Blog Post

What 2019 could bring: A look inside the crystal ball

Economic performance prospects in Europe, the US and Asia in 2019. We start off by reviewing commentaries and predictions about the euro zone, which many commentators expect to perform below potential as uncertainties continue to dampen a still robust recovery.

By: Date: January 14, 2019 Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance

In its Economic Bulletin, the European Central Bank (ECB) expects the global economy to decelerate in 2019 as a result of cyclical forces and trade tensions. For the euro area it projects real GDP growth of 1.7%, inflation of 1.8% and somewhat increased government budget deficits.

This assessment is at the optimistic end of a range of economic forecasts that the Financial Times (FT) collected from euro-zone observers. Only half of the 24 respondents expect the euro zone to grow by more than 1.5% in 2019. The more pessimistic outlook is mostly due to uncertainties around Brexit, the threat of further US protectionist measures and reduced demand from China.

Most respondents acknowledge that anti-EU populists are likely to increase their seats in the European parliamentary elections in May, but few expect this to have a large effect on the performance of the euro-area economy in 2019, as the majority will remain with traditional parties. Finally, as most respondents have lower inflation expectations than the ECB, the earliest interest rate rise in the euro area is expected in late 2019 or in 2020. Because of disappointing industrial output in Germany, Reuters reports that money markets do not expect the first rate hike before mid-2020.

Many commenters stress that the euro-area economy is still going strong, and that they expect growth to pick up in the second half of the year if uncertainties concerning trade, European elections and Brexit have waned. However, there remain plenty of downside risks to this scenario.

Start with the US-China trade war: in case of further escalation, global trade and exports from Europe are expected to slow down. But even in the case of a truce, Alicia Garcia-Herrero argues that “trade diversion away from Europe and in favour of the US” should be expected because part of a truce will inevitably be an increase in Chinese imports from the United States. Add to this the possibility of US tariffs on EU automobile exports, on which a US commerce department report will be published in February 2019.

Financial risks in the euro area remain substantial, writes Shamik Dhar in the South China Morning Post. Because European banks still own European sovereign debt, region-wide contagion in the financial sector remains a problem. Similarly, Patrick Jenkins criticises the zero risk-weight on EU sovereign bonds, which incentivises European banks to hold a large share of domestic bonds. This evidently increases the danger of another doom-loop crisis in the euro area. Finally, Martin Wolf argues that ever-increasing global debt levels and still-negative interest rates leave little room to manage even a modest slowdown. Furthermore, with a weakened global political order and economic conditions diverging across the world economy, coordinated responses to deal with a global slowdown will become unlikely.

As the world economy is inevitably intertwined with the US business cycle, Henry Curr, economics editor at the Economist, takes a closer look at the downside risks in the US economy. He notes that the US Federal Reserve’s interest rate hikes, although well managed so far, remain a source of risk to the US economy because of the inherent uncertainties involved in monetary policymaking. While all classes of assets have seen immense price increases, the lowest-rated investment-grade corporate bonds, which make up 45% of all investment-grade corporate bonds, could turn out to be a particular risk as only one downgrade would take them into ‘junk’ status.

Also, further interest rate hikes could bring down borrowers with floating-rate debt as well as trouble emerging markets that have to service dollar-denominated debt. Substantial turmoil in emerging markets would in turn strengthen the dollar, via investor flight to safe assets. Possibly induced by very robust expectations of several interest rate hikes in 2019, the US Federal Reserve is assumed to have backtracked somewhat and indicated in the new year that monetary tightening is going to be rather limited.

Jeffrey Frankel predicts that US growth will slow down in 2019, as the stimulating effects of the tax cuts wear off and the dysfunctionalities of the US government – such as the trade war and the government shutdown – may start to inflict serious damage on the economy. He notes that interest rates in the US are still very low when compared to the inflation rate or the ideal interest rate suggested by the Taylor Rule and, therefore, further interest rate hikes by the US Fed are expected. While Mr Frankel acknowledges that raising interest rates can pose difficulties for emerging markets, he highlights that increasing US interest rates implies a strongly growing US economy, which is “not bad news for the world economy overall”.

Leo Abruzzese sees economic trouble brewing in 2019. As the US economy continues growing and inflation seems to pick up, the US Fed will continue to raise interest rates. But higher interest rates in the US will increase the costs for developing countries to service their often dollar-denominated debt and make it costlier to raise further debt. With global debt being 20% higher than 2007, rising interest rates will be troublesome news not only for developing economies, but also for companies in advanced economies who increased their debt substantially over the last decade while interest rates were low. On the upside, Mr Abruzzese notes that bank-capitalisation and corporate and government risk management has improved since 2007. However, as the US-China trade war will depress business investments and Chinese consumption is slowing down, the signs of stress are evident and signal trouble ahead.

The sentiment that the Chinese economy is slowing down in 2019 is widely shared by the Chinese government as well as international observers (e.g. the World Bank). The China-US trade war is deemed one of the most significant risks for the Chinese economy. In accordance with other commentators, Simon Rabinovitch, the Economist’s Asia economics editor, does not think that the US-China trade war is coming to a quick end. The kind of demands US negotiators are making from China in order to lift tariffs are the very reverse of what the Chinese government deems essential to moving up the value chain. Instead, China is likely to sit it out and ease financial constraints in the economy to dampen the effect of reduced exports.

But a fully fledged trade war could reduce Chinese GDP growth substantially, writes Takahide Kiuchi for the Nikkei Asian Review. Assuming that the 90-day trade war ceasefire between the US and China will not end the escalation of tariffs between the two economies, the Chinese GDP is likely to take a hit by up to 1.4%. Such a slowdown may trigger defaults in Chinese investment products that, in turn, could raise the danger of bank failures, reduce banks’ lending and trigger further financial market turmoil. All of this might shave another half-percent off Chinese growth, which would then stand at 4.5% instead of the 6.4% in the case of trade war settlement.

