Edward Conard

Top Ten New York Times Bestselling Author

  • “…a must-read for serious students of economic policy.” - Glenn Hubbard, Dean, Columbia Business School, and former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers
  • “…a fresh argument for the productive value of inequality.” - David Autor, Professor of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
  • “…a comprehensive explanation of the modern economy.” - Julian Robertson, Founder, Tiger Management
  • “Unintended Consequences offers deep and well-argued analyses on almost every issue.” - The New York Times
  • “…challenges misconceptions that distort our economic debates.” - Arthur Brooks, President of the American Enterprise Institute
  • “Unintended Consequences is far smarter and more thought-provoking than most economics written for the general public” - Greg Mankiw, Harvard University, Former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors
  • “…serious thinking for serious thinkers. …a thought-provoking blueprint for growing middle- and working-class incomes.” - Mitt Romney, former Governor of Massachusetts
  • “…challenges misconceptions that distort our economic debates.” - Arthur Brooks, President of the American Enterprise Institute
  • “…a fresh argument for the productive value of inequality.” - David Autor, Professor of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
  • “A full-throated defense of economic dynamism.” - The Wall Street Journal
  • “…serious thinking for serious thinkers. …a thought-provoking blueprint for growing middle- and working-class incomes.” - Mitt Romney, former Governor of Massachusetts
  • “…a very valuable contribution.” - Larry Summers, former Secretary of the Treasury and director of the National Economic Council, president emeritus, Harvard University
Upside of Inequality Oxford Unintended Consequences
Buy the Books
  • Macro Roundup
  • About Roundup
  • About Ed Conard
  • Highlights
  • Topics
  • Subscribe
Edward Conard
  • twitter
  • facebook
  • linkedin
  • youtube

Macro Roundup

  • Email
  • Text Message (SMS)
  • Twitter/X
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • WhatsApp Message
Subscribe to Macro Roundup Emails
Select topics to choose: articles that mention them (broader) or articles mainly about them (focused)
  • Mentions 0
  • Primary focus 0
Showing all 7,294 Macro Roundup articles
When you search for any topic (like GDP, Inflation, or Banking), choose:
Choose search scope

Thursday, October 1, 2026

Demand-Driven Inflation

AI Summary. Demand and supply curves estimated from pre-pandemic data imply relatively flat demand curves in the US and euro area, so adverse supply shifts would produce large output losses but comparatively little inflation. The authors argue explaining the observed combination of high inflation and output requires outward demand shifts, including accommodative monetary policy alongside fiscal expansion.

Domenico Giannone and Giorgio Primiceri Bookings Papers on Economic Activity
Date Posted:
October 1, 2026
Is Database:
Database

Giannone and Primiceri revisit the relative role of supply vs. demand shocks in generating the post-Covid inflation. Because aggregate demand curves estimated from pre-pandemic data are flat, supply shocks alone would not have generated large inflation in the absence of added demand stimulus.

Did outward demand shifts, not supply shocks alone, drive recent inflation?

Core argument: Demand curves estimated from pre-pandemic US and euro-area data are relatively flat, reflecting central banks’ strong pre-pandemic responses to inflation, so adverse supply shifts produce large output losses but comparatively little inflation.

Demand and supply curve slopes are estimated from pre-pandemic data using the essentially definitional restriction that supply shocks move prices and output in opposite directions along demand curves, while demand shocks move them together along supply curves; the plotted slopes represent Bayesian posterior medians rather than uniquely identified estimates. The estimated demand curves are relatively flat in both the US and euro area [Figure 7], reflecting the central banks’ strong pre-pandemic responses to inflation. With those slopes, adverse supply shifts cause large output losses but comparatively little inflation. [To successfully explain] the combination of inflation and output observed in 2022 therefore requires demand to shift outwards too. Strong demand, including unusually accommodative monetary policy [on top of strong fiscal expansion], cushioned the output losses while increasing inflation [Figure 7]. In 2021–22, both inflation and GDP as subsequently revised exceeded forecasts in the US and euro area. That combination is suggestive of unexpectedly strong demand, whereas an adverse supply surprise alone would raise inflation but lower output. [Figure 9].

