The real victims of China’s yuan policy

Frustration in Washington is growing over China’s contorted policy on its currency, the yuan. And for good reason. A so-called “reform” of the regime introduced in June, in which Beijing finally ended a de facto two-year yuan-dollar peg and permitted its currency to “float” in a narrow band, has proven to be a big yawn. The yuan has barely budged against the dollar since then. That has only fueled criticism in Washington that China keeps the yuan artificially cheap to give Chinese exports an unfair price advantage in global markets. A bill is gaining momentum in the House of Representatives that would instruct the Commerce Department to slap duties on imports from countries that undervalue their currencies – in other words, China. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner will testify in Congress on the yuan issue today, and he looks set to take his toughest position yet. In his testimony, released in advance on Wednesday, Geithner made clear that the U.S. is considering new steps to pressure China to allow the yuan to strengthen. Here’s a sample of his comments, courtesy of Reuters:

We are concerned, as are many of China’s trading partners, that the pace of appreciation has been too slow and the extent of appreciation too limited…We are examining the important question of what mix of tools, those available to the United States and multilateral approaches, might help encourage the Chinese authorities to move more quickly.

What Washington eventually decides to do on the currency issue will set the tone for China-U.S. relations for some time. My own opinion is that the U.S. fixation on the yuan is overcooked. But that doesn’t mean China’s currency regime is benign. Far from it. The real victims of China’s stubborn insistence on controlling its currency can be found throughout the developing world – the hundreds of millions of people still trapped in poverty who desperately need the job opportunities China is hoarding for itself.

Though there is no clear consensus on how undervalued the yuan might be, it is clearly undervalued. We know that because on the rare occasions when Beijing lets the currency actually move it tends to strengthen, as it has over the past week. A stronger yuan would be good for everyone. For China, it would help with the crucial transition the country needs to make to “rebalance” its economy, away from its unstable invest-and-export growth model towards one more reliant on domestic consumption. A more expensive yuan would make imports into China cheaper for Chinese companies and consumers, possibly stimulating American exports to China and creating much-needed jobs in the U.S. That, in turn, would help reduce China’s giant current account surplus, which is the target of American ire.

However, in my opinion, the overall impact of a stronger yuan on the U.S. economy won’t be as dramatic as many Americans seem to believe. A stronger yuan would raise the prices of Chinese-made goods in U.S. stores, which would further tax the already stretched American consumer. Nor will it result in a flood of factories and jobs retracing their steps across the Pacific as many seem to hope. Perhaps a stronger yuan would encourage a few American companies to move or maintain production facilities back home, but probably not enough to make that much of a difference. A stronger yuan might thus change the American trade relationship with China, but not necessarily change the face of American manufacturing. That’s because there are too many cheaper places than the U.S. where multinational companies can open factories. Rather than setting up shop in Ohio or South Carolina, a manufacturer can tap into the low wages of India, Indonesia, Bangladesh, and a host of others.

But it is here where we can truly find the damage done by China’s currency policy. By controlling the value of the yuan, Beijing is likely depriving the poorest nations of the world of their chance at a China-style economic miracle. That’s because the cheap yuan is stunting the progress of export sectors in other developing economies, in two key ways. First, it keeps Chinese manufactured exports relatively more competitive versus rival products from other emerging economies. That blunts export growth from those poor nations. Secondly, it makes other developing economies relatively less attractive as investment destinations for exporters. In both cases, China’s policy is curtailing job creation in poor countries.

China jumpstarted its growth story by wooing labor-intensive production from higher-cost countries, thus creating jobs in new export industries and alleviating poverty. In theory, as China developed and costs rose, the economy would no longer remain a competitive locale for some of that production, especially of low-end goods like apparel and electronics. By keeping the yuan extra-cheap, however, China is likely holding onto at least some of that production longer than it otherwise would. That’s because if the yuan appreciated, products made in Chinese factories would become more expensive in world markets, causing buyers from the U.S. and Europe to look to manufacturers from other developing nations for a better buy. Factories would likely close up shop in China and reopen in cheaper places, or new factories that might have come to China would get diverted to competitors. The effect of an appreciating yuan would combine with rising wages and other costs within China – which are already straining the profit margins of many of China’s exporters — and act as further encouragement for manufacturers to look for less costly places to base their factories.

As a result, we’d see a shift of export production, and therefore employment, from China to other emerging markets. The Cambodias and Bangladeshes of the world could get their hands on more of those low-end factory jobs that proved so crucial to obliterating poverty in China and Asia’s other rapidly developing economies. By not allowing this natural shift of work to take place as quickly as it should, China is contributing to the persistence of global poverty.

Of course, a strengthening currency wouldn’t deprive China of its export machine. China has competitive advantages that go beyond cost, like solid infrastructure. But it is undeniable that labor-intensive production of low-end goods is already shifting out of China due to its more expensive business environment, even with a depressed yuan. Vietnam in recent years has been a big beneficiary of this trend, as manufacturers have flocked to China’s Communist neighbor as a new, lower-cost alternative.

