China’s third interest rate cut and how to think about it

by on May 13, 2015 at 12:45 am in Current Affairs, Economics | Permalink

On Sunday the Chinese central bank cut interest rates for the third time since November.  I have read a number of pieces on this move, but overall am a little disquieted at how quickly people are comparing China to the Keynesian vision of the United States or for that matter Japan.  I would stress a few points:

1. Many of China’s municipal governments are broke or close to broke, and in the meantime too heavily dependent on land sales and land leases for revenue.  Lower rates are intended to help them refinance themselves.  That is not opposed to a Keynesian or AD framework, but it is distinct from it.

2. The Chinese government is at the same time relaxing controls over deposit interest rates, so some interest rates in the economy will be going up.  In other words, part of the problem is figuring out the optimal speed for removing financial repression, and in the process allowing to “shadow banking bubble” to deflate at an appropriate speed, all the while trying to keep deposits in the formal banking system.

2b. A lot of borrowers are paying effective nominal rates of six to seven percent — don’t you wish we had a better understanding of the true rate of price inflation in China?  One policy goal is to get more loans to these businesses, but there the very real jawboning of the Chinese government may prove more effective than the interest rate cuts.  But should those businesses get more loans?

3. In an Austro-Chinese, excess capacity model of the business cycle, there is a gain and a loss from cutting interest rates when an economy is well into the over-expansion phase.  The gain is that you may mitigate the costs of the “secondary deflation,” as the Austrians call it.  The cost is that you may overextend the excess capacity even further.  That is a call the central bank must make, noting that the excess capacity model applies only with some probability.

4. “China’s imports also plunged 16.2 percent in April from a year earlier, a fall that economists attributed partly to low commodity prices and partly to weak demand within China’s economy.”  I doubt if they are growing at a true seven percent, or even a “slightly below seven percent” figure.

5. For well over thirty years, the Chinese economy has lived in a world where both the AD and AS curves swing rather wildly (in a good way) outwards and to the right.  Some of this is driven by migration to the cities, some of it is driven by trickle-down growth and the adoption of foreign technologies.  Some of it may be driven by China’s own TFP, and for sure some of it is driven by policy reform.  In any case, as long as that process continues, China is semi-immune to the standard Keynesian dilemmas — who needs to lower nominal wages when worker productivity and customer demand are rising so quickly?  But does that ongoing outward real expansion it render them immune to Austro-Chinese business cycle theory as well?  Sadly, Hayek never seems to have considered that problem, but it’s very much on my mind out here in Shaanxi.

1 Tom Warner May 13, 2015 at 1:12 am

Well, your Austro-Chinese theory links seem to go back to 2009, so the system had at least six years worth of immunity.

2 homeandhosed May 13, 2015 at 2:00 am

What if China is moving quicker than everyone thinks towards financial liberalisation? Their share of global capital flows could go from 1% to 10 or 20% relatively quickly. What would that injection of liquidity mean for global capital markets, both from a volume and stability perspective?

3 8 May 13, 2015 at 8:09 pm

They are moving quicker than most people think because they’re pushing to get into the SDR basket. The unknown is which way capital flows when the door opens. The Chinese are worried the answer to that question is out.

4 The Devil's Dictionary May 13, 2015 at 2:59 am

No tree grows to the sky. Not even the Chinese tree.

http://www.devilsdictionaries.com/blog/the-chinese-addiction

5 rayward May 13, 2015 at 6:51 am

China is so big that it defies convention. Since Cowen’s next post is about U.S. demograhics, I will point out that demographers project that in the second half of this century China’s population will decline by roughly 400 million (that’s the mid-range projection). Think about the effect that will have on the economy, and on politics.

6 Bob from Ohio May 13, 2015 at 1:19 pm

” I doubt if they are growing at a true seven percent, or even a “slightly below seven percent” figure.”

Of course not. Their economic stats are just propaganda.

Amazing that supposedly intelligent people think a one party dictatorship is honest and transparent.

7 ladderff May 13, 2015 at 4:29 pm

You’re amazing

8 E. Harding May 13, 2015 at 5:32 pm

Of course it’s propaganda, but China really has gone from middle (or even bottom) third world to middle second in forty years.

9 Jones May 21, 2015 at 5:26 pm

Frankly speaking this is nothing new and seriously not anything to be worried too much about, I believe if we take action at right time we can make great money from it. I am working with OctaFX broker, it also has got outstanding analysis service for free, so these news are posted there on regular basis, so following it means I am in profits almost everything and I have been using it for over 7 months now with fantastic results.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: