The Unassuming Economist

From the IMF’s latest report on Macao:

“Staff reiterates its call to phase out the residency-based LTV capital flow management measure and macroprudential measure (IMF Country Report No. 19/123, Appendix IV). The authorities have introduced this measure in response to a potential risk from soaring property prices fueled by demand from non-residents. However, since 2019 this risk has abated as residential prices have plateaued and residential property transactions by non-residents have fallen. Linking the differentiation in LTV limits directly to banks’ risk assessment of loans and borrowers could attain the same objective without residency-based differentiation.”

From Noahpinion:

“It’s always an interesting experience to read books about China’s economy from before 2018 or so. So many world-shaking events have changed the story since then — Trump’s trade war, Covid, Xi’s industrial crackdowns, the real estate bust, lockdowns, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Reading predictions of China’s evolution from before these events occurred is a little like reading sci-fi from 1962.

When I started China’s Economy: What Everyone Needs to Know®, by the veteran economic consultant Arthur Kroeber, I was prepared for this surreal effect. After all, it was published in April 2016 — not the most opportune timing. So I was pleasantly surprised by how relevant the book still felt. Most of the book’s explanations of aspects of the Chinese economy — fiscal federalism, urbanization and real estate construction, corruption, Chinese firms’ position within the supply chain, etc. — are either still highly relevant, or provide important explanations of what Xi’s policies were reacting against. Dan Wang was not wrong to recommend that I read it.

But China’s Economy is still a book from 2016, and through it all runs a strain of stubborn optimism that seems a lot less justifiable six years later. Most crucially, while Kroeber acknowledged many of China’s economic challenges — an unsustainable pace of real estate construction, low efficiency of capital, an imbalance between investment and consumption, and so on — he argued that China would eventually overcome these challenges by shifting from an extensive growth model based on resource mobilization to one based on greater efficiency and productivity improvements. This was despite his acknowledgement of the fact that productivity growth had already slowed well before 2016, and that Xi’s policies so far didn’t seem up to the challenge of reviving it.

In many ways, productivity growth is the thread that ties together the entire story of the Chinese economy since 2008. Basic economic theory says that eventually the growth benefits of capital accumulation hit a wall, and you have to improve technology and/or efficiency to keep growth going. Some countries, like Japan, South Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan, have done this successfully, and are now rich; other, like Thailand, failed to do it and are now languishing at the middle income level. For several decades, Chinese productivity growth looked like Japan’s or Korea’s did. But slightly before Xi came to power, it downshifted to look a bit more like Thailand. Here’s a graph from the Lowy Institute’s recent report:”

From a new paper by Adolfo Maza:

“Okun’s law is one of the best-known stylized facts in the economic literature, as well as one of the most widely used policy tools. The aim of this paper, which utilizes a comprehensive sample of 265 European regions by using annual observations covering the period from 2000 to 2019, is to deepen our knowledge of Okun’s law from two perspectives: on one hand, by checking the existence and intensity of regional differences, and on the other hand, by assessing the factors that explain them. To this end, in the first part, we apply a heterogeneous panel approach that deals with cross-sectional dependence, which allows us to obtain an average coefficient as well as region-specific coefficients. In the second part, a cross-sectional spatial model is used to uncover explanatory factors. Our findings reveal quite remarkable regional differences, as well as a somewhat geographical pattern in them. Moreover, they point out the importance of demographic factors (such as gender and age), labor market variables (share of employment in industry and construction, as well as self-employment and part-time employment and the severity of long-term unemployment), R&D expenditure, and some national institutional factors when it comes to explaining differences across regions.”

On cross-country:

• Global Residential Cities Index – Q4 2021 – Knight Frank
• Understanding African Real Estate Markets – Routledge 
• Tighter monetary policy and regulation point to slowdown in property market – ING

On the US:    