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. Demand curves estimated from pre-pandemic US and euro-area data are relatively flat, reflecting central banks’ strong pre-pandemic responses to inflation, so adverse supply shifts produce large output losses but comparatively little inflation.
  2. Explaining the 2022 combination of inflation and output requires an outward shift in demand, with strong demand — including unusually accommodative monetary policy atop fiscal expansion — cushioning output losses while raising inflation.
  3. In 2021–22, both inflation and GDP as subsequently revised exceeded forecasts in the US and euro area, a combination suggestive of unexpectedly strong demand, since an adverse supply surprise alone would raise inflation but lower output.

Related Articles:

  • Are Government Bonds Safe in Times of War and Pandemic? — Government bonds severely underperform in wartime, in absolute terms and relative to equities, housing, and economic growth, unlike in financial crises when bonds tend to outperform stocks. The U.S. and U.K. reduced war-driven debt-to-GDP ratios without explicit default, using surprise inflation and financial repression that shifted fiscal burdens onto bondholders.
  • Why Did Inflation Rise And Fall In 2021-24? Channels And Evidence From Expectations — Across countries, unexpectedly higher government deficits relative to earlier International Monetary Fund forecasts are associated with unexpectedly higher inflation, measured by each factor's contribution to the increase in public debt, a relationship the author finds statistically significant. This evidence is consistent with a fiscal channel for inflation.
  • Fiscal Influences on Inflation in OECD Countries, 2020-2022 — Across 21 economies, the authors find that headline and core inflation responded positively to a measure of government spending increases scaled by pre-pandemic debt-to-GDP and average debt duration. Estimated coefficients of 0.4–0.5 suggest 40–50% of the extra spending was financed through inflation, with the rest through conventional public finance.
  • Inflation
  • GDP
  • Monetary Policy

How Much Revenue Does The AI Buildout Need In 2030?

AI Summary. The authors estimate AI capital spending of $560bn in 2026 and, in a high-investment case, $3.5tn of net AI capital in service by 2030, requiring roughly $1.3tn in annual infrastructure revenue once depreciation, operating costs and a 15% return are covered. That implies 7.4x growth from current annualized revenues, with downstream revenues of $1.9–2.6tn.

William Gildea and Azeem Azhar Exponential View
Date Posted:
October 1, 2026
Is Database:
Database

Beginning with capex projections, Gildea/Azhar derive for their high-growth case a $1.3T annual AI-infrastructure revenue hurdle for 2030. This covers $771B of depreciation and operating costs, plus a 15% return on $3.5T of net capital in service.

How much annual revenue must AI infrastructure generate to justify investment?

Core argument: In a high investment case with $3.5tn of net AI capital in service, the authors estimate AI infrastructure must generate $1.3tn of annual revenue by 2030, requiring 7.4x growth (59% CAGR) from today’s annualized revenues.

We estimate AI CapEx to be $560B in 2026, 64% of the total declared by the hyperscalers. Unfinished facilities can’t generate revenue, so the investment bill and the productive asset base will grow at different speeds. [In the high investment case], by 2030 we see $3.5T of net AI capital in service. The largest component [of the revenue hurdle] is the $555B in compute depreciation. We model lifespans at the current 5-6 years. Shell depreciation and OpEx combined contribute about a further $216B to the required revenue hurdle. [Adding a 15% return on net capital brings required annual infrastructure revenue to $1.3T]. Reaching the $1.3T hurdle would represent 7.4x growth (59% CAGR) from today’s annualized revenues. For its customers to earn 30-50% gross margins, downstream revenues need to be $1.9-2.6T. [Editor’s note: Van Nieuwerburgh’s far larger figure of $3.7T covers mature revenues from projects completed through 2032, using commissioning capital and a 50% infrastructure operating cash-flow margin. This estimate instead charges depreciation and operating costs plus 15% on net capital in service in 2030. Different horizons and cost conventions prevent a direct comparison. Van Nieuwerburgh also has a much higher capex estimate.]

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. In a high investment case with $3.5tn of net AI capital in service, the authors estimate AI infrastructure must generate $1.3tn of annual revenue by 2030, requiring 7.4x growth (59% CAGR) from today’s annualized revenues.
  2. Compute depreciation of $555bn, modeled on 5-6 year lifespans, is the largest component of the 2030 revenue hurdle, with shell depreciation and operating expenses adding about $216bn and a 15% return on net capital completing the $1.3tn total.

