 2014, there’d be a boost to consumer demand from higher real incomes, and this would support the recovery. On the other, the diminished competitiveness of U.S. producers in domestic and foreign markets would probably cancel out the benefit. Exports would fall and imports would rise. It’s quite likely — contrary to some short-term forecasts — that the combination of cheap oil and a strong dollar will be more helpful to Japan and the euro area than to the United States.

If I were a U.S. policy-maker, I’d be concerned about this. If I were a governor of the Federal Reserve, I might be concerned enough to wonder whether the dollar’s strength — in effect, an unplanned tightening of U.S. monetary policy — should make me want to postpone the first post-crash rise in short-term interest rates yet again.

True, a strong dollar will keep imported inflation in check –but inflation is not yet a concern. Meanwhile, further currency appreciation could do lasting structural harm to the economy by bringing the recent revival of US manufacturing to a premature halt. That’s not all. Lately, unlike the other main currencies, China’s renminbi has risen along with the dollar; at some point, policy-makers in Beijing are likely to act against the ongoing loss of competitiveness. That would add to the downside for the U.S. economy.

Many will say there’s little the US can do about the fall  in oil prices or the rise of the dollar — and I expect they’re right. Even so, I see US policy-makers mobilising their diplomats and hitting the phones, urging foreign counterparts not to solve their own economic problems at the expense of the US. Since 2008, the structure of the American economy has changed and, partly for that reason, the nation has recovered much of its strength. Those gains won’t be surrendered lightly.


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.

View comments
Read about event More on this topic

Upcoming Event

Mar
7
12:30

Trump’s energy policy: America first, climate last?

This event seeks to discuss the potential way forward for the US energy and climate policy, and its implications for both global energy markets and global climate change mitigation efforts.

Speakers: Kristine Berzina, Tim Boersma, Connie Hedegaard, Simone Tagliapietra and Zhang Xumin Topic: Energy & Climate Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels
Read article Download PDF

Policy Brief

Screen Shot 2017-02-17 at 16.42.38

Europe in a new world order

In this paper the authors explore what the EU’s strategic reaction should be to US diminishing giant policies, and the EU’s role in a world of declining hegemony and shifting balances

By: Maria Demertzis, André Sapir and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, Global Economics & Governance Date: February 17, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Marek Dabrowski

The EU should not retaliate against Trump’s protectionism

If the US moves ahead with Republican plans to introduce a border adjustment tax, the EU will need to decide on its response. Marek Dabrowski argues that the EU would be unwise to retaliate with its own anti-import policies: the border adjustment tax would be difficult to implement and damaging to the global trade order. Instead the EU should build a broad coalition of allies to defend free trade.

By: Marek Dabrowski Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: February 9, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

photo2016

The border adjustment tax: a dangerous proposal

Reflecting the fact that the United States imports more than it exports, border adjustment tax is considered by its proponents as an essential part of the Trump tax reform package.

By: Uri Dadush Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: February 9, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Scott Marcus

How good a shield is Privacy Shield?

Privacy Shield was put in place in 2016 to ensure that transfers of personal data from the EU to the US would be in compliance with European Union privacy law, and thus permissible. The institutional framework of Privacy Shield was weak, and depended on the good will of the US administration. Recent actions by the new administration, including the famous executive order forbidding residents from 7 predominantly Muslim countries to enter the US, may have (presumably unintended) effects on Privacy Shield. To preserve the validity of Privacy Shield in European Courts, strong EU-US cooperation and potentially additional agreements may become necessary.

By: J. Scott Marcus Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy Date: February 7, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Emmanuel Mourlon-Druol

The EU must stand ready to confront US leadership

This is not the first time that the United States has antagonised Europe. And Europe can provide an effective response to such external challenges when it stands united.

By: Emmanuel Mourlon-Druol Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: February 3, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Mark Hallerberg

Border adjustment tax could help Europe find common voice on Trump

The Trump administration seems more than willing to break with liberal orthodoxy on trade. Could this lead them to introduce a "destination tax", essentially penalising imports? If the USA moves ahead with this idea, Mark Hallerberg argues that the EU should seriously consider doing the same. Not only would it balance out some of the trade effects of the US move, it might also have positive political implications for Europe.

By: Mark Hallerberg Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: February 1, 2017
Read article More on this topic

Blog Post

dsc_0809
OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

Trade flows between the US, UK and EU27: what goes where?

As US President Trump and UK Prime Minister Theresa May meet in Washington, Bruegel researchers look at bilateral trade flows between the US, UK and EU27.

By: Filippo Biondi and Robert Kalcik Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: January 27, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Opinion

Guntram B. Wolff

Europe needs to react to Trump’s trade agenda – four urgent questions

It seems increasingly likely that President Trump will govern according to the values of his campaign. On trade, this might lead to major disturbances in the global rules-based order. The EU needs to decide how it will react, and it needs to decide fast.

By: Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: January 26, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Silvia Merler

Tariffs and the American poor

What’s at stake: much has been said and debated — during the US election and beyond — about the distributional impact of free trade on the disadvantaged. But what would be the distributional impact of a new protectionism instead?

By: Silvia Merler Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: January 23, 2017
Read about event More on this topic

Past Event

Past Event

Implications of the new US trade policy by the incoming president Trump

An event about the implications of Donald Trump's emerging trade agenda on global trade.

Speakers: Adam Posen, André Sapir, Guntram B. Wolff and Xiang Yu Topic: Global Economics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: January 19, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Guntram B. Wolff

Manufacturing in the US: Will Trump’s strategy repatriate highly-paid jobs?

Trump has set out a plan to repatriate highly-paid manufacturing jobs to the US. But the idea that manufacturing jobs are better paid than service roles is a myth. Moreover, labour markets are slow to shift between sectors. An aggressive trade policy may create some jobs in manufacturing but will not be a benefit to US citizens in general.

By: Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: January 6, 2017
Load more posts