adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Economy

The $250 Trillion Burden Weighing On The Global Economy In 2020 – Forbes

Published

 on


Concerns about global debt emanating from the office of World Bank President David Malpass are drenched in pot-calling-the-kettle-black irony.

Here’s a person who made his reputation at Bear Stearns of all places—a shop whose recklessness helped topple Wall Street in 2008. Malpass later went on to work for a Donald Trump White House seemingly determined to morph America into Argentina.

So, it’s a bit rich that now that he’s running the World Bank, Malpass, 63, senses the circles in which he once ran are creating troubles that could make 2008 look quaint. That’s particularly true here in Asia, a region that isn’t just on its own debt-issuance tear but most on the hook for Trump’s epic borrowing binge.

Better late than never, I guess. But Malpass isn’t wrong to highlight the $55 trillion of debt emerging markets from Asia to Latin America have churned out since the crisis that blew up Bear Stearns—and later Lehman Brothers. Worse, those are only the IOUs that have been booked officially as of the end of 2018. The tally excludes the last 12 months and whatever off-balance-sheet borrowing vehicles governments have been cooking up.

It’s not just the magnitude of debt, but the haste with which it’s being amassed. In a new study, the World Bank looks at the four most notable borrowing-binge episodes involving 100 countries since 1970. They include Latin America in the 1980s, Asia in the 1990s and the subprime fiasco of the 2000s. Those three, of course, ended in tears and financial ruin.

This fourth episode, though, may have the others beat. Since 2010, the collective debt-to-gross-domestic-product ratios of developing nations skyrocketed from 54% to at least 168%. “The size, speed and breadth of the latest debt wave should concern us all,” Malpass warns.

Now that he’s apparently among the converted, Malpass says the debt explosion of the last decade “underscores why debt management and transparency need to be top priorities for policymakers—so they can increase growth and investment and ensure that the debt they take on contributes to better development outcomes for the people.”

Fair enough as China’s slows toward the 5% growth range and governments from Malaysia to India grapple with excessive debt loads. But Malpass’s real quarrel may be with this former boss a few blocks away in the White House.

Trump, along with leaders in Europe, Japan and Britain, is doing more than his fair share of borrowing. In the first half of 2019, global debt blew past a record $250 trillion—and growing, according to the Institute for International Finance. While this debt tsunami began prior to Trump’s presidency, his trade war supercharged things.

A world economy top-heavy with debt is the last thing you want as its two biggest powers jab each other with tariffs and other barriers. The same goes for one of those powers (the U.S.) being addicted to the other’s (China) savings. As Trump pushes Washington’s debt past the $23 trillion mark and annual deficits well above $1 trillion, his team assumes Beijing will continue to lend it money.

China and Japan, after all, are America’s top bankers, each holding more than $1 trillion of Treasury securities. All it would take to shake world markets is for President Xi Jinping’s government to curb dollar purchases. This makes for a unique risk dynamic between Asia’s smaller economies and the globe’s biggest. 

In October, the International Monetary Fund issued a sobering warning: about $19 trillion—or nearly 40%—of corporate debt in major economies could default amid a global downturn. That’s more than China’s annual $14 trillion of output and rivals America’s $21 trillion. Such a reckoning would make 2008 look tame by comparison.

The other worry is a dearth of shock-absorbers. Borrowing since then leaves limited fiscal space to stabilize growth. And central banks from Washington to Frankfurt to Tokyo are at, or close to, zero. That means the quantitative-easing rescue that saved the day a decade ago isn’t available in 2020.

None of this means 2020 will see a history-making debt crash. But the interplay between Trump and Xi raises the odds.

There’s zero chance, for example, that Trump is done with his tariff arms race. As the ink dries from any “phase one deal” he signs with President Xi, Trump will be back for more clashes, and not just with China. Japan, too, is in harm’s way, if Trump’s abusive relationship with South Korea is any guide.

First Trump demanded that Seoul re-open a trade deal in effect since 2012. President Moon Jae-in did just that, agreeing to allow Detroit to send more automobiles to Asia’s No. 4 economy. Now Trump is shaking Moon’s administration down for more protection money—demanding a 400% increase in what Korea pays for U.S. troops stationed on the peninsula.

Shinzo Abe’s Japan will be next. With impeachment risks increasing and the November election approaching, Trump has few, if any, legislative levers to excite his base. He’s also miffed that markets ignored the bilateral deal struck with Prime Minister Abe. Hence Trump’s desire for a “phase two” process with Tokyo, one that includes the risk of 25% taxes on cars and auto parts. Japan, meantime, hosts twice as many U.S. troops are Korea.

