Blog Post

The cost of remittances

Remittances flows are very important for developing countries. In 2009 the G8 pledged to reduce the cost of remittances to 5%, a commitment that was endorsed by the G20 in 2011 and 2014, and included in the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals in 2015. What is the cost today, and what are economists’ suggestions to reduce it?

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

Stephen Cecchetti and Kim Schoenholtz document the stubbornly high cost of remittances, and look at avenues for cost reduction. Today, remittance flows are triple what they were in 2000 and five times what they were in 1990. Furthermore, the economic importance of inward remittances has increased for low- and middle-income countries, rising from an average of 1.2% of GDP in 1990 to 1.6% of GDP today. However, costs have trended lower only gradually, and with considerable differences across types of transfer agents and across sender countries (see figure below).

While the direct cost is borne by the migrant senders and their family recipients, the burden also falls on poor countries as a whole because remittances enhance growth in poor countries by providing alternative means for financing investment where transactions costs are high. Cecchetti and Schoenholtz believe that there are two major mechanisms for reducing costs: consumer education (about the cost of alternatives available) and competition. Expanding mobile technology is also helping to displace banks, and squeeze remittance costs.

The importance of competition also stems from an early 2009 paper by Thorsten Beck and Maria Soledad Martinez Peria, who analysed published data on remittance fees across 119 corridors from 13 sending to 60 receiving countries – linking them to an array of corridor-specific variables, sending country characteristics, and receiving country characteristics.

Across all corridors and all providers, remittance costs averaged 10.2% – and the average cost among banks was higher than the average for money-transfer operators. Relating remittance fees on the corridor level to an array of corridor-specific variables, sending country characteristics, and receiving country characteristics, they found that the number of migrants was statistically and economically significantly associated with lower average fees across corridors.

This seemed to suggest an important volume effect through scale economies and/or higher competition in a larger market. Corridors with higher income per capita in both the sending and receiving country exhibited – on average – higher costs, which could reflect higher costs of non-tradable goods, such as services, in general. There was strong evidence that competition does matter, as corridors with a larger number of providers exhibited lower fees and bank competition in the receiving country seemed to be negatively associated with the cost of sending remittances. Finally, they did not find evidence that remittance-senders’ literacy matters.

A 2014 paper by Bettin, Presbitero and Spatafora highlights the importance of financial development. They use a new dataset from the Bank of Italy, which provides bilateral information on remittance flows disaggregated across 103 Italian source provinces and 107 recipient countries.

One key result is that remittances are countercyclical with respect to income and output in recipient countries – in particular, increasing in response to exogenous shocks to which developing countries are particularly vulnerable – and procyclical with respect to the macroeconomic situation in the source Italian province. On balance, if the source and the recipient economy are exposed to negative shocks of the same magnitude (for instance, as a result of the global crisis), the anti-cyclical effect stemming from the output contraction in the recipient country prevails.

A second results show a negative correlation between remittances and financial development in the recipient country and a positive correlation with the degree of development of the banking system in the source economy. Lower transaction costs and better access to financial services by immigrants should therefore represent a key element of any policy to encourage remittances.

Doug King at the Federal Reserve Board of Atlanta looks at cost and accessibility of remittances originating from the United States with a focus on the Mexico corridor. The underlying question for the paper is whether the passage in 2010 of the Dodd-Frank Act did alter the landscape of remittances, through section 1073, which created new protections for US consumers sending money abroad.

The paper thus examines how the implementation of the 1073 rules changed the environment for low-value remittance transfers ($200 or less) in the United States, and looks at how these changes have affected the cost of remittance transfers that originate from the United States and travel the United States-Mexico remittance corridor, which accounts for nearly 20% of all US remittances. King concludes that there is no evidence that the issuance in 2012 of section 1073 caused consumer prices of low-value remittance transfers to rise. In fact, the emergence of new service providers and business models, the growth of e-commerce and mobile commerce channels, and increased pricing transparency seem to have actually given consumers access to lower-priced remittance options.

Martin Namaska focuses on Africa, the most expensive continent to send remittances to. He cites research suggesting that digitising the remittance value chain from the sender to the receiver and removing dependency on agents will help reduce the transaction costs of sending money to Africa. Mobile phone technology, mobile money, digital currencies and cryptocurrencies, distributed ledger technology, electronic identification, verification and cloud technology have the capacity to technically make cross-border payments negligible in cost, instant and auditable.