Related Articles:

  • Financing the AI Buildout — The authors estimate roughly 57 gigawatts of operating US data center capacity against a planned development pipeline of about 509 gigawatts, which is not a completion forecast since projects may be delayed, scaled back, or abandoned. Their central scenario has 182.8 gigawatts of added capacity becoming operational through 2032, 117.2 gigawatts completed later, and 226.9 gigawatts never completed.
  • What Investment Data Implies about the AI Transition — The five largest U.S. technology firms are scaling AI capital spending about 50% a year, from $155bn to a forecast $755bn. Embedding this in a two-sector model with rare productivity booms, the authors estimate AI adds roughly 5, 20, or 58pp to cumulative growth over a seven-year transition, depending on scenario.
  • Rear Window — Major cloud providers posted annual revenue growth of 37% at Amazon Web Services, 43% at Microsoft Azure and 82% at Google Cloud, with rising revenue backlogs of $514bn and $496bn respectively at Google Cloud and Amazon Web Services. Earnings growth appears highly contingent on continued hyperscaler capital spending and research, which rose from $460bn to $870bn.
  • Investment
  • GDP
    • Financial Markets
  • Productivity
    • Innovation/Research

In MAGA-Land People Are Dying Faster Than They Are Being Born

AI Summary. Domestic migration has historically added about 0.5% a year to the population of reliably Republican counties while reliably Democratic counties lost 0.6%, with international migration showing the reverse pattern. Internal Revenue Service data show the fastest-growing Republican counties draw many newcomers from Democratic and competitive areas, and Republican support in those faster-growing counties has weakened.

Economist Staff The Economist
Date Posted:
October 1, 2026

An Economist analysis of more than 3,000 US counties finds that in reliably GOP counties, annual deaths now exceed births by 0.4 per 1k residents, while in reliably Democratic counties, births exceed deaths by 2.8 per 1k. Population growth in the GOP counties is largely driven by internal migration.

How is domestic migration reshaping politics in Republican counties?

Core argument: Domestic migration has historically added about 0.5% a year to the population of reliably Republican counties while subtracting 0.6% a year from reliably Democratic ones.

Our number crunching shows that domestic migration has historically boosted the population of reliably Republican counties by about 0.5% a year, while reliably Democratic ones have lost 0.6%. The opposite is true of international migration, which has historically added 0.5% a year to solid-blue counties, compared with just 0.1% in solid-red ones. Data from the IRS show that the fastest-growing red counties draw an unusually large share of newcomers from politically unfriendly territory. In 2022-23 more than 20% came from solid-blue places and around 40% from competitive ones. This may already be affecting voting patterns. Before 2016, fast-growing red counties leaned more Republican than slower-growing ones. That has now flipped: slower-growing red counties lean more Republican, and GOP support in faster-growing ones has weakened.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. Domestic migration has historically added about 0.5% a year to the population of reliably Republican counties while subtracting 0.6% a year from reliably Democratic ones.
  2. International migration has historically added about 0.5% a year to solid-blue counties versus just 0.1% in solid-red ones, reversing the pattern of domestic migration.
  3. Internal Revenue Service data show that in 2022-23 more than 20% of newcomers to the fastest-growing red counties came from solid-blue places and around 40% from competitive ones.

Related Articles:

  • Where Americans Choose to Move and Where They Leave — County-level mapping of net domestic migration within the United States shows some counties gained net movers equal to 10% or more of their 2020 population while others lost an equivalent share, excluding international moves.
  • Americans Are Done With Being Put in Racial Boxes — Immigration from Asia and Latin America has been the chief driver of rising US diversity and the declining non-Hispanic White share of the population. Intermarriage across racial and ethnic lines is far more common among Hispanic and Asian Americans, and rising among Black and non-Hispanic White Americans, leaving more people outside single racial categories.
  • The Great “Transfer”-mation — Government transfers rose from 8.2% of Americans' total personal income in 1970 to 17.6% in 2022, making them the third largest income source after work and investments. The share of U.S. counties drawing a quarter or more of personal income from transfers rose from under 1% in 1970 to 53% in 2022.
  • Demographics
  • Politics
  • Workforce
    • Immigration

Treasuries Surge as France’s Fiscal Woes Boost Haven Demand

AI Summary. The 10-year US Treasury yield briefly touched 5.34%, its highest level since 2002, amid a monthslong selloff in global government debt. The 30-year US bond rate also reached a 24-year high.

