adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Economy

Russia after a year of sanctions – Al Jazeera English

Published

 on


After Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Western countries imposed numerous sanctions against Russian banks and companies, which significantly affected the Russian economy. Yet the economic collapse some expected never came.

This allowed President Vladimir Putin to declare confidently at the beginning of this year: “2022 was a challenging year for us, and we managed to get through the risks that emerged … quite successfully.”

Indeed, the Western sanctions did not undermine Russia’s economic potential to an extent that the Kremlin would lose the ability to finance its war in Ukraine. The events of 2022 have confirmed that the Russian economy is inefficient but resilient and that the Kremlin is able to mitigate any destabilising effect the economic downturn may have on the political front.

300x250x1

The impact of sanctions

The sustainability of the Russian economy is determined by its place in the global division of labour: it stands at the very beginning of technological chains as a supplier of natural resources.

Since the global economy cannot grow without increasing its consumption of natural resources, the demand for Russian raw materials is maintained. This, to a large extent, has protected the Russian economy from the impact of sanctions.

In 2021, Russia provided 17.5 percent of oil sold on the world market, 47 percent of palladium, 16.7 percent of nickel, 13 percent of aluminium (not including China), and almost a quarter of potash fertilisers.

Hypothetically, the world economy could give up Russian raw materials, but only at the cost of price hikes and potentially years of recession, which is not in the interests of Western politicians.

The United States’ attempt to close the access of Russian aluminium to the world market in 2018 led to an instant jump in the price of this metal by 20 percent, which forced the White House to abandon the announced plans.

That is why, in 2022, the West imposed some of the harshest sanctions on Russian export sectors, such as steel, coal and processed wood, where the global economy has spare capacity. The combined share of these raw materials in Russian exports in 2021 was 11.7 percent, so restrictions on sales to Europe did not have a significant impact on Russia’s economy at large.

However, they did affect significantly the economies of certain regions where these sectors are dominant. For example, in November-December 2022, coal mines in Kemerovo, Russia’s core coal production region, were able to sell just 50-60 percent of extracted coal. In Karelia and Arkhangelsk, where there are many woodworking enterprises, industrial production contracted by 15.5 percent and by 19.8 percent respectively. In Lipetsk, it collapsed by 15.4 percent due to a drop in production at the largest Russian steelmaker, Novolipetsk Steel.

Western sanctions related to the oil industry targeted revenues rather than production. As a result, Russian oil production increased by 2 percent in 2022. On February 5, an EU ban on the import of refined petroleum products from Russia came into effect, but there is no evidence yet that it has impacted the Russian economy. Since the beginning of 2023, production of gasoline and diesel fuel climbed by 7 percent compared with the previous year which could in part be the result of increased demand from the Russian army.

The decline in exports of gas to Europe – which is not so much sanctions-related but a consequence of Putin’s “freeze and split” strategy for Europe – has had a more significant impact, with production falling by 18-20 percent. If the situation does not change, gas production may shrink by an additional 7-8 percent in 2023.

The Russian economy in recession

The impact of the sanctions on the Russian economy was significant but it was not as severe as some expected. It contracted by 2.1 percent in 2022 – much less than the predictions of 5-6 percent made in the spring.

The fall in GDP was cushioned by the high oil and gas prices which brought in windfall profits. Revenues from hydrocarbon production and exports increased by 28 percent compared with 2021, and high inflation in the first half of 2022 led to an increase in nominal revenues from taxes.

Financial sanctions, such as the freeze on the accounts and assets of the central bank and commercial banks, and the restriction on payments and access to capital markets, had the most immediate impact on the economy.

In the spring of 2022, it took just a week for inflation in Russia to accelerate to more than two percent per week and for the dollar to appreciate by 60 percent to the rouble. The Russian financial authorities were able to mitigate this initial fallout by imposing restrictions on current and capital transactions and refusing to convert the rouble, thus strengthening the exchange rate and suppressing inflation.

However, the gradual build-up of pressure on the balance of payments associated with restrictions on trade in Russian hydrocarbons led to a fall in the current account balance and a weakening of the rouble by more than 20 percent in the second half of the year.

A more severe blow to the Russian economy came from the “moral sanctions” – the voluntary withdrawal of foreign companies from Russia. The most significant effect was the shutdown of automobile plants, which belonged to international companies. As a result, the production of new cars in Russia fell threefold, and sales – by 59 percent. The manufacturing industry in the Kaluga and Kaliningrad regions, where such plants were concentrated, shrunk by 20 percent.

When considering the drop in industrial production and services, we should take into account the fact that throughout the past year, many foreign companies sold their assets to Russian businesses. This process, especially if we are talking about large production facilities, takes several months and requires the consent of the Russian government.

