| |
For release: April 3, 2006
Is the U.S. Current Account Deficit Dangerous?
St. Louis, Mo. — Numerous academics, economics
reporters and policymakers have expressed much concern regarding
the U.S. current account deficit in recent years, but an analysis
from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis suggests that if U.S.
monetary and fiscal authorities maintain sound policies, a "hard
landing" would be unlikely.
The analysis was written by the St. Louis Fed's Cletus C. Coughlin,
vice president and deputy director of research, senior economist
Michael R. Pakko, and William Poole, the president and CEO of the
Reserve Bank. Their discussion appears in the April issue of The
Regional Economist, the St. Louis Fed's quarterly publication
of business and economic issues. The publication is also available
online at the St. Louis Fed's web site: http://www.stlouisfed.org.
The U.S. current account deficit has been increasing as a percentage
of gross domestic product (GDP) since the early 1990s, with the
present deficit exceeding 6 percent. As a consequence, the net international
investment position of the United States—that is, the difference
between assets owned by the United States and foreign-owned assets
in the country—has grown ever larger over time.
Coughlin, Pakko and Poole note that economic theory suggests that
today's current account deficit will need to be trimmed or reversed
in the long run. "The question," they pose, however, "is
not whether the U.S. current account deficit will narrow in the
future, but whether the inevitable adjustment is likely to be painful
and disruptive of economic growth and stability."
Coughlin, Pakko and Poole cite the experience of several other
industrialized economies that have incurred much larger external
obligations as a percent of GDP without precipitating crises, including
Australia, Ireland and New Zealand. Noting that these countries
have recently been among the most successful in terms of economic
growth, they say that "the combination of rising external obligations
and prospects for robust growth is entirely consistent: Capital
flows toward countries that can make productive use of it."
They point out that in today's world of electronic funds transfers,
financial derivatives and largely unrestricted capital flows, investors
have a global marketplace in which to diversify their risk and pursue
profitable returns. In particular, they note that "many private
and governmental investors abroad rely on the U.S. capital market
as the best place to invest in extremely safe and liquid securities."
That investment, in turn, is "a testament to the confidence
that the world in the safety and soundness of our financial system."
Instead of thinking that capital flows are "financing"
the current account deficit, they suggest that capital inflows "may
be keeping the dollar stronger than it otherwise would be, tending
to boost imports and suppress exports, thus leading to a current
account deficit."
Coughlin, Pakko and Poole also note that the U.S. situation is
far different from countries that have previously experienced dramatic
currency depreciation in the wake of current account adjustments,
such as those affected by the Asian financial crisis of 1997-98.
The important distinction is that U.S. debt is primarily denominated
in its own currency: When the foreign exchange value of the dollar
declines, "dollar-denominated U.S. liabilities remain unchanged
in domestic value," they write, "which means that debt
service in dollars and relative to the size of the U.S. economy
does not change. Moreover, holdings of U.S. investors abroad, about
two-thirds of which are denominated in foreign countries, appreciate
in dollar terms. The composition of the U.S. international investment
account, therefore, contributes to stability rather than to instability."
Overall, they find that the central role of the U.S. financial
markets—and the dollar—in the world economy "suggests
that that capital account surpluses and, therefore, current account
deficits are being driven primarily by foreign demand for U.S. assets
rather than by any structural imbalance in the U.S. economy itself."
Coughlin, Pakko and Poole believe that "the forces driving
the U.S. capital account represent a persistent, but ultimately
temporary, process that might result in a higher level of net claims
without necessarily posing any threat to the long-run sustainability
of the U.S. current account."
"Nor," they conclude, "will the transition to a
sustainable, long-run path necessarily require wrenching adjustments
in domestic or international markets or in exchange rates."
With branches in Little Rock, Louisville and Memphis, the Federal
Reserve Bank of St. Louis serves the Eighth Federal Reserve District,
which includes all of Arkansas, eastern Missouri, southern Indiana,
southern Illinois, western Kentucky, western Tennessee and northern
Mississippi. The St. Louis Fed is one of 12 regional Reserve banks
that, along with the Board of Governors in Washington, D.C., comprise
the Federal Reserve System. As the nation’s central bank,
the Federal Reserve System formulates U.S. monetary policy, regulates
state-chartered member banks and bank holding companies, and provides
payment services to financial institutions and the U.S. government.
# # #
Back to top |