Total Pageviews

Monday, 6 May 2019

EU Customs Union Membership (Revision Essay Plan)

Here is a suggested essay plan to this question: 


"Examine the argument that the UK economy will be better off by remaining inside the European Union Customs Union. Use diagrammatic analysis to support your answer." (25 Marks)




Contextual background (not part of the answer)
The EU accounted for 46% of UK exports of goods and services and 53% of imports in 2018. The UK had a trade deficit with the EU of £64 billion in 2018 and a trade surplus of £33 billion with non-EU countries. In June 2016, the United Kingdom voted in a referendum to leave the European Union. Some economists argue that the economic performance of the UK economy in the long run would be better served by an agreement to remain inside the EU customs union.

KAA Point 1: Keeping trade frictions low

Customs Union (CU) involves free trade between members & a common external tariff on imports from non-member countries. One argument for remaining is that EU is UK’s biggest trade partner – lots of cross-border trade e.g. component parts. Inside CU makes it less costly for TNCs to invest & produce in the UK and then export to EU. Extra trade friction costs outside CU lead to higher consumer prices & lower real incomes.

EVAL Point 1: Trade with faster-growing economies

Staying outside the Customs Union means that the UK can negotiate new preferential / free trade agreements outside the EU with faster-growing countries such as China, India, Australia, Vietnam and South Korea. Although the EU is the UK’s biggest trade partner, the % of trade in goods and services with the EU has been falling and other parts of the world economy are growing more strongly.

KAA Point 2: Economic costs from EU tariffs

If the UK leaves the Customs Union (and in the absence of a trade deal with the EU) then import tariffs would apply to UK exports. The average EU import tariff is 4.8%. The EU CET ranges from 0% on pharmaceutical products and 11% on footwear to 45% on tobacco. Higher tariffs can damage consumer welfare and lead to regressive effects on the distribution of income along with higher inflation and interest rates.


EVAL Point 2: Average tariffs have been falling

Staying inside the EU customs union would mean that the UK would be obliged to follow changes in EU trade agreements without any say in how they were negotiated. And whilst there would be some additional tariffs initially, a UK-EU trade agreement is likely. Average import tariffs have fallen in recent years which might help mitigate the macroeconomic effects of leaving the EU Customs Union agreement.

FINAL CONCLUSION

Overall, continued membership of the customs union in my opinion is likely to be best for the UK. The gravity theory of trade suggests strongly that we trade more with countries in close proximity and this is unlikely to change fundamentally in the years ahead. The EU has more than sixty five free trade and preferential agreements with over countries including Canada, South Korea and Australia and there is no guarantee that the UK will be able to achieve better deals with these countries on their own. In a globalized world, keeping trade frictions low is vital to continue to attract inward investment. Nissan has a UK workforce of 6,700 and exported around 250,000 cars to the EU in 2015, around half of its output. Those exports would face a tariff of up to 10 per cent outside the customs union unless a free trade deal could be negotiated. Honda has already announced that it will be closing their Swindon plant in 2021. These are important sources of jobs and incomes for regions outside of London, and provide evidence that the UK should continue to stay inside the CU for the foreseeable future.


Current Account Deficit & Policies (Revision Essay Plan)

Here is a revision essay plan on this question: 

"Assess policies that might be most effective in reducing the size of the UK current account deficit in the future." (25 Marks)




In 2018, the UK current account, saw a deficit of £82 billion, compared with £68 billion in 2017. The current account deficit was 3.9% of GDP in 2018 compared with 3.3% in 2017.

KAA Point 1

One demand-side policy is a rise in direct taxation – e.g. increase in income tax – reduces real disposable income – causing contraction in household spending – reduces demand for imports (expenditure-reducing effects) – assuming that the value of exports remains the same - this will lead to an improvement in net trade which is a component of the current account.

EVAL Point 1

Higher direct taxes are not always effective in reducing spending – people may view tax hikes as temporary – and choose to maintain spending by reducing their savings out of disposable income. Reduced consumer spending could also lead to a fall in planned investment which could then hinder the productive capacity of businesses that export.