Ye Xie, Alice Gledhill, and Victor Swezey Bloomberg
Date Posted:
October 1, 2026

The US 10-year Treasury yield hit 5.34%, its highest since 2002, before retreating as investors bought Treasuries amid stress in European bond markets.

Are long-term Treasury yields reaching their highest levels in decades?

Core argument: The 10-year US Treasury yield briefly traded at 5.34% on Thursday, rising above its 2007 peak to its highest level since 2002.

The US benchmark yield touched its highest level since 2002, the latest milestone in a monthslong selloff in global sovereign debt. The yield on the 10-year Treasury note briefly rose above its 2007 peak to trade at 5.34% on Thursday. US Treasuries [then] rebounded from a bruising global bond selloff as pressure in European markets fueled demand for haven assets, pulling 10-year yields down from a 24-year high. In Europe, the spread between Italy and Germany’s two-year yields almost doubled to 55 basis points on Thursday, the biggest daily jump since 2020 on a closing basis. The equivalent gap for France rose as much as 22 basis points, the most since 2012.
 

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. The 10-year US Treasury yield briefly traded at 5.34% on Thursday, rising above its 2007 peak to its highest level since 2002.
  2. The 10-year Treasury yield’s rise marks the latest milestone in a monthslong selloff in global sovereign debt.
  3. The yield on 30-year US bonds reached a 24-year high.

Related Articles:

  • Booms, Bombs and Bonds: Interest Rates, Part I — Because investors can buy bonds across borders, an investment boom in one country such as the United States can draw in loanable funds from abroad and push up interest rates in other nations. The linkage is not one-for-one, since investors also weigh expected exchange-rate changes and the resulting capital gains or losses.
  • Don’t Draw The Wrong Conclusion From Treasury Yields — Ten-year real yields equal the average expected overnight rate over the next decade plus a term premium, and fiscal credibility or debt sustainability concerns would show up as a higher term premium. With the term premium and inflation expectations contained, the increase in bond yields reflects higher expected long-term overnight rates.
  • America’s Risky Debt: What Markets See That Policymakers Don’t — Two market-based measures suggest the safety premium investors pay to hold US Treasuries has compressed toward zero and at times reversed: the spread between top-rated corporate bonds and Treasuries after stripping out default risk, and the gap between currency-hedged foreign G10 government yields and Treasury yields at the same maturity, where longer-maturity comparisons now favor foreign bonds.
  • Financial Markets
  • Fiscal Policy
    • Fiscal Deficits
  • GDP

France Seeks To Rein In Pensions And State Salaries In 2027

AI Summary. France plans to narrow its budget deficit to 5% of GDP by cutting state spending, capping increases to pensions and civil servant salaries, and raising taxes. Deteriorating public finances have left France borrowing at higher interest rates than Italy and Greece, with 10-year bond yields reaching their highest since 2002.

Leila Abboud and Ian Smith Financial Times
Date Posted:
October 1, 2026

The French government has proposed €43B in spending cuts and tax increases for 2027, in an effort to reduce the deficit to 5% of GDP from a projected 5.4% in 2026.

Can capping pensions and public salaries shrink a widening budget deficit?

Core argument: France’s government under Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu aims to narrow the deficit to 5% of GDP next year by cutting state spending, capping increases to pensions and civil servant salaries, and raising taxes.

The government of Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu said it aimed to narrow the deficit to 5% of GDP next year by slashing state spending, capping increases to pensions and civil servant salaries, while raising taxes. The French deficit is on track to rise to 5.4% of GDP this year, after a deterioration in its public finances that has led to France borrowing at higher interest rates than Italy and Greece. France’s 10-year bond yields reached as high as 4.96% on Thursday, their highest point since 2002, as a global bond rout was exacerbated by investor concerns over the country’s fragile public finances. But they later fell back to 4.93% in choppy trading.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. France’s government under Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu aims to narrow the deficit to 5% of GDP next year by cutting state spending, capping increases to pensions and civil servant salaries, and raising taxes.
  2. The French deficit is on track to rise to 5.4% of GDP this year, following a deterioration in public finances that has left France borrowing at higher interest rates than Italy and Greece.
  3. French 10-year bond yields reached 4.96%, their highest since 2002, as a global bond rout was exacerbated by investor concerns over France’s fragile public finances, before falling back to 4.93%.