During this time, current activities may stop, but after the transaction is legally formalised, the companies can resume their work. This means that to a certain extent, the economic decline reflected in shrinking gross domestic product (GDP) for 2022 may be partially compensated in 2023.

The Russian government was also able to mitigate the effect of the sanctions on the general population by increasing spending. Public expenditure went up by 32 percent of the planned budget for 2022 or $113bn.

About half of the additional budget was directed to the military, but much of the rest was spent on new social programmes, including additional indexation of pensions, increased benefits for families with children, deferment of payroll tax payments, etc.

The Russian government was able to cover the extra expenditure from the fiscal reserve accumulated in previous years, the National Wealth Fund (NWF). At the beginning of 2022, the liquid part of it amounted to $113.5bn or 7.3 percent of GDP. The entire budget deficit for 2022, which equalled 3.3 trillion roubles ($50bn), was financed from it. It is likely that in 2023, the fiscal reserve – which now has fallen to 4.6 percent of GDP or $87bn – will be used to cover the budget deficit again.

The pressure on the Russian government budget will inevitably increase in the coming years because the sluggish economy will not be able to generate enough revenues. As a result, the fiscal reserve may disappear completely by 2025-26, but that will not lead to a budgetary crisis. The overall Russian public debt is below 20 percent of GDP which allows the government to borrow from the domestic market.

The long-term outlook

It seems that the past year of sanctions and economic downturn is continuing a trend of stagnation in the Russian economy rather than starting a new one.

In the first eight years of Putin’s presidency (2000-2008), the Russian economy grew at an average rate of 7 percent annually as a result of the economic reforms of the 1990s, high oil prices and extensive foreign borrowing.

By contrast, between 2012 and 2021, the Russian economy grew on average by 1.4 percent. This slow growth had a lot to do with Putin’s authoritarian approach to political and economic decision-making after he returned to the presidency in 2012.

While cracking down on political competition, he also dismantled the progressive system of arbitration courts, which had provided a much higher level of legal protection for businesses. Putin also launched a massive programme to rearm the military at the expense of investment in human capital development.

After the annexation of Crimea in 2014 and the unleashing of the armed conflict in eastern Ukraine, sanctions were imposed against Russia limiting many companies’ access to modern technology. The research and development sector was also undermined, especially by criminal cases launched against Russian scientists, who were accused of treason. These factors severely worsened the business climate in the country and diminished economic growth.

In the short term, the Kremlin will do its best to cushion the Russian population from the effects of the economic crisis.

It is already looking to compensate for falling revenues from slumping oil and gas prices (down 43 percent for October 2022 -January 2023 compared with January-March 2022) by introducing changes to oil tax rates. Putin also declared he wants Russian businesses to contribute voluntary payments to the budget to boost its revenues.

This additional revenue will be used to finance not only the Russian army but also the families of regular and mobilised soldiers. Other social benefits and programmes will also be maintained.

This will ensure that when the time comes for the presidential elections in March 2024, a considerable amount of the population would not mind seeing Putin re-elected with 70-75 percent of the votes.

In the longer term, the Russian economy is still unlikely to experience a collapse. That is because even the most onerous sanctions have a limited effect. Iran is a good example of that. The country has been under US sanctions since 1987, but its GDP grew by 3.3 percent on average between 1990 and 2020.

Like Iran, Russia will gradually lag behind the global economy and it will not achieve more than 1.5-2 percent annual growth.

In the long term, the sanctions will have severe consequences for the technological development of the Russian economy. For ordinary Russians, this would mean a gradual decline in the quality of goods on store shelves and the inaccessibility of services that were customary until the war.

Economic stagnation, however, is unlikely to lead to social or political unrest. The decline of the standard of living will be very slow and uneven, while the repression of dissidents and the political opposition will grow, making the cost of protest very high.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Economy

Britain's economy went into recession last year, official figures confirm – The Globe and Mail

Published

 on


Open this photo in gallery:

People walk over London Bridge, in London, on Oct. 25, 2023.SUSANNAH IRELAND/Reuters

Britain’s economy entered a shallow recession last year, official figures confirmed on Thursday, leaving Prime Minister Rishi Sunak with a challenge to reassure voters that the economy is safe with him before an election expected later this year.

Gross domestic product shrank by 0.1 per cent in the third quarter and by 0.3 per cent in the fourth, unchanged from preliminary estimates, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) said on Thursday.

The figures will be disappointing for Mr. Sunak, who has been accused by the opposition Labour Party – far ahead in opinion polls – of overseeing “Rishi’s recession.”

300x250x1

“The weak starting point for GDP this year means calendar-year growth in 2024 is likely to be limited to less than 1 per cent,” said Martin Beck, chief economic adviser at EY ITEM Club.