KAA Point 2

A second approach might be for the Bank of England to try achieve a competitive depreciation of sterling e.g. by keeping interest rates lower, expanding QE or by direct intervention in currency markets. Weaker £ increases M prices and makes exports more competitive (in $s etc) – leading to expenditure-switching effects and an improvement in net trade providing that the Marshall-Lerner condition is met.

EVAL Point 2

The main causes of current account deficit are likely to be structural (e.g. linked to a persistent productivity gap) rather than due to an over-valued exchange rate. The majority of exports also require imports, so weaker £ increases costs of imported raw materials & components and also makes imported technology more expensive which can then hamper price competitiveness in the future.


FINAL CONCLUSION

Demand side policies carry risks (e.g. cuts in real living standards) and the option of a competitive devaluation is not available if the UK continues to operate a free-floating exchange rate system. Supply-side economic reforms can perhaps be more effective in the long run in helping to correct an external deficit. E.g. cuts in corporation tax designed to attract inward investment from overseas e.g. car manufacturing firms which then increases export volumes. Increased spending on STEM education and tax relief for research & development in emerging sectors such as life sciences can raise a country’s export potential in industries where global demand is likely to be strong in the years ahead.


Policies to Improve Competitiveness (Revision Essay Plan)

Here is an answer to this question: 

"With reference to a country of your choice, evaluate policies that might be most effective in improving competitiveness." 

This essay uses Poland as a contextual example, but you could just as easily use the UAE, UK or any country of your choice.

Once you have read the answer, discuss with a friend how you would change the analysis and evaluative points for your chosen country.




Analysis and application point 1

Competitiveness is the ability to sell goods and services successfully at a profit in overseas markets. Poland is a country inside the EU single market but retains their own currency – the Zloty. 25% of Polish exports go to Germany. One policy that might help to improve the price competitiveness of Poland is for the Polish central bank to intervene in the currency market to bring about a competitive depreciation against the Euro. This might be done by lowering policy interest rates or by intervening directly to sell Zloty and buy Euros. A weaker currency would make Polish products relatively cheaper in Western European markets, as a result, there might be expenditure-switching effects as Poland sells more exports and domestic demand for imports contracts since they become more expensive priced in Zloty. A consequence of this might be that Polish exporters will make more profits and this could then help them to increase capital investment. This in turn could cause an increase in productivity which would help maintain competitiveness in the long-term.

Evaluation point 1

Although in theory a depreciation of the Polish Zloty might improve the price competitiveness of the Polish economy, in practice the benefits might be eroded by some of the negative effects of a weaker currency. For example, Poland imports animal feed, vehicle parts and pharmaceuticals mainly from other EU countries. When the external value of a currency falls, then the domestic price of imported products almost inevitably goes up. This leads to a deterioration in the terms of trade meaning that Poland has to export more to pay for a given volume of imports. Crucially it can and does lead to a rise in cost-push inflation which reduces the real incomes of Polish consumers and also reduces the profits of Polish companies reliant on imports. Higher relative inflation can therefore make Poland less competitive inside the EU single market.


Analysis and application point 2

A second approach to improving competitiveness could be to introduce supply-side economic reforms to the Polish economy. Poland was once a transition economy and has used a number of market-friendly policies during the move away from socialism. These have included reductions in corporation tax and income tax – for example income tax rates in Poland are 18% and 32% contrasted with 20% and 40% in the UK. Lower tax rates have encouraged a rise in the number of business start-ups and inflows of foreign direct investment into the Polish economy. This investment has added to the country’s capital stock and has helped to increase labour productivity which in turn is a key factor causing real per capita incomes to rise. Inward investment also creates the extra productive capacity which increases Poland’s export potential. Foreign-owned firms are said to account for over half of Poland’s exports and the revenue from profits made by transnational businesses manufacturing in Poland also generates extra tax revenues.

