Abstract:Financial capital and fixed capital tend to flow in opposite directions between poor and rich countries. Why? What are the implications of such two-way capital flows for global trade imbalances and welfare in the long run? This paper introduces frictions into a standard two- country neoclassical growth model to explain the pattern of two-way capital flows between emerging economies (such as China) and the developed world (such as the United States). We show how underdeveloped credit markets in China can lead to abnormally high rate of returns to fixed capital but excessively low rate of returns to financial capital relative to the U.S., hence driving out household savings (financial capital) on the one hand while simultaneously attracting foreign direct investment (FDI) on the other. When calibrated to match China’s high marginal product of capital and low real interest rate, the model is able to account for the observed rising trends of China’s financial capital outflows and FDI inflows as well as its massive trade imbalances. Despite double heterogeneity in households and firms and a less than 100% capital depreciation rate, our two-country model is analytically tractable with closed form solutions at the micro level, which permits exact aggregation by the law of large numbers, so the general equilibrium of the model can be solved by standard log-linearization or higher order perturbation methods without the need of using numerical computation methods. Our model yield, among other things, three implications that stand in sharp contrast with the existing literature: (i) Global trade imbalances between emerging economies and the developed world are sustainable even in the steady state. (ii) There exists an immiserization effect of FDI --- namely, FDI is beneficial for the sourcing country but harmful to the recipient country under financial frictions. (iii) Our quantitative results cast doubts on the conventional wisdom that the saving glut of emerging economies is responsible for the low world interest rate.>

Are Trade Liberalizations a Source of Global Imbalances?

Are Trade Liberalizations a Source of Global Current Account Imbalances?

Trade Liberalizations and Global Current Account Imbalances

Trade reforms and current account imbalances

Nber working paper series trade reforms and current account imbalances

Trade Reforms and Current Account Imbalances: when Does the General Equilibrium Effect Overturn a Partial Equilibrium Intuition?

Capital Market Liberalization: Optimal Tradeoff and Bargaining Delay

Two-Way Capital Flows and Global Imbalances: A Neoclassical Approach

Two-Way Capital Flows and Global Imbalances

Comparative Advantage, Endowment Structure, and Trade Imbalances

Nber Working Paper Series a Solution to Two Paradoxes of International Capital Flows

The Impact of Trade Liberalization on the Trade Balance in Developing Countries

The puzzle of quality upgrading of Chinese exports from the trade liberalization perspective

Managing Cross-border Capital Flow: From A Political Economic Perspective

The Impacts of Global Trade Liberalization on China and World Economy

Trade Liberalisation and Labour Income Share Variation: an Interpretation of China’s Deviation from the Stolper–Samuelson Theorem

Imbalance between Financial Development and Global Trade:A Study based on Intertemporal Trade Model

How Does Trade Liberalization in Imports Affect China's Export Growth Pattern?

Global imbalances and a trade‐finance‐nexus

The impact of capital goods trade liberalization on regional labor market in China

A Solution to Two Paradoxes of International Capital Flows