BNP IP: Beginnt China einen Währungskrieg?
"Auch rational handelnde Regierungen haben einen Anreiz, ihre Währung abzuwerten, um strategische Positionen zu wahren", sagt Chi Lo, Senior Economist, Greater China, BNP Paribas Investment Partners. Das einzig stabile Gleichgewicht wäre dann eines, in dem alle abwerten.13.08.2015 | 15:22 Uhr
Some analysts are predicting a 10% devaluation of the renminbi in the coming year, which is an importanttail risk when weakness in the euro and yen may prompt Beijing to recalibrate its FX policy stance. We have warned about the renminbi devaluation risk, but have also argued that devaluation would not be thebest option for China. On balance, Beijing’s rational policy response would still be for it to resist joining currency war. The change (on 11 August) in the renminbi’s daily fixing regime, which weakened the RMBUSD exchange rate by 1.86% overnight, is not a harbinger for renminbi devaluation.
If the global economy fails to regain healthier growth, a currency war will likely prevail because in a world of feeble growth and insufficient policy levers to boost aggregate demand, currency devaluation can be a useful tool to stimulate growth. But in competitive devaluation, one country gains at the expense of the other. The resultant increase in FX volatility will raise the cost of international trade and investment, leading to contraction in capital flows and global growth and, thus, a lose-lose outcome.
So countries should avoid such an outcome, right? Not necessarily. To maintain their strategic positioning,even rational governments would have a strong incentive to devalue, and the only stable equilibrium wouldbe one in which everyone devalues.
The cost
A currency war leads to higher FX volatility, thus increasing FX risk and the cost of cross-bordertransactions. Higher hedging costs, plus the negative impact of a strong currency, will squeeze the profitmargins of exporters in the non-devaluing countries, prompting companies to focus on their home markets atthe expense of international markets, thus dampening global trade. It will also discourage foreign directinvestment (FDI) flows and strengthen the home bias for capital flows, increasing the cost of capital incountries that run current account deficits.