Evaluation point 2

Market-friendly supply-side policies can improve the long-term competitiveness but they can also come into conflict with other macro objectives. For example, cuts in direct taxation on household incomes and corporate profits might contribute to more inequality and relative poverty within Poland. Higher inequality can actually damage competitiveness over time in part because a widening gap between the lower middle class and poor households compared to the rest of society might lead to more people being unable to afford good quality education and health care. If education outcomes suffer, then a country will not be improving its human capital as fast as possible and this can lead to structural problems such as higher unemployment and ultimately, lower labour productivity which is a key factor influencing price competitiveness.

Final reasoned comment / conclusion

In the long-term, competitiveness is mainly determined by the supply-side performance of a country. Therefore, I would argue that Poland should use policies that increase investment in education to build up human capital and also encourage more women into the active labour force. Poland actually ranks higher than the UK in the PISA rankings for Maths, Science and Reading. And Poland ranks third for best computer programming talent, ahead of the US and India. Investment in early years, secondary and higher education provides the best platform for improving non-price competitiveness in areas such as innovation, adoption of artificial intelligence and robotic technologies which will matter in years to come.

Thursday, 25 April 2019

Horizontal integration & government regulation: Sainsbury's and Asda merger blocked!

Click on this link to read an excellent and timely piece on the proposed merger between Sainsbury's and Asda, two huger supermarkets in the UK.



There is so much Economics in this article. Points to discuss:

What is the view of the CMA?
What are the opposing arguments given by the Supermarkets involved?

Who is correct?

Is the market contestable?

What would the positives have been for the consumer if this merger went ahead?

What would the impact of the merger have been on efficiency?

Monday, 15 April 2019

Supply side economics - April 2019

Supply-side policies are mainly micro-economic policies aimed at making markets and industries operate more efficiently and contribute to a faster underlying-rate of growth of real national output.


 


  • Successful policies have the effect of shifting the LRAS curve to the right leading to a rise in potential output
  • Most governments believe that improved supply-side performance is the key to achieving sustained growth without causing a rise in inflation.
  • Supply-side reform on its own is not enough to achieve this growth. There must also be a high enough level of AD so that the productive capacity of an economy is actually brought into play.
  • Supply-side policies can be implemented by the public or the private sector









Supply-side objectives
Key concepts to focus on are incentives, enterprise, technology, mobility, flexibility and efficiency.
  • 1.Improve incentives to look for work and invest in people’s skills
  • 2.Increase labour and capital productivity
  • 3.Increase occupational and geographical mobility of labour to help reduce the rate of unemployment
  • 4.Increase investment and research and development spending
  • 5.Promoting more competition and stimulate a faster pace of invention and innovation to improve competitiveness
  • 6.Provide a platform for sustained non-inflationary growth
  • 7.Encourage the start-up and expansion of new businesses / enterprises especially those with export potential
  • 8.Improve the trend rate of growth of real GDP



Recent UK Government Supply-Side Policies
  • Relaxation of the Sunday trading laws – but worries over work-life balance
  • 24 new regional enterprise zones – aiming to take advantage of external economies of scale by attracting inward investment
  • Completion of London’s Cross Rail – with plans for Cross Rail 2 and HS3 (East-West high speed rail in North of England)
  • Tax relief for businesses investing in low carbon technologies – designed to increase investment in renewable energy capacity
  • Increases in the income tax free allowance to £11,000 a year
  • Reduction in taper rate at which universal benefit is taken away as people earn extra income from 65% to 63% - helps work incentives
  • Main rate of corporation tax (a tax on profits) - currently 20% - to fall to 17% by 2020 – designed to stimulate domestic I and FDI
  • UK National Infrastructure Plan – range of projects including the new nuclear power station at Hinkley Point in Somerset
  • Planned investment of £400m in 'full-fiber' super-fast broadband
  • £2.3 billion for a new Housing Infrastructure Fund – i.e. investment in improved road and water connections to support new housing