Yet China’s debt buildup is its own clear and present danger. It’s $30 trillion pile of credit and general opacity mean that when China does hit a wall—as all industrializing nations do—it will appear to come out of nowhere. Just as Malpass and his Wall Street ilk found a decade ago. 

The thing about unsustainable debt episodes is that at some point the reckoning comes, invariably and suddenly. We can debate whether it will arrive in 2020. Less in dispute is that $250 trillion of debt leaves economies huge and small on a knife’s edge at the worst possible moment.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Economy

Trump’s victory sparks concerns over ripple effect on Canadian economy

Published

 on

 

As Canadians wake up to news that Donald Trump will return to the White House, the president-elect’s protectionist stance is casting a spotlight on what effect his second term will have on Canada-U.S. economic ties.

Some Canadian business leaders have expressed worry over Trump’s promise to introduce a universal 10 per cent tariff on all American imports.

A Canadian Chamber of Commerce report released last month suggested those tariffs would shrink the Canadian economy, resulting in around $30 billion per year in economic costs.

More than 77 per cent of Canadian exports go to the U.S.

Canada’s manufacturing sector faces the biggest risk should Trump push forward on imposing broad tariffs, said Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters president and CEO Dennis Darby. He said the sector is the “most trade-exposed” within Canada.

“It’s in the U.S.’s best interest, it’s in our best interest, but most importantly for consumers across North America, that we’re able to trade goods, materials, ingredients, as we have under the trade agreements,” Darby said in an interview.

“It’s a more complex or complicated outcome than it would have been with the Democrats, but we’ve had to deal with this before and we’re going to do our best to deal with it again.”

American economists have also warned Trump’s plan could cause inflation and possibly a recession, which could have ripple effects in Canada.

It’s consumers who will ultimately feel the burden of any inflationary effect caused by broad tariffs, said Darby.

“A tariff tends to raise costs, and it ultimately raises prices, so that’s something that we have to be prepared for,” he said.

“It could tilt production mandates. A tariff makes goods more expensive, but on the same token, it also will make inputs for the U.S. more expensive.”

A report last month by TD economist Marc Ercolao said research shows a full-scale implementation of Trump’s tariff plan could lead to a near-five per cent reduction in Canadian export volumes to the U.S. by early-2027, relative to current baseline forecasts.

Retaliation by Canada would also increase costs for domestic producers, and push import volumes lower in the process.

“Slowing import activity mitigates some of the negative net trade impact on total GDP enough to avoid a technical recession, but still produces a period of extended stagnation through 2025 and 2026,” Ercolao said.

Since the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement came into effect in 2020, trade between Canada and the U.S. has surged by 46 per cent, according to the Toronto Region Board of Trade.

With that deal is up for review in 2026, Canadian Chamber of Commerce president and CEO Candace Laing said the Canadian government “must collaborate effectively with the Trump administration to preserve and strengthen our bilateral economic partnership.”

“With an impressive $3.6 billion in daily trade, Canada and the United States are each other’s closest international partners. The secure and efficient flow of goods and people across our border … remains essential for the economies of both countries,” she said in a statement.

“By resisting tariffs and trade barriers that will only raise prices and hurt consumers in both countries, Canada and the United States can strengthen resilient cross-border supply chains that enhance our shared economic security.”

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 6, 2024.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Economy

September merchandise trade deficit narrows to $1.3 billion: Statistics Canada

Published

 on

OTTAWA – Statistics Canada says the country’s merchandise trade deficit narrowed to $1.3 billion in September as imports fell more than exports.

The result compared with a revised deficit of $1.5 billion for August. The initial estimate for August released last month had shown a deficit of $1.1 billion.

Statistics Canada says the results for September came as total exports edged down 0.1 per cent to $63.9 billion.

Exports of metal and non-metallic mineral products fell 5.4 per cent as exports of unwrought gold, silver, and platinum group metals, and their alloys, decreased 15.4 per cent. Exports of energy products dropped 2.6 per cent as lower prices weighed on crude oil exports.

Meanwhile, imports for September fell 0.4 per cent to $65.1 billion as imports of metal and non-metallic mineral products dropped 12.7 per cent.

In volume terms, total exports rose 1.4 per cent in September while total imports were essentially unchanged in September.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 5, 2024.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Economy

How will the U.S. election impact the Canadian economy? – BNN Bloomberg

Published

 on


[unable to retrieve full-text content]

How will the U.S. election impact the Canadian economy?  BNN Bloomberg

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending