In recent decades, the experience in many countries has been that the decline of the public debt ratio during expansions did not compensate for the increase during recessions. This could end up creating concern about sovereign risk and influence the borrowing cost. Under the assumption of permanent reinvestment of maturing paper, significant holdings by the central bank of government paper as a result of quantitative easing, could limit this risk. This depends on the interest rate on excess reserves and on whether such a policy ends up generating higher inflation and/or inflation expectations.
For several weeks now, the improvement in economic data has been slowing down. On the one hand, this loss of momentum is unsurprising as it followed a substantial rebound which could not last. On the other hand, this fall could reflect the economic reaction to the rise in the number of new Covid-19 cases in many countries. Furthermore, the level of uncertainty which remains very high, affecting households and businesses, should also play a role. As a result, monetary and especially fiscal policies remain crucial in ensuring that the recovery continues pending the release of a vaccine.
The Fed’s new inflation averaging strategy should have global real and financial spillover effects. The former refer to international trade whereby a more sustained expansion of US GDP should pull along the economies of its trading partners via increased US imports. The financial spillovers are driven by capital flows, monetary policy and risk appetite. These factors are highly intertwined. The new Fed strategy will also force other central banks to revisit their own strategy. This creates an issue for the ECB.
Unsurprisingly, this week’s GDP numbers for the second quarter were exceptionally bad. The third quarter should see strong quarterly growth, if only because of a powerful base effect. It also leaves room for disappointment however, should the growth momentum start to slip over the summer. In the US, this already seems to have started. In the euro area, business surveys continue to improve and the employment expectations indicator sees a marked increase. Households are not convinced however and their unemployment expectations have remained broadly stable.
Due to the externalities of economic activity, the lockdown has had a considerable impact, not only on the economy but also on the environment. In a post-lockdown world, the question is how and to what extent the experience of the pandemic will influence the environment in the years to come. Covid-19 may make people more health-focused, including how the environment influences one’s health. This may change behaviour in terms of mobility and spending. It may also cause an increase in the allocation to sustainable investments, which in turn could influence corporate strategies. Changes in global value chains can also have an environmental impact
The easing of lockdown measures has caused a significant improvement in business sentiment and a mechanical rebound in activity and demand. In the near term, the narrowing of the gap between observed and normal activity levels should gradually lead to less spectacular growth numbers. These are underpinned by pent-up demand, monetary and fiscal policy support and the possibility for households to use the extra-savings accumulated during the lockdown. A lot will depend however on how uncertainty evolves. The health situation is not under control in certain countries and there are concerns about the risk of a flare-up. Households face income uncertainty due to bleak labour market prospects. Against this background, companies may tune down their investment plans.
The bleak outlook for the labour market implies there is a strong case for measures to boost consumer spending in order to keep the recovery on track. A host of instruments can be considered: vouchers, VAT rate cuts, income tax cuts, tax credits, negative income taxes. Amongst these, a voucher programme offers many advantages given the possibility for fine-tuning the target group, the final beneficiaries, the type of spending and the regional dimension. However, it comes with considerable administrative costs.
With an increasing number of countries scaling back if not removing the lockdown measures, the purchasing managers’ indices have improved further in June. The world manufacturing PMI is now even above the level reached in February. Big increases have been noted in the US, France, Germany, Ireland, Spain, Turkey, Indonesia and Vietnam. Brazil and India have also seen a considerable improvement, which seems at odds with the health situation in these countries [...]
This document presents the budgetary and monetary measures taken in several countries as well as the EU and the eurozone to address the economic consequences of the Covid-19 pandemic. It is presented in such a way that it facilitates an international comparison.
The publication by the ECB of different economic scenarios illustrates the extent of uncertainty which at present surrounds the forecasts for key macroeconomic variables. As a consequence, companies may hold off investing, preferring to wait for better visibility. While understandable at the micro level, such a wait-and-see attitude could act as a drag on growth and reinforce the view of companies that their caution was warranted. The large increase in the dispersion of earnings forecasts points to huge uncertainty at the individual company level. However this has not stopped the US equity market from rallying. Although several factors help to explain these different reactions to uncertainty, such dissension cannot last forever
The gradual easing of lockdown measures has for the month of May, as expected, led to an improvement in the manufacturing PMIs in all countries with the exception of the Netherlands and Japan. The extent of the rebound however varies greatly between countries [...]
The Covid-19 pandemic shows that the supply side warrants greater attention when conducting macroeconomic analyses. Very long global value chains may be optimal from a cost and price perspective, but operationally may be very complex and, in particular, fragile. A more resilient supply side comes with a cost, both at the micro and macro level. Solving this trade-off in a market economy is difficult, which, to some degree, leaves a role for public policy.
The Covid-19 pandemic has caused a jump in most of our uncertainty indicators. The media coverage based indicator is now at a record high. After stabilising at a high level, uncertainty of German companies has increased further whereas it has seen a big jump for US businesses. The behaviour of geopolitical risk is an exception...
