Opinion

Germany’s export-oriented economic model is caught in a US-Chinese squeeze

The new Merkel government has to reduce the dependencies on exports by stimulating domestic growth forces in Germany and Europe. At the same time, Berlin should push for a more ambitious national and European innovation policy as well as a robust European foreign trade policy.

By: and Date: April 30, 2018 Topic: Global Economics & Governance

This article has also been published by the Berlin Policy Journal;

 

The German export-oriented economic model is facing a massive attack this year. Germany is caught between tough American protectionism and aggressive Chinese industrial policy. The US government threatens to impose painful sanctions on key German export goods such as automobiles. China’s industrial policy is aimed at acquiring important industrial technologies and, in the medium term, at replacing existing foreign technology leaders in the automotive, engineering and chemical industries.

Because of the sizes of their markets, the United States and China undoubtedly have the tools to hurt Germany’s export-oriented economy. The new German government under Angela Merkel will have to buffer the effects of the US-Chinese squeeze. It should reduce the vulnerability of its export industry by promoting domestic growth and investment in Germany and in Europe. At the same time, Berlin should push for a more ambitious national and European innovation policy as well as a resilient European foreign trade policy.

First, the German dependency on exports to the United States and China must be reduced. The focus should be on strengthening not just German but European growth forces. All euro area countries except France, Finland, Cyprus and Belgium have a current account surplus. The euro area as a whole has a surplus of around 3% of GDP. Germany’s surplus amounts to almost 8% of GDP. These external surpluses are no longer sustainable in a world in which the US president is threatening to launch a trade war and the World Trade Organization can no longer enforce the rules for open markets in key economies.

Germany’s capital investment is lagging behind

Regardless of this acute pressure situation, it is also in Germany’s interest to liberate domestic growth forces. German business investment has been weakening for years. The level of German gross investment in the industrial sector has been below even that of France and Italy since the start of the millennium. A timely and feasible step would be to massively improve the rules for depreciating assets on capital, software, and research investments in the German tax code. This is all the more necessary as US corporate tax reform allows companies to immediately deduct 100% of their expense for equipment and building upgrades.

Beyond reforming the tax code and lowering other regulatory barriers, Germany will have to accelerate the development of public infrastructure. A strengthening of capital intensity will also help raise wage levels in Germany. This set of measures has the capacity to promote domestic growth and reduce dependence on exports. The resulting growth in Germany would also help EU partner countries such as Italy through increasing demand for their products.

Second, German innovation policy must make a real leap forward, especially in the field of the digital economy, so as not to leave the future of technological change entirely to others. American and Chinese IT corporations are in the process of dividing up world markets, setting the technological standards that will be associated with huge licensing revenues in the future. They are also rushing into the meta-technology of the near future: artificial intelligence.

Europe has left 5G technology to China

At present, Germans and Europeans do not have a lot to offer to the digital economy. The Digital Single Market in the EU is not progressing. As early as 2019, Europeans will become painfully aware of the shortcomings in innovation policy in their telecommunications networks when, for example, the Chinese company Huawei begins to install 5G mobile technologies in Europe, the prerequisite for networked industrial production and autonomous driving.

Europe needs a much more ambitious and active digital innovation policy that must include the targeted promotion of European “infant industries,” for example through the development of larger venture capital markets. With regard to critical infrastructures, there should be no taboo on the targeted support of currently weakened European 5G developers such as Nokia or Ericsson. If European companies for semiconductors and mobile networks disappear from the markets, dependencies on US and Chinese technology providers will not only create security risks, but will permanently minimise European innovation capacities.

European governments will therefore need to fundamentally rethink their innovation policies, and in particular their digital policies, in order to counter the rush of American and Chinese companies and innovations. Trusting in the power of company- and market-driven “innovation from below” will not be enough. This is because digital transformation requires new, state-financed infrastructures, targeted support measures and educational offers, as well as continuously adapted market rules that are not provided by companies, but by governments and parliaments. Public innovation policy must simply become more ambitious and think in terms of bigger goals and dimensions. Substantially strengthening research and development spending in the European and German budgets is only a first necessary step in this direction.

Foreign investment should be screened for market distortion

Third, Germany should campaign for a robust foreign trade policy in Europe. On the one hand, this is about adequately examining security interests in foreign investments and acquisitions, and flanking them with a pan-European coordination office. On the other hand, it is about protecting strategic technologies from takeovers through market manipulation practices. For this task, the competencies of the EU Directorate-General for Competition should be strengthened. It is completely unacceptable that foreign top dogs operating with special state funding from closed domestic markets, based on practices that massively distort competition, should be able to drive European companies out of the European market.

Germany must stand up for open markets and fair trade practices more decisively than before through the EU’s Directorate-General for Trade, without weakening the European institutions through national unilateral action. European Trade Commissioner Malmström is doing a very good job not only in her negotiations with the United States and China, but also in establishing new strategic trade relations with, for example, the Latin American Mercosur or the free trade agreement with Japan. Europe should build further partnerships and, at the same time, sharpen its trade policy instruments in order to defend itself in case of conflict and to represent European interests more effectively than before.