The possibility that Vietnam and other poor countries could steal away China’s exports and jobs is exactly why Beijing won’t let its currency loose. The people who should really be furious at Beijing are Mumbai slum dwellers and destitute African villagers, not the U.S. Congress.

Related Topics: Economy & Policy, Wall Street & Markets
  • Latest on Business

    Shannon Stapleton / Reuters

    Facebook, Wall Street Banks Sued Over Pre-IPO Financial Forecasts

    Just days after its controversial IPO, Facebook and its Wall Street bankers have been hit by shareholder lawsuits alleging that the social networking giant and its underwriters concealed the company’s decelerating revenue growth from investors. The lawsuits come amid a growing furor about whether Facebook’s banks selectively disclosed information that gave favored clients an unfair advantage over other investors. Top U.S. regulators have begun examining the IPO, and now the U.S. Senate Banking Committee and other lawmakers want answers from Facebook about issues raised in the offering’s aftermath, according to The Hill newspaper.

    Why Greece Isn't Leaving the Eurozone YetSlate

    Associated Press

    Small Dairies Go Under as Milk Prices Sink Again

    PLAINFIELD, Vt. — The MacLaren brothers are third-generation dairy farmers, but they will likely be the last in their family.

    After working all their lives on the hillside farm in Vermont that their grandfather bought in 1939, rising to milk cows at 3 a.m., even in blizzards and sub-zero temperatures, they decided to call it quits, auctioning off their roughly 200 cows and equipment ranging from stalls and hoof trimmers to tractors and steel pails.

  • http://rodgermmitchell.wordpress.com Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

    “A bill is gaining momentum in the House of Representatives that would instruct the Commerce Department to slap duties on imports from countries that undervalue their currencies.”
    .
    Now that the U.S. government has proved so adept in running our economy, it feels it can run the economies of all other nations.
    .
    The whole concept is based on a myth, the China Trade Deficit myth. Exports bring dollars to the U.S. in exchange for goods and services sent overseas. But, as a monetarily sovereign nation, the U.S. does not need to bring dollars into the country. It has the unlimited power to create dollars. All those dollars coming in from exports are dollars we originally created.
    .
    This means, literally speaking, the U.S. does not need to export at all. The federal government has the power to buy all the goods and services our economy can produce.
    .
    Before you get too excited, I do not suggest we stop exporting. I merely point out the factual difference between monetarily sovereign nations and non-monetarily sovereign nations, with the later having to export, and the former not having to export.
    .
    Because we don’t have to export, we have great flexibility in how much we export, and all this fuss over China’s money either is misguided by ignorance, or is an intentional diversion, to blame someone else for our problems.
    .
    Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

  • lsobrado

    I agree 100% with the point that china is hurting every thrid world cuntry on earth. But could not dissagree more that the US wouldn’t benefit greatly from a strong yuan. a stong yuan may not bring the jobs of making clothes back to the US. that’s not the goal. the goal is to play in even terms in 21st century goods.

    the goal is to allow the remaining US industry to sell to the chinese market at a fair prices. That includes high tech exports like planes, machinery, software, etc. The yuan appreciation will be good news for the entire US and europe for it will allow high tech exports to thrive in the cash rich china. the chinese consumer and companies will get more buying power thus able to afford the higher end goods.

    Also a strong yuan will cut the trade deficit. trade deficit substracts from the us GDP. in order to fend off unemployment and to finance the budget, the us needs to grow its GDP far beyond the current 14 trillion. cutting the trade deficit will help that goal and having the chinese buy american goods and servies thanks to their newly found purchasing power will go great lengths. Consider the china population is 4 times bigger than the US.

    In summary china needs to become the next great consumer for europe and the US cannot longer pay for the cost. It will be a good thing for everybody. The chinese people will benefit even at the expense of some manual jobs. The problem is the totalitarians in china are nervous for it means europe and the US would prosper greatly from a consumer rich china and that gets in the way of their global power agenda. that’s all the reason beyind their efforts to prop up the euro, yen and dollar. Ultimately it is futile. china has the biggest population. they are destined to become the worlds biggest consumer.

  • http://beadesway.wordpress.com alaricnyc

    I’m glad to see a rare bit of wisdom in this article regarding the effect of the yuan peg on the US-China balance of trade. I keep reading, ad nauseam, op-eds by people like the NY Times’ Paul Krugman and various online commentators about how we need to pressure the Chinese to raise the yuan’s value and sink the dollar in order to spur exports. But while such a strategy might work for countries that have strong manufacturing sectors — like Japan and Germany — it wouldn’t work for the US because so much of our manufacturing has been outsourced to other countries, and we haven’t been very smart about pursuing policies that encourage companies to set up shop here.

    Unfortunately, given the news I read today, it appears the Obama administration is more interested in taking Krugman’s very bad advice than taking this author’s.

  • gum0nshoe

    Western economists are entirely against isolationism because the costs are higher over all than when free trade exists. But, by not protecting ourselves at all when others do all we’re really doing is asking to be kicked in the gut. Free trade works when two groups decide to do it mutually. We shouldn’t have any illusions that this is going to happen with China.

blog comments powered by Disqus