Over the past decennia, hospital capacity has been gradually reduced in most OECD countries, as major health care innovations have resulted in a gradual shift towards more extra-muros care. Nevertheless, countries with the oldest populations such as Japan and Germany have maintained a large hospital capacity. In Germany, the number of acute beds is two to three times larger than in some other major countries such as France, the UK, and Italy. In that respect, South Korea is an outlier by combining a large hospital capacity with a relatively young population. In the current Covid-19 outbreak, having a large hospital capacity is a clear advantage. Fortunately, some countries have been able to increase their capacity of intensive care beds rapidly
Major economic policy responses have been introduced to try to attenuate the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the economy. This document reviews the key measures taken by central banks and governments in a large number of countries as well as those taken by international organisations. It includes measures that were introduced through 10 April. It will be updated regularly.
Major economic policy responses have been introduced to try to attenuate the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the economy. This document reviews the key measures taken by central banks and governments in a large number of countries as well as those taken by international organisations. It includes measures that were introduced through 3 April. It will be updated regularly.
The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a sudden stop in an increasing number of countries. This in turn had led to international spillovers via a decline in foreign trade and an increase in investor risk aversion triggering a global rush for dollar liquidity and a surge in capital outflows from developing economies. A forceful reaction has followed in major economies in terms of monetary and fiscal policy in an effort to attenuate the impact of the pandemic. The near-term dynamics of demand and activity will entirely depend on the length and severity of the lockdown. Once the lockdown has ended, the recovery is likely to be gradual and uneven and policy will have to shift from pandemic relief to growth-boosting measures, thereby putting additional pressure on public finances.
The PMI indices published this week give an early insight into the scale of the economic shock from Covid-19. The composite indices for Japan (35.8), Germany (37.2), France (30.2), the UK (37.1) and the US (40.5) all slumped in March. The euro zone composite PMI was the lowest ever recorded at 31.4. The deterioration was particularly marked for the sub-indices relating to employment and orders for goods and services. Figures for April, whilst remaining at historically low levels, are expected to show increasing divergence between the regions. In East Asia, internal demand should start to pick up, as activity starts to normalise in China. Conversely, the epidemic is spreading more rapidly in the US, India and Africa; meanwhile, many European countries remain in lock-down.
The coronavirus epidemic represents a combination of a demand, a supply and an uncertainty shock. This has knock-on effects on the price of oil and on financial conditions which in turn should end up acting as an additional drag on growth. The huge drop in the price of oil following the absence of an agreement amongst the OPEC+ countries on further production cuts, makes this worse. It hits the producer countries, increases the financial pressure on energy companies, in particular those which are highly indebted, whereas the reaction on the demand side will be muted due to the epidemic and lack of visibility. The timid improvement of business survey data at the end of 2019 has been stopped. Recent data show a very significant deterioration in China, Hong Kong
Depending on the source, estimates of the number of ‘cryptocurrencies’ vary between 1,600 and 3,000. These crypto-assets struggle to fulfil the three economic functions of money, and so cannot be considered as such. Although their fairly modest uptake currently limits their economic impact, increased use could create risks in the transmission of monetary policy, money creation and financial stability. Several central banks are looking at the introduction of a ‘central bank digital currency’ (CBDC) in response to these challenges. However, far from being simply a substitute for private cryptocurrencies, these CBDCs would carry specific risks in terms of financial stability, most notably that of a ‘digital bank run’
At the start of a new month, the purchasing managers indices are amongst the earliest data providing information on what happened the month before. Following the coronavirus outbreak they were even more eagerly awaited than normal. For the manufacturing sector, the picture is very mixed, with a considerable decline for the world index on the back of huge drops in China and Hong Kong. On the other hand, the index for the eurozone saw another increase, driven by Germany, the Netherlands, Spain and Greece with Italy remaining stable and France weakening. In the US, both the Markit PMI and the ISM index declined. Clearly, except for China and Hong Kong, the data do not yet show the impact of the coronavirus epidemic but it is only a matter of time for this to happen
The international propagation of the coronavirus forces a rethink of the consequences for the global economy. Coming after the outbreak in China, the marginal impact on the global economy of the spreading of the epidemic should, a priori, be rather limited. Yet, financial markets have reacted very negatively. This jump in risk aversion reflects concern that the economic consequences may have been underestimated thus far as well as increased focus on tail risk. This ‘financial accelerator’ phenomenon may in turn contribute to the worsening of the growth outlook.
The data used to chart different measures of uncertainty do not yet take into account the impact of the coronavirus. With this caveat in mind, the signals nevertheless go in different directions...
Recent survey data have picked up, in particular in the manufacturing sector and in terms of export orders. The European Commission noted a marked increase of economic sentiment in the European Union, the eurozone, Germany and France in January, after substantial weakness in Q4. Although economists expect a pick-up in growth in the US as the year progresses, the dispersion is very wide. This means that the median forecast will inspire less confidence than if the level of disagreement amongst forecasters would be lower.
In recent months, the global manufacturing cycle has been bottoming out whereas in services a slight uptick has been noted. In addition, two major sources of uncertainty have seen a positive development: the US and China signed a trade deal and the UK and the European Union can at last start negotiations about their future relationship. Very accommodative central bank policy has contributed to buoyant market sentiment. The combination of these three factors - stabilisation of business sentiment, decline in uncertainty, supportive financial environment - implies conditions are met to see some uptick in growth. Nevertheless, caution prevails in this assessment, if only because later on this year, uncertainty may very well increase again.