Related Articles:

  • The Bond Market Reckoning Has Only Begun — The gap between French and German 10-year government bond yields has widened at a pace matched only during the euro zone sovereign debt crisis. France and the UK have less room than the US to close deficits with tax increases, as tax revenues equal 43.9% of GDP in France and 35.3% in the UK versus 25.2% in the US.
  • Soaring Bond Yields, Gaping Deficits and Towering Debts: What Could Go Wrong? — An analysis of 22 rich countries estimates that if each refinanced its entire debt at current five-year bond yields, Britain would need the largest primary surplus to stabilize its debt-to-GDP ratio, about 1.5%, followed by Italy at 1.4%, France at 1.2% and America at 1%.
  • Global Debt Report 2026 — Gross central government borrowing across OECD countries rose 7% to a record $17tn, about 23% of GDP, and is projected to reach roughly $18tn, or 24% of GDP. The United States and Japan account for close to 80% of the area's refinancing requirements, with the US share rising from 57% to 70%.
  • Financial Markets
  • Fiscal Policy
    • Fiscal Deficits
    • Government Spending
  • GDP
  • Politics

Friday, October 2, 2026

Shipping to America

AI Summary. The U.S.-bound shipping network once turned about 89% of potential fleet capacity into effective service, but utilization fell below 70% as ships waited at anchor, slowed steaming, or sailed around maritime bottlenecks, and has not recovered. Diverting vessels around the Cape of Good Hope drives much of the loss.

Xiwen Bai, Jesús Fernández-Villaverde, Yiliang Li, Ricardo Marto and Francesco Zanetti National Bureau Of Economic Research
Date Posted:
October 2, 2026

US-bound shipping can fall far short of potential after disruptions. Pandemic queuing and slow steaming drove effective capacity from ~89% of potential to <70%. Later, Houthi attacks left it near 79% as ships rerouted around the Cape of Good Hope.

Why has shipping capacity to America not regained its prior utilization?

Core argument: The U.S.-bound shipping network converted about 89% of potential fleet capacity into effective service in 2016–2019, but aggregate utilization fell below 70% in 2021–2022 as ships waited at anchor, steamed slowly, or sailed around maritime bottlenecks.

In 2016–2019, the U.S.-bound shipping network turned about 89% of the fleet’s potential capacity into effective service [Figure 3.5]. During 2021–2022, effective capacity declined despite potential capacity reaching record highs. Pandemic-era port congestion and slower steaming pushed aggregate utilization below 70%. On the Asia-Pacific–U.S. West Coast route, utilization fell from about 92% before 2020 to 53% by late 2021. The route has since recovered but remains below its old peak. The network as a whole has not regained its pre-pandemic utilization. More recently, rerouting after the 2023–2024 Houthi attacks in the Red Sea held aggregate utilization near 79%. Utilization on the Middle East and Asia-Pacific routes to the U.S. East Coast via Suez fell to 48% and 61%, respectively, largely because diversion around the Cape of Good Hope lengthened voyages without increasing cargo delivered.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. The U.S.-bound shipping network converted about 89% of potential fleet capacity into effective service in 2016–2019, but aggregate utilization fell below 70% in 2021–2022 as ships waited at anchor, steamed slowly, or sailed around maritime bottlenecks.
  2. Utilization on the Asia-Pacific–U.S. West Coast route dropped from 92% before 2020 to 53% by late 2021 amid port congestion and slower steaming, recovering since but remaining well below its old peak.
  3. Since late 2023, utilization on the Middle East and Asia-Pacific routes to the U.S. East Coast via the Suez Canal has fallen to 48% and 61%, with diversions around the Cape of Good Hope driving much of the loss as ships travel longer distances without delivering additional cargo.