“However, an acceleration in momentum this year remains on the cards.”

Britain’s economy has shown signs of starting 2024 on a stronger footing, with monthly GDP growth of 0.2 per cent in January, and unofficial surveys suggesting growth continued in February and March.

Tax cuts announced by finance minister Jeremy Hunt and expectations of interest-rate cuts are likely to help the economy in 2024.

However, Britain remains one of the slowest countries to recover from the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. At the end of last year, its economy was just 1 per cent bigger than in late 2019, with only Germany faring worse among Group of Seven nations.

The economy grew just 0.1 per cent in all of 2023, its weakest performance since 2009, excluding the peak-pandemic year of 2020.

GDP per person, which has not grown since early 2022, fell by 0.6 per cent in the fourth quarter and 0.7 per cent across 2023.

Sterling was little changed against the dollar and the euro after the data release.

The Bank of England (BOE) has said inflation is moving toward the point where it can start cutting rates. It expects the economy to grow by just 0.25 per cent this year, although official budget forecasters expect a 0.8-per-cent expansion.

BOE policy maker Jonathan Haskel said in an interview reported in Thursday’s Financial Times that rate cuts were “a long way off,” despite dropping his advocacy of a rise at last week’s meeting.

Thursday’s figures from the ONS also showed 0.7 per cent growth in households’ real disposable income, flat in the previous quarter.

Thomas Pugh, an economist at consulting firm RSM, said the increase could prompt consumers to increase their spending and support the economy.

“Consumer confidence has been improving gradually over the last year … as the impact of rising real wages filters through into people’s pockets, even though consumers remain cautious overall,” Mr. Pugh said.

Britain’s current account deficit totalled £21.18-billion ($36.21-billion) in the fourth quarter, slightly narrower than a forecast of £21.4-billion ($36.6-billion) shortfall in a Reuters poll of economists, and equivalent to 3.1 per cent of GDP, up from 2.7 per cent in the third quarter.

The underlying current account deficit, which strips out volatile trade in precious metals, expanded to 3.9 per cent of GDP.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Economy

How will a shrinking population affect the global economy? – Al Jazeera English

Published

 on


Falling fertility rates could bring about a transformational demographic shift over the next 25 years.

It has been described as a demographic catastrophe.

The Lancet medical journal warns that a majority of countries do not have a high enough fertility rate to sustain their population size by the end of the century.

300x250x1

The rate of the decline is uneven, with some developing nations seeing a baby boom.

The shift could have far-reaching social and economic impacts.

Enormous population growth since the industrial revolution has put enormous pressure on the planet’s limited resources.

So, how does the drop in births affect the economy?

And regulators in the United States and the European Union crack down on tech monopolies.

The gender gap in tech narrows.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Economy

John Ivison: Canada's economy desperately needs shock treatment after this Liberal government – National Post

Published

 on


Lack of business investment is the main culprit. Canadians are digging holes with shovels while our competitors are buying excavators

Get the latest from John Ivison straight to your inbox

Article content

It speaks to the seriousness of the situation that the Bank of Canada is not so much taking the gloves off as slipping lead into them.

Senior deputy governor, Carolyn Rogers, came as close to wading into the political arena as any senior deputy governor of the central bank probably should in her speech in Halifax this week.

Article content

But she was right to sound the alarm about a subject — Canada’s waning productivity — on which the federal government’s performance has been lacklustre at best.

Advertisement 2

Article content

Productivity has fallen in six consecutive quarters and is now on a par with where it was seven years ago.

Lack of business investment is the main culprit.

In essence, Canadians are digging holes with shovels while many of our competitors are buying excavators.

“You’ve seen those signs that say, ‘in emergency, break glass.’ Well, it’s time to break the glass,” Rogers said.

She was explicit that government policy is partly to blame, pointing out that businesses need more certainty to invest with confidence. Government incentives and regulatory approaches that change year to year do not inspire confidence, she said.

Recommended from Editorial

  1. Carolyn Rogers, Senior Deputy Governor of the Bank of Canada, holds a press conference at the Bank of Canada in Ottawa on Wednesday, March 6, 2024.

    Canada’s lagging productivity at crisis level, BoC official says

  2. Homes for sale at the Juniper condo development in North Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, on Tuesday, Sept. 13, 2022.

    Expected BoC rate cuts luring buyers back into housing market

The government’s most recent contribution to the competitiveness file — Bill C-56, which made a number of competition-related changes — is a case in point. It was aimed at cracking down on “abusive practices” in the grocery industry that no one, including the bank in its own study, has been able to substantiate. Rather than encouraging investment, it added a political actor — the minister of industry — to the market review process. The Business Council of Canada called the move “capricious,” which was Rogers’s point.