Germany can no longer avoid an economic policy correction in face of the dual pressure from the United States and China. The new German government has to act now if it wants to defend domestic industries from unfair competition while releasing Europe’s own growth forces.


Republishing and referencing

Bruegel considers itself a public good and takes no institutional standpoint.

Due to copyright agreements we ask that you kindly email request to republish opinions that have appeared in print to communication@bruegel.org.

View comments
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Is this time different? Reflections on recent emerging-market turbulence

Since the beginning of 2018, currencies of two large emerging-market economies – Argentina and Turkey – suffered from substantial depreciation. Other currencies also recorded losses. Which factors are determining macroeconomic and financial stability in emerging-market economies? And what can be done to prevent a crisis and avoid its economic, social and political costs?

By: Marek Dabrowski Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: November 14, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

US mid-term elections and the global economy

Democrats won control of the House and Republicans held onto the Senate in the most consequential US mid-term elections in decades. Bowen Call reviews economists’ and scholars’ analyses of the impact this might have on the world economy.

By: Bowen Call Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: November 12, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Opinion

Plädoyer gegen eine Politik der Scheinlösungen

Der Daueraufschwung verdeckt, dass Deutschland für die nächste Krise schlecht gerüstet ist. Und das Zeitfenster für Reformen schließt sich.

By: Jochen Andritzky Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: October 31, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Opinion

The global economy’s three games

In this column, Jean Pisani-Ferry portrays the current international economic and geopolitical order as increasingly reminiscent of chess. Three key players: the US, China and a loose coalition of the other G7 members play three games simultaneously, and no one knows which game will take precedence.

By: Jean Pisani-Ferry Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: October 29, 2018
Read article Download PDF More on this topic More by this author

Policy Contribution

Should we give up on global governance?

The pervasive gridlock affecting the traditional global governance approach calls into question the idea of broadening its scope beyond its core remit, and it calls for alternatives, either as substitutes for obsolete arrangements or to address emerging collective action problems in new, inadequately covered fields.

By: Jean Pisani-Ferry Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: October 23, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

The United States-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement (USMCA)

While final ratification of the USMCA (also known as Nafta 2.0) is pending, we review economists’ assessment of the agreement.

By: Silvia Merler Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: October 22, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Opinion

How could Europe benefit from the US-China trade war?

Under pressure from the US, Beijing is set to be more open to making new allies.

By: Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: October 18, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Podcast

Podcast

Backstage: The new balance of Asia-EU-US trade relations

Amid the Asia-Europe Economic Forum on the fringes of the 12th ASEM Summit, Bruegel senior fellow hosts a conversation on developing global trade relations, with guests Moonsung Kang, professor as Korea University, and Michael G. Plummer, director at SAIS Europe – Johns Hopkins University, for an episode of the Bruegel Backstage series on ‘The Sound of Economics’.

By: The Sound of Economics Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: October 17, 2018
Read about event

Past Event

Past Event

Policy responses for an EU-MENA shared future

In the third edition of the "Platform for Advanced & Emerging Economies Policy Dialogue" we will discuss trade flows and trade policy between Europe and MENA, integration of developing economies into global value chains, and regional energy relations.

Speakers: Karim El Aynaoui, Marek Dabrowski, Uri Dadush, Ignacio Garcia Bercero, Ettore Greco, Giuseppe Grimaldi, Badr Ikken, Joanna Konings, Said Moufti, Pier Carlo Padoan, Lia Quartapelle, Visar Sala, Nicolò Russo Perez, Nicolò Sartori, Simone Tagliapietra and Guntram B. Wolff Location: LUISS Business School Viale Pola, 12, 00198 Roma RM, Italy Date: October 11, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Opinion

Global markets’ tepid reaction to China’s new opening

China’s accession to the World Trade Organisation in 2001 was greeted with great fanfare. But near silence has greeted the recent removal by the China Banking and Insurance Regulatory Commission of caps on foreign ownership of Chinese financial institutions. For Beijing, the apparent lack of interest might be an issue of too little, too late.

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: October 11, 2018
Read article Download PDF More on this topic

External Publication

The EU response to US trade tariffs

The authors contributed to the new issue of 'Intereconomics - Review of European Economic Policy' with a paper on the EU's strategy for managing the trade war. The authors argue that to minimise the economic costs of the trade war and protect multilateralism, the EU's best and only response is to retaliate.

By: Maria Demertzis and Gustav Fredriksson Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: October 11, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Opinion

Ten years after the crisis: The West’s failure pushing China towards state capitalism

When considering China’s renewed state capitalism, we should be mindful of the damage done by the 2008 financial crisis to the world's perception of Western capitalism.

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: October 10, 2018
Load more posts