{"title":"贸易赤字:原因、影响和补救","authors":"H. Kyambalesa","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3471015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article is designed to explore the causes of trade deficits, the effects of trade deficits, policy options facing national governments in dealing with trade imbalances, and a comment on U.S. tariffs. Firstly, however, let us briefly consider what is referred to as the \"balance of trade,\" which may be defined as the difference between the monetary value of a country’s exports of goods (X) and the monetary value of its imports of goods (M). The difference can ordinarily be said to be favorable (meaning that X – M > 0) or unfavorable (implying that X – M < 0). \n \nIf a country’s trade with another country yields a favorable outcome (that is, X – M > 0), the trade culminates into what is referred to as a trade surplus for the country. If, on the other hand, the country’s involvement in trade yields an unfavorable outcome (that is, X – M < 0), the trade yields what is referred to as a trade deficit for the country. \n \nTherefore, a “trade deficit” essentially represents a greater outflow of a country’s currency reserves to any specific trading partner in exchange for goods from the trading partner relative to the inflow of currency reserves from the trading partner in exchange for goods from the trading partner, assuming that the country’s consumers and business entities have the wherewithal to pay for imports from the trading partner’s economic units. \n \nIt is important to note here that the excess of a country’s outflow of its currency reserves over the inflow of currency reserves is essentially wiped out by earnings realized by local retailers of a portion of goods imported into the country. \n \nIt is perhaps also important to make a distinction between any given country’s balance of trade (defined above) and its balance of international indebtedness, which portrays the difference between assets owned by a country’s nationals in foreign countries and those owned by foreigners in the country, and which is also referred to alternately as a country’s international investment position. \n \nA country can use data pertaining to its “international investment position” to project the inflow of income through investments made within its borders by foreign investors, and the flow of payments (in the form of dividends and/or interest) to be repatriated to foreign investors’ home countries (see Salvatore, 1990:438-439). \n \nThe difference between income inflows and disbursements can, therefore, enable a country to determine whether it is a net “debtor nation” or a net “creditor nation” with respect to the concept of the “international investment position.” \n \nPrivate investments made in foreign countries by a country’s local investors can improve the country’s “international investment position” if they are greater than investments made by foreign private investors in the country. For countries which have an abundance of capital for investment in their domestic economies and are no longer in need of rapid economic growth (such as G-7 nations), it is perhaps desirable to seek to become net “creditor nations” by screening investments by foreign nationals. \n \nAs Salvatore (1990:440) has advised, this can, among other things, forestall the potential for a financial crisis and high interest rates which can be caused by a sudden withdrawal of investments, for whatever reason, and the worsening of current account balances due to rising income payments to foreigners for their investments. \n \nDeveloping countries, however, do not have the luxury of screening foreign investors, mainly because they are, by and large, in dire need of foreign direct investments to prop up their fragile and poverty-gripped national economies.","PeriodicalId":341166,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Trade Relationships (Topic)","volume":"58 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Trade Deficits: Causes, Effects and Remedies\",\"authors\":\"H. Kyambalesa\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3471015\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article is designed to explore the causes of trade deficits, the effects of trade deficits, policy options facing national governments in dealing with trade imbalances, and a comment on U.S. tariffs. Firstly, however, let us briefly consider what is referred to as the \\\"balance of trade,\\\" which may be defined as the difference between the monetary value of a country’s exports of goods (X) and the monetary value of its imports of goods (M). The difference can ordinarily be said to be favorable (meaning that X – M > 0) or unfavorable (implying that X – M < 0). \\n \\nIf a country’s trade with another country yields a favorable outcome (that is, X – M > 0), the trade culminates into what is referred to as a trade surplus for the country. If, on the other hand, the country’s involvement in trade yields an unfavorable outcome (that is, X – M < 0), the trade yields what is referred to as a trade deficit for the country. \\n \\nTherefore, a “trade deficit” essentially represents a greater outflow of a country’s currency reserves to any specific trading partner in exchange for goods from the trading partner relative to the inflow of currency reserves from the trading partner in exchange for goods from the trading partner, assuming that the country’s consumers and business entities have the wherewithal to pay for imports from the trading partner’s economic units. \\n \\nIt is important to note here that the excess of a country’s outflow of its currency reserves over the inflow of currency reserves is essentially wiped out by earnings realized by local retailers of a portion of goods imported into the country. \\n \\nIt is perhaps also important to make a distinction between any given country’s balance of trade (defined above) and its balance of international indebtedness, which portrays the difference between assets owned by a country’s nationals in foreign countries and those owned by foreigners in the country, and which is also referred to alternately as a country’s international investment position. \\n \\nA country can use data pertaining to its “international investment position” to project the inflow of income through investments made within its borders by foreign investors, and the flow of payments (in the form of dividends and/or interest) to be repatriated to foreign investors’ home countries (see Salvatore, 