Apart from trade tensions, troubling signs have also emerged around the Chinese economy, most recently in form of a letter written by Apple’s CEO warning that profits might be lower than expected, partly because of the unforeseen “magnitude of the economic deceleration, particularly in Greater China”. A reduction in Chinese manufacturing activities, possibly triggered by uncertainties around trade, seems of particular concern. However, Uday Khanapurkar writes in the Diplomat that the Chinese economy should not only be judged by the manufacturing index. China has a remarkable track record in spawning large digital-service companies such as Alibaba and Tencent, and he argues that observers need to take the increasing importance of the Chinese service sector into account before they “sound the death knell on the Chinese economy”.

In response to the signs of deceleration, the Chinese government announced tax cuts, additional fiscal stimulus and easing of constraints in the financial sector. While these measures are expected to boost domestic consumption in 2019, they also increases worries about unsustainable debt among Chinese corporations. Hence, Panos Mourdoukoutas writes in Forbes how the Chinese debt situation, which could be as high as 300% according to some estimates, reminds him of the Greek debt crisis. As the Chinese government is often both lender and borrower, credit risks are concentrated and pose the most important risk for the Chinese and world economy in 2019.

Nevertheless, Simon Rabinovitch thinks that the slowdown could also motivate some deeper reforms such as a balancing of tax revenues between provinces, the reduction of import tariffs, and further opening up of its financial sector to foreign investors. This would not stop a slowdown of Chinese growth towards the 6% mark, but it would improve long-term perspectives.


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

Blog Post

India in 2024: Narendra Modi once more, but to what end?

Even with the recent economic slowdown, India still boasts Asia’s fastest growing economy in 2018. But beneath the veneer of impressive GDP expansion, uneasiness about India’s economic model clearly tempers enthusiasm.

By: Alicia García-Herrero and Trinh Nguyen Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: May 17, 2019
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

What is in store for the EU’s trade relationship with the US ?

If faced with a resurgent President Trump after the next US election, the EU will have some difficult decisions to make as it is compelled to enter a one-sided negotiation. Failure to strike a deal will imperil the world’s largest trade relationship and contribute to the progressive unravelling of the rules enshrined in the World Trade Organization – although the changes required of Europe by Trump’s demands may ultimately turn out to be in the interest of Europeans.

By: Uri Dadush Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: May 16, 2019
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Podcast

Podcast

Director's Cut: Evolution of US-China relations amid trade-tariff conflict

Bruegel director Guntram Wolff and Bruegel fellow Uri Dadush welcome William Alan Reinsch, senior adviser and Scholl chair in international business at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, for a discussion of how China-US relations are developing in the context of unfolding trade war.

By: The Sound of Economics Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: May 14, 2019
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Implications of the escalating China-US trade dispute

If allowed to escalate, the trade dispute between China and the United States will significantly increase the likelihood of a global protectionist surge and a collapse in the rules-based international trading system. Here the author assesses the specific impacts on the Chinese and US economies, as well as the strategic problems this dispute poses for Europe.

By: Uri Dadush Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: May 14, 2019
Read article More on this topic

Opinion

Will China’s trade war with the US end like that of Japan in the 1980s?

The outcome of the US-China trade war is anticipated to be quite different from the experience of Japan in the 1980s and 1990s, due to China’s relatively lower dependence on the US and having learned from the Japanese experience.

By: Alicia García-Herrero and Kohei Iwahara Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: May 13, 2019
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Opinion

Trade war: Is the U.S. panicking due to China's big hedge?

U.S.-China trade war has suddenly taken centre stage following Donald Trump’s unexpected announcement to ramp up tariffs if no deal is reached. U.S. is in desperate need for a comprehensive victory, and China is ready to make concessions, but not to the extent of transforming its state-led economic model into a market-based economy.

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: May 9, 2019
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

Blog Post

All eyes on the Fed

Last week the US Federal Reserve left the federal funds rate unchanged and lowered the interest rate on excess reserves. We review economists’ recent views on the monetary policy conduct and priorities of the United States’ central bank system.

By: Inês Goncalves Raposo Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: May 6, 2019
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Podcast

Podcast

Backstage: The EU financial services landscape after Brexit

Bruegel fellows Rebecca Christie and Nicolas Véron discuss how the map of the EU's financial services industry has begun to change, and how it might eventually settle.

By: The Sound of Economics Topic: Finance & Financial Regulation Date: April 30, 2019
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Developing resilient bail-in capital

Europe’s largest banks have made progress in issuing bail-inable securities that shelter taxpayers from bank failures. But the now-finalised revision of the bank resolution directive and a new policy of the SRB will make requirements to issue such securities more onerous for other banks. In order to strengthen banking-system resilience, EU capital-market regulation should facilitate exposures of long-term institutional investors.

By: Alexander Lehmann Topic: Finance & Financial Regulation Date: April 29, 2019
Read about event More on this topic

Past Event

Past Event

The emerging new geography of financial centers in Europe

What shape is the new financial continent of Europe?

Speakers: Rebecca Christie, Valerie Herzberg, Nicolas Véron and William Wright Topic: Finance & Financial Regulation Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: April 29, 2019
Read article More on this topic

Opinion

Life after the multilateral trading system

Considering a world absent a multilateral trading system is not to promote such an outcome, but to encourage all to prepare for the worst and instil greater clarity in the mind of policymakers as to what happens if compromise fails.

By: Uri Dadush and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: April 25, 2019
Load more posts