Taking the UK and Africa as an example, Namaska argues that £100 million could be saved each year in transaction costs if people switched to sending money digitally to Africa. If the cost of sending money to Africa was to meet the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) target of 3% by 2030, then over £300 million a year would be saved. The development of regional automated clearing houses in Africa also presents a channel for improving the efficiency and reducing the cost of low-value cross-border transfers into Africa. But improved trust and comfort with digital money will be required before new technology can reach its full potential and reduce costs.

This is why no single technology can be applied to fix the remittance challenge in Africa: it would be difficult to imagine progress without corresponding financial sector reform, corporate governance and anticorruption efforts. African governments, development agencies and service providers must collaborate to create complete systems that reduce both the risks and costs associated with money transfers.


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 article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Argentina’s troubles

Argentina has abruptly called on the International Monetary Fund for financial help, amid currency pressures. We review recent economists’ position on this.

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

Blog Post

200 Years of Karl Marx

May 5th 2018 marked the 200th anniversary of the birth of Karl Marx. We review some economists’ takes on the controversial philosopher’s legacy.

By: Silvia Merler Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: May 14, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Did Economics Fail?

The debate about rethinking economics keeps rambling. We summarise newest contributions to this important discussion.

By: Silvia Merler Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: May 7, 2018
Read about event More on this topic

Past Event

Past Event

European development policy in a global context

What is the role of Europe in development finance and how effective is the current institutional structure? How can we leverage the private sector to support development objectives?

Speakers: Cecilia Akerman, Sir Suma Chakrabarti, Thierry Déau, Marjeta Jager and Jean Pisani-Ferry Topic: Global Economics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: April 24, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Trade Wars: what are they good for?

Following the US announcements in early March of their intent to impose steel and aluminum tariffs, and the subsequent threats from China to retaliate with their own tariffs, the global trade picture remains uncertain. The IMF and the World Bank Spring Meetings set off amid US-Japan bilateral negotiations and Trump’s hot-and-cold approach to the TPP. This week we review blogs’ views on tensions over international trade and how they can impact world economic growth.

By: Inês Goncalves Raposo Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: April 23, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

The debate on euro-area reform

A paper jointly written by 14 French and German economists set off a debate about the reform of euro-area macroeconomic governance. We review economists’ opinions about it.

By: Silvia Merler Topic: Finance & Financial Regulation Date: April 16, 2018
Read article More on this topic

Blog Post

Free trade in Africa: An important goal but not easy to achieve

The signing of the African Continental Free Trade Agreement and the Kigali Declaration may signal a new push towards economic integration on the African continent. However, it remains to be seen how many more countries sign up, how successfully 'phase two' is implemented later this year, and whether the agreement can be built upon to more comprehensively promote trade in services and a reduction of non-tariff barriers.

By: Marek Dabrowski and Yana Myachenkova Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: April 13, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Latvia’s money laundering scandal

Latvia’s third largest bank ABLV sought emergency liquidity from the ECB and eventually voted to start a process of voluntary liquidation, after being accused by US authorities of large-scale money laundering and having failed to produce a survival plan. What does it mean for the ECB?

By: Silvia Merler Topic: Finance & Financial Regulation Date: April 9, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Milton Friedman's " The role of monetary policy" - 50 years later

In March 1968, Milton Friedman’s “The Role of Monetary Policy” - after his famous presidential address to the American Economic Association - was published in the American Economic Review. 50 years later, economists reflect on this famous work.

By: Silvia Merler Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: April 3, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

The Brexit Transition Deal

Michel Barnier, the European Union’s Brexit negotiator, and David Davis, Britain’s Brexit secretary, announced a transition deal on March 19. We review recently published opinions about the deal and its implications.

By: Silvia Merler Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: March 26, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Central banks in the age of populism

Two years of elections have shown that we live in an age of increasing political and economic populism. What are the consequences of that for central banks? We explore opinions about it, from both 2017 and more recently.

By: Silvia Merler Topic: Finance & Financial Regulation Date: March 19, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Are we steel friends?

The U.S. administration is considering to impose tariffs on steel (25%) and aluminium (10%), based on a national security argument. We review economists’ views about this major shift in U.S.’ trade policy.

By: Silvia Merler Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: March 12, 2018
Load more posts