Article content

Advertisement 3

Article content

While blatant price-fixing is rare, the lack of investment is a product of the paucity of competition in many sectors, where Canadian companies protected from foreign competition are sitting on fat profit margins and don’t feel compelled to invest to make their operations more efficient. “Competition can make the whole economy more productive,” said Rogers.

The Conservatives now look set to make this an election issue. Ontario MP Ryan Williams has just released a slick 13-minute video that makes clear his party intends to act in this area.

Using the Monopoly board game as a prop, Williams, the party’s critic for pan-Canadian trade and competition, claims that in every sector, monopolies and oligopolies reign supreme, resulting in lower investment, lower productivity, higher prices, worse service, lower wages and more wealth inequality.

(As an aside, it was a marked improvement on last year’s “Justinflation” rap video.)

Williams said that Canadians pay among the highest cell phone prices in the world and that Rogers, Telus and Bell are the priciest carriers, bar none. The claim has some foundation: in a recent Cable.co.uk global league table that compared the average price of one gigabyte, Canada was ranked 216th of 237 countries at US$5.37 (noticeably, the U.S. was ranked even more expensive at US$6).

Advertisement 4

Article content

Williams noted that two airlines control 80 per cent of the market, even though Air Canada was ranked dead last of all North American airlines for timeliness.

He pointed out that six banks control 87 per cent of Canada’s mortgage market, while five grocery stores — Sobeys, Metro, Loblaw, Walmart and Costco — command a similar dominance of the grocery market.

“Competition is dying in Canada,” Williams said. “The federal government has made things worse by over-regulating airlines, banks and telecoms to actually protect monopolies and keep new players out.”

So far, so good.

The Conservatives will “bring back home a capitalist economy” — a market that does not protect monopolies and creates more competition, in the form of Canadian companies that will provide new supply and better prices.

That sounds great. But at the same time, the Conservative formula for fixing things appears to involve more government intervention, not less.

Williams pointed out the Conservatives opposed RBC buying HSBC’s Canadian operations, WestJet buying Sunwing and Rogers buying Shaw. The party would oppose monopolies from buying up the competition, he said.

Advertisement 5

Article content

The real solution is to let the market do its work to bring prices down. But that is a more complicated process than Williams lets on.

Back in 2007, when Research in Motion was Canada’s most valuable company, the Harper government appointed a panel of experts, led by former Nortel chair Lynton “Red” Wilson, to address concerns that the corporate sector was being “hollowed out” by foreign takeovers, following the sale of giants Alcan, Dofasco and Inco.

The “Compete to Win” report that came out in June 2008 found that the number of foreign-owned firms had remained relatively unchanged, but recommended 65 changes to make Canada more competitive.

The Harper government acted on the least-contentious suggestions: lowering corporate taxes, harmonizing sales taxes with a number of provinces and making immigration more responsive to labour markets.

But it did not end up liberalizing the banking, broadcasting, aviation or telecom markets, as the report suggested (ironically, it was a Liberal transport minister, Marc Garneau, who raised foreign ownership levels of air carriers to 49 per cent from 25 per cent in 2018).

Advertisement 6

Article content

The point is, Canada has a competition problem but solving it requires taking on vested interests. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has indicated he is willing to do that, calling corporate lobbyists “utterly useless” and saying he will focus on Canadian workers, not corporate interests.

“My daily obsession will be about what is good for the working-class people in this country,” he said in Vancouver earlier this month.

Even opening up sectors to foreign competition is no guarantee that investors will come. There are no foreign ownership restrictions in the grocery market (in addition to the five supermarkets listed above, there is Amazon-owned Whole Foods). When the Competition Bureau concluded last year that there was a “modest but meaningful” increase in food prices, it recommended Ottawa encourage a foreign-owned player to enter the Canadian market. It was a recommendation adopted by Industry Minister Francois-Philippe Champagne, to no avail thus far.

But it is clear from the Bank’s warning that the Canadian economy requires some shock treatment.

Robert Scrivener, the chairman of Bell and Northern Telecom in the 1970s, called Canada a nation of overprotected underachievers. That is even more true now than it was back then.

It’s time to break the glass.

jivison@criffel.ca

Get even more deep-dive National Post political coverage and analysis in your inbox with the Political Hack newsletter, where Ottawa bureau chief Stuart Thomson and political analyst Tasha Kheiriddin get at what’s really going on behind the scenes on Parliament Hill every Wednesday and Friday, exclusively for subscribers. Sign up here.

Article content

Get the latest from John Ivison straight to your inbox

Comments

Join the Conversation

This Week in Flyers

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending