Chris Dillow has a post comparing devaluation and
tariffs. This raises some interesting
points but misses what seem to me to be some of the most important distinctions.
First, tariffs raise revenue for the state that levies
them. This transfer from private to
public sector represents a form of fiscal tightening with a potentially
contractionary impact on demand. To make
a better comparison with the impact of devaluation, it is therefore useful to
consider an imposition of tariffs combined with a reduction in general sales
tax or value added tax, to the extent that the net tax take is unchanged.
This has the additional benefit that the overall price level
for domestic sales is largely unchanged (ignoring any exchange rate movements
that might result from the imposition of tariffs). Prices of imports (or goods with high
imported content) rise, but prices of domestically produced goods fall.
This is the key benefit (to the nation that levies them) of
tariffs. A devaluation raises the domestically
denominated price of imported goods (generally by some fraction of the change
in the exchange rate) and that of those foreign goods that compete with exports. The rise in import prices not only has a direct impact on the general
price level, but firms using domestic inputs are also able to raise their sales
prices. In the absence of any wage
adjustment, this produces an immediate reduction in real wages and a drop in
the wage share of national income.
What happens thereafter depends on the ability of labour to
resist this erosion of the real wage. If
they are able to secure nominal wage increases then this further increases domestic
based prices. If this happens to a great
enough extent, it may end up eliminating any impact of the devaluation on real
price differences. In which case, the
devaluation no longer has any impact.
This is why tariffs (specifically a general tariff) may work
when a devaluation does not. It
facilitates a favourable change in a nation's net export propensity without
requiring a reduction in that nation's real wage level.
In some cases, this may be the only way that particular nation
can expand. The problem is that it
doesn't work if every nation imposes tariffs.
So, if some nations have to compete by having low unit labour costs,
they might object to the lucky nation that gets to avoid doing so. Particularly when it is a developed nation,
with a relatively high standard of living.
However, nations often respond to a balance of
payments constraint, not by devaluing, but by suppressing domestic demand,
keeping the economy in a state of underemployment. This does nobody any good and in such cases, at least in principle, a
programme of tariffs may offer an improvement even for those nations that are
on the wrong end of them.
No comments:
Post a Comment