The Skill Bias of the US Trade Deficit

2017 ◽  
pp. 197-221 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosario Crinò ◽  
Paolo Epifani
Keyword(s):  
Trade Deficit ◽  
Skill Bias ◽  
The Us

Currency Manipulations and Bilateral Trade Between China and the USA

2017 ◽  
Vol 52 (3) ◽  
pp. 171-184 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masoud Moghaddam ◽  
Jie Duan
Keyword(s):  
Exchange Rate ◽  
Gravity Model ◽  
Bilateral Trade ◽  
Trade Deficit ◽  
The Us ◽  
Spot Exchange Rate ◽  
Main Culprit ◽  
Long Time ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Strong Relation

The US trade deficit with China has existed for a long time, and its dollar value has been on the rise recently. It is widely believed that the main culprit is the manipulated value of Renminbi relative to the US dollar. Towards that end, this article re-examines the spot exchange rate and bilateral trade nexus using the Fourier approximation and a variant of the well-known gravity model during the sample period 1993: q1–2014: q1. Although China’s exports to the US Granger cause the exchange rate in a co-integrated space, the findings of a vector error correction model indicate that there is not a strong relation between the two. Indeed, within the aforementioned sample, only 15.52 per cent of changes in China’s exports to the USA are attributable to changes in the spot exchange rate. This is noticeably much smaller than impacts of the other variables utilized in the estimated gravity model. As such, the palpable trade imbalance between the USA and China cannot be single-handedly blamed on the spot exchange rate manipulations.

The Thucydides Trap as an Alternative Explanation for the US–China Trade War

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 42-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Imad A. Moosa
Keyword(s):  
Alternative Explanation ◽  
Bilateral Trade ◽  
National Income ◽  
Trade Deficit ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
China Trade ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Thucydides Trap ◽  
Trade War

The current trade war between the USA and China is perceived to be motivated by the US desire to curtail the bilateral trade deficit, on the assumption that reducing the deficit boosts economic growth. This flawed proposition indicates gross misunderstanding of the national income identity and the basic principles of macroeconomics. The imposition of tariffs will not reduce the trade deficit as the assumptions and conditions required for a smooth working of the process are unrealistic and counterfactual. The notion of an economic Thucydides trap is put forward to explain why the trade war is motivated by US apprehension about China’s rising economic power.

scholarly journals Saldo Comercial De Productos Por Habitante De México, 2001-2014. Un Comparativo Con La Región APEC

2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (16) ◽  
pp. 248
Author(s):  
Antonio Favila Tello ◽  
América Ivonne Zamora Torres
Keyword(s):  
International Business ◽  
Automotive Industry ◽  
Trade Balance ◽  
Trade Deficit ◽  
The Other ◽  
Us Economy ◽  
The Us ◽  
Per Capita ◽  
Extractive Economies ◽  
Constant Prices

Trade balance per capita is one of the international trade indicators that experts frequently use to evaluate a country’s performance in trade and evaluate its commercial policies. Exports, imports and the trade balance per capita of the 21 APEC countries were calculated for the 2001-2014 period in order to observe and evaluate its recent evolution, especially for the Mexican case. The data used only covered merchandises according to their value in US dollars at constant prices of 2014. Results suggest the existence of trade surpluses in extractive economies such as Brunei, Papua New Guinea and Russia. The exponential growth of exports from Vietnam and China is also demonstrated as well as the outstanding international business activity in Singapore and Hong Kong (which in per capita indicators outweighed all of the other members of APEC). Conditions of trade deficit are detected for powerful economies such as United States and Japan. On the other hand, Mexico shows a balanced condition in this indicator, an important and growing automotive industry and a noteworthy dependence on the US economy.

The US Trade Deficit and the Rate of Interest

2013 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 614-626 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ravi Batra ◽  
Hamid Beladi
Keyword(s):  
Trade Deficit ◽  
The Us

Tibet and the Sino-Indian borders

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jude Woodward
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
Indian Ocean ◽  
Trade Deficit ◽  
Sensitive Issue ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Indian Ocean ◽  
India And China

China and India’s long-standing border disputes have defied settlement and frequently disrupted their relations. This chapter considers the background to the disputes, and how India and China have gradually de-escalated the conflict since the Sino-Indian 1962 border war. In this context it also looks at how the sensitive issue of Tibet has been exploited by the US in creating problems for China since 1949. The chapter concludes that overall the issues that have been flagged for conflict between India and China – the borders, the Indian Ocean, India’s trade deficit with China – are better addressed through collaboration than conflict, leading India to stand aloof from the US’s new Cold War strategies towards China.

US protectionism would raise trade costs worldwide

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Trade Deficit ◽  
The United States ◽  
Final Demand ◽  
Services Trade ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Goods And Services ◽  
Us Economy ◽  
The Us ◽  
Commerce Department ◽  
Firing Line

Subject Exposure to US final demand. Significance The Commerce Department reported on March 7 that the US goods trade deficit widened to 69.7 billion dollars in January after a five-year high of 4% of GDP last year. The new administration has threatened to build a wall along the Mexican border, impose punitive tariffs on countries it runs a goods deficit with and label China a currency manipulator. Other countries also rely on US demand -- through goods and services trade, investment and remittances. Impacts In the unlikely event that Trump follows through on all his most extreme trade threats, the world could plunge into recession. Evidence does not support the new administration's view that free trade has damaged the US economy and the fortunes of its workforce. The WTO is reviewing several cases the previous US administration began against China -- extreme escalation could trigger US WTO withdrawal. Germany is the only G7 country that the United States runs both a goods and services trade deficit with, placing it in the firing line.

USMCA has pros and cons for Mexico

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Mexico City ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Auto Industry ◽  
Trade Deficit ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Us ◽  
Pros And Cons

Subject Implications of the USMCA. Significance Mexico’s Senate on December 12 ratified changes to the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement on free trade (USMCA), agreed on December 10. Several important changes were signed by the three governments in Mexico City, altering the original agreement signed in November 2018. Mexico now awaits ratification of the final deal in Washington and Ottawa. If enacted, the accord will replace NAFTA, which has determined the rules of trade among the countries since 1994. Impacts What was initially framed as a political victory for AMLO may lose lustre as details emerge on the concessions granted by his government. Long-term auto industry investments in Mexico may suffer due to new stipulations on issues such as regional content and wages. After the USMCA is formally enacted, Trump will probably focus on seeking to reduce the US trade deficit with China.

scholarly journals Maximum Pressure, Minimum Deal: President Trump’s Trade War with a Rising China*

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 94-99
Author(s):  
Holger Janusch ◽  
Daniel Lorberg
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Trade Deficit ◽  
Maximum Pressure ◽  
Trade Relation ◽  
Structural Problems ◽  
The Us ◽  
Rising China ◽  
Trade War ◽  
Zero Sum ◽  
Hegemonic Stability

In the context of the American decline, President Trump’s trade war toward a rising China fits into the pattern of a declining hegemon, as predicted by hegemonic stability theory. Trump’s trade policy is driven by his view of trade as a zero-sum game, his fixation on the trade deficit, and his “maximum pressure” negotiation approach. The result - the “phase one” deal - seems to be a trade ceasefire rather than a lasting trade peace between the declining hegemon and its ascending challenger because it stands on a shaky foundation. This “phase one” deal does not address the structural problems in the US-Sino trade relation. Moreover, its goals are unrealistic, and it is built upon a dispute settlement that favors deal determination over rule-based conflict resolution.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document