1990:438-439). \\n \\nThe difference between income inflows and disbursements can, therefore, enable a country to determine whether it is a net “debtor nation” or a net “creditor nation” with respect to the concept of the “international investment position.” \\n \\nPrivate investments made in foreign countries by a country’s local investors can improve the country’s “international investment position” if they are greater than investments made by foreign private investors in the country. For countries which have an abundance of capital for investment in their domestic economies and are no longer in need of rapid economic growth (such as G-7 nations), it is perhaps desirable to seek to become net “creditor nations” by screening investments by foreign nationals. \\n \\nAs Salvatore (1990:440) has advised, this can, among other things, forestall the potential for a financial crisis and high interest rates which can be caused by a sudden withdrawal of investments, for whatever reason, and the worsening of current account balances due to rising income payments to foreigners for their investments. \\n \\nDeveloping countries, however, do not have the luxury of screening foreign investors, mainly because they are, by and large, in dire need of foreign direct investments to prop up their fragile and poverty-gripped national economies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":341166,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PSN: Trade Relationships (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"58 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-10-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PSN: Trade Relationships (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3471015\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PSN: Trade Relationships (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3471015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
摘要
本文旨在探讨贸易逆差的原因,贸易逆差的影响,各国政府在处理贸易不平衡方面面临的政策选择,以及对美国关税的评论。然而,首先让我们简单地考虑一下所谓的“贸易平衡”,这可能被定义为一个国家的货币价值之间的区别的出口商品(X)和货币价值的进口商品(M)。通常可以认为是有利的区别(即X - M > 0)或不利的(这意味着X - M < 0)。如果一个国家与另一个国家的贸易收益良好的结果(即X - M > 0),贸易的高潮到什么被称为贸易顺差。另一方面,如果一国参与贸易产生了不利的结果(即X - M < 0),则贸易对该国产生了所谓的贸易逆差。因此,“贸易逆差”本质上代表了一个国家的货币储备流出到任何一个特定的贸易伙伴,以换取贸易伙伴的商品,相对于从贸易伙伴的货币储备流入,以换取贸易伙伴的商品,假设该国的消费者和商业实体有必要的资金来支付从贸易伙伴的经济单位进口的商品。值得注意的是,一个国家的外汇储备流出量超过外汇储备流入量的部分,基本上被进口到该国的部分商品的当地零售商实现的收入所抵消。也许同样重要的是,对任何一个国家的贸易余额(如上所述)和国际负债余额进行区分,后者描绘了一个国家国民在外国拥有的资产与外国人在该国拥有的资产之间的差异,也被交替称为一个国家的国际投资头寸。一个国家可以使用有关其“国际投资状况”的数据来预测外国投资者通过在其境内进行投资而流入的收入,以及将汇回外国投资者本国的付款(以股息和/或利息的形式)的流量(见Salvatore, 1990:438-439)。因此,收入流入和支出之间的差额可以使一个国家能够确定,就“国际投资状况”的概念而言,它是一个净“债务国”还是一个净“债权国”。如果一个国家的本地投资者在国外进行的私人投资大于外国私人投资者在该国的投资,则可以改善该国的“国际投资地位”。对于那些拥有充足资本用于国内经济投资而不再需要快速经济增长的国家(如七国集团国家)来说,通过筛选外国国民的投资,寻求成为净“债权国”或许是可取的。正如Salvatore(1990:440)所建议的那样,这可以,除其他外,预防潜在的金融危机和高利率,这可能是由于任何原因突然撤回投资,以及由于向外国人投资的收入支付增加而导致的经常账户余额恶化。然而,发展中国家没有审查外国投资者的奢侈,主要是因为总的来说,它们迫切需要外国直接投资来支持其脆弱和贫困的国民经济。
This article is designed to explore the causes of trade deficits, the effects of trade deficits, policy options facing national governments in dealing with trade imbalances, and a comment on U.S. tariffs. Firstly, however, let us briefly consider what is referred to as the "balance of trade," which may be defined as the difference between the monetary value of a country’s exports of goods (X) and the monetary value of its imports of goods (M). The difference can ordinarily be said to be favorable (meaning that X – M > 0) or unfavorable (implying that X – M < 0).
If a country’s trade with another country yields a favorable outcome (that is, X – M > 0), the trade culminates into what is referred to as a trade surplus for the country. If, on the other hand, the country’s involvement in trade yields an unfavorable outcome (that is, X – M < 0), the trade yields what is referred to as a trade deficit for the country.
Therefore, a “trade deficit” essentially represents a greater outflow of a country’s currency reserves to any specific trading partner in exchange for goods from the trading partner relative to the inflow of currency reserves from the trading partner in exchange for goods from the trading partner, assuming that the country’s consumers and business entities have the wherewithal to pay for imports from the trading partner’s economic units.
It is important to note here that the excess of a country’s outflow of its currency reserves over the inflow of currency reserves is essentially wiped out by earnings realized by local retailers of a portion of goods imported into the country.
It is perhaps also important to make a distinction between any given country’s balance of trade (defined above) and its balance of international indebtedness, which portrays the difference between assets owned by a country’s nationals in foreign countries and those owned by foreigners in the country, and which is also referred to alternately as a country’s international investment position.
A country can use data pertaining to its “international investment position” to project the inflow of income through investments made within its borders by foreign investors, and the flow of payments (in the form of dividends and/or interest) to be repatriated to foreign investors’ home countries (see Salvatore, 1990:438-439).
The difference between income inflows and disbursements can, therefore, enable a country to determine whether it is a net “debtor nation” or a net “creditor nation” with respect to the concept of the “international investment position.”
Private investments made in foreign countries by a country’s local investors can improve the country’s “international investment position” if they are greater than investments made by foreign private investors in the country. For countries which have an abundance of capital for investment in their domestic economies and are no longer in need of rapid economic growth (such as G-7 nations), it is perhaps desirable to seek to become net “creditor nations” by screening investments by foreign nationals.
As Salvatore (1990:440) has advised, this can, among other things, forestall the potential for a financial crisis and high interest rates which can be caused by a sudden withdrawal of investments, for whatever reason, and the worsening of current account balances due to rising income payments to foreigners for their investments.
Developing countries, however, do not have the luxury of screening foreign investors, mainly because they are, by and large, in dire need of foreign direct investments to prop up their fragile and poverty-gripped national economies.