• Housing Market Expectations – CEPR
• The (Non-)Effect of Opportunity Zones on Housing Prices – Journal of Urban Economics
• The Housing Market Is Hot But Certainly Not ‘Unhinged’. Simple patterns in aggregated numbers provide no understanding as to why buyers are paying more for homes. – Bloomberg
• In Wealthy U.S. Suburbs, There’s Not Much of a Housing Boom. Westchester, NY, and Montgomery County, MD, are up about 1%. Home prices in two-thirds of counties gained over 10%: Attom – Bloomberg
• More Than Shelter: The Effects of Rental Eviction Moratoria on Household Well-Being – Philadelphia Fed
• Where pro-housing groups are emerging – Brookings
• The Effect of Housing First Programs on Future Homelessness and Socioeconomic Outcomes – Kansas Fed
• What Has Research Shown About Alternative Home Financing in the U.S.? A look at the available evidence and the persistent gaps, as well as topics for future investigation – PEW
• Home Prices Can Always Get More Ridiculous. Welcome to the (maybe) new normal. – Bloomberg
• Emergency Rental Assistance Has Helped Stabilize Struggling Renters – Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies
• US mortgage interest rates hit 5% for the first time in a decade. That’s great news – Quartz

On other countries:  

• [Australia] The risks of Australia’s ‘house and holes’ economy are rising. As the country faces an election, it is increasingly reliant on housing and mining for growth – FT
• [Australia] Australia’s Property Market Is Beginning to Cool, Led by Sydney – Bloomberg
• [Canada] Toronto Home Prices Dip as New Listings Close the Gap With Sales – Bloomberg
• [Canada] Canada to Ban Foreigners From Buying Homes as Prices Soar. Trudeau to put billions toward boosting housing supply. Benchmark price is up more than 50% over past two years – Bloomberg
• [Hong Kong] Hong Kong’s property tycoons braced for further losses from zero-Covid regime. Family-run developers forecast to face sharp fall in house prices after steep revenue drops last year – FT
• [Germany] Germany’s Bundesbank warns over bank loans to hot property market – Reuters
• [United Kingdom] UK house prices rise at fastest pace in 18 years. Annual growth hits 14.3% as price-to-earnings ratio reaches all-time high, according to Nationwide survey – FT
• [United Kingdom] UK house prices reach record high in March as supply remains short. Average cost of a property reaches £282,753 driven by strong demand for homes in less dense areas – FT

From VoxEU post by Pierre Bachas, Matthew Fisher-Post, Anders Jensen, and Gabriel Zucman:

“Globalisation has wide-ranging effects on tax systems. This column uses a new dataset of taxes on capital and labour across countries and time to assess these dynamics. The authors document a global convergence of average effective labour and capital taxes over time, as labour taxes have increased and capital taxes fallen. However, the large fall in capital taxation in developed economies contrasts its gradual rise in developing economies, albeit from a low base. This trend is consistent with evidence suggesting the causal effect of trade integration on the tax capacity of developing economies.

Social scientists have for a long time been cognisant that globalisation may have deep impacts on tax systems. In particular, economists have conjectured that increased openness pushes governments to reduce taxes on mobile factors of production and recover the revenue shortfalls by increasing taxes on immobile factors (Bates et al. 1985, Rodrik 1997). In this view, globalisation erodes the taxes effectively paid by capital owners, shifting the tax burden towards workers. The fall of statutory tax rates on corporate income worldwide (IMF 2019), and evidence that globalisation reduces income tax rates on mobile high-income earners at the expense of median-income workers (Egger et al. 2019) support this hypothesis. Prior work has focused on the recent experience of high-income countries, but how has cross-border integration affected the relative taxation of labour and capital historically and globally? And which countries have been most affected by the erosion of effective capital taxation, and why? Answering these questions is critical to shed light on the macroeconomic effects and long-run social sustainability of globalisation. 

A new dataset to measure the effective taxation of capital and labour globally since the 1960s 

Assessing the extent to which globalisation has affected tax systems requires a global and long-run dataset on the taxation of capital and labour. In Bachas et al. (2022), we assemble data on effective tax rates (ETRs) on labour and capital covering 150 countries and half a century. Constructed following a common methodology, these series offer a worldwide, historical, and comparative perspective on the evolution of tax structures.¹  

ETRs capture all taxes paid: on corporate income, individual income, payroll, property, inheritance, and consumption. They then assign each type of tax revenue to capital, labour or a mix of the two and divide these by their respective capital and labour flows in national accounts (Mendoza et al. 1994).²  ETRs thus make it possible to estimate total tax wedges – for instance, the gap between what it costs to employ a worker and what the worker receives – and how these wedges vary internationally and over time. Since capital income is always more concentrated than labour income, the relative taxation of the two factors of production is closely linked to the overall progressivity of the tax system.”

Continue reading here.