Related Articles:

  • How to Fight an Economic War — China earned about $3.4bn from exporting rare-earth elements and magnets in a year, while the U.S. Geological Survey estimates a 30% disruption to U.S. supply of the rare-earth element neodymium alone would cut U.S. GDP by 2.2%, over $600bn. This asymmetry gives Chinese export controls their leverage.
  • Industrial Policy and Economic Security — Industrial policy justified on national security grounds requires weighing how much economic inefficiency is worth tolerating, since costs incurred today make a country poorer and therefore less able to project power later. The calculation is difficult because security gains are probabilistic and long-term economic costs are speculative.
  • The Rise Of The Security Premium — Energy security concerns, not environmentalism, are argued to drive the buildout of solar, wind, and nuclear power, since domestic generation avoids chokepoints like Hormuz, the Red Sea, and the Panama Canal. China and India are expected to demand higher strategic stockpiles of energy and other critical commodities, repricing security above efficiency.
  • Trade (not deficits)
  • GDP
    • Inflation
  • Security

Soaring Yields Find Europe’s Weak Spot

AI Summary. A rapid rise in long-term US Treasury yields has highlighted vulnerabilities elsewhere, notably France, where risks are elevated. Because France is in the euro zone, any crisis there would extend to the currency area, and European stocks have sold off alongside a weakening euro.

John Authers Bloomberg
Date Posted:
October 2, 2026

The spread between 10-year French OATs and German Bunds is pricing a second eurozone sovereign-debt crisis. Authers suggests that the recent surge in US long-term yields has “shone a light” on France’s fiscal weakness, raising its salience to investors.

Do rising US long-term yields expose vulnerabilities in Europe?

Core argument: The speed of the rise in US long-term Treasury yields has raised the risk of dislocations elsewhere, with France a point of elevated vulnerability that would extend to the rest of the euro zone.

The speed of [the upward move in US long yields] brought the risk of dislocations elsewhere, like in France. Much as a surprising hawkish shift from the Fed under Alan Greenspan in 1994 revealed underlying weaknesses in the Mexican financial system that led to the Tequila Crisis, so this Treasury scare has shone a light on where the world’s greatest vulnerabilities are to be found. As France is part of the euro zone, any crisis must naturally extend to the rest of the currency area, at a time when most of its members are moving in a nationalist direction and likely reluctant to help. That is beginning to have an impact on stocks. The main European bourses sold off even as US equities rallied on Thursday. In combination with a weakening euro, the continent’s stocks have now given up almost all their gains since Trump took office.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. The speed of the rise in US long-term Treasury yields has raised the risk of dislocations elsewhere, with France a point of elevated vulnerability that would extend to the rest of the euro zone.
  2. The Treasury scare echoes the Fed’s surprising hawkish shift under Alan Greenspan in 1994, which revealed weaknesses in Mexico’s financial system and led to the Tequila Crisis.
  3. Europe’s main bourses sold off even as US equities rallied, and combined with a weakening euro, the continent’s stocks have given up almost all their gains since Trump took office.

Related Articles:

  • France Seeks To Rein In Pensions And State Salaries In 2027 — France plans to narrow its budget deficit to 5% of GDP by cutting state spending, capping increases to pensions and civil servant salaries, and raising taxes. Deteriorating public finances have left France borrowing at higher interest rates than Italy and Greece, with 10-year bond yields reaching their highest since 2002.
  • Soaring Bond Yields, Gaping Deficits and Towering Debts: What Could Go Wrong? — An analysis of 22 rich countries estimates that if each refinanced its entire debt at current five-year bond yields, Britain would need the largest primary surplus to stabilize its debt-to-GDP ratio, about 1.5%, followed by Italy at 1.4%, France at 1.2% and America at 1%.
  • Global Debt Report 2026 — Gross central government borrowing across OECD countries rose 7% to a record $17tn, about 23% of GDP, and is projected to reach roughly $18tn, or 24% of GDP. The United States and Japan account for close to 80% of the area's refinancing requirements, with the US share rising from 57% to 70%.
  • Financial Markets
  • Fiscal Policy
    • Fiscal Deficits
    • Government Spending
  • GDP

How Asia’s Surpluses Are Evolving

AI Summary. Japan, China, South Korea and Taiwan together hold just under $30tn in gross foreign assets, a five-fold rise over two decades, and about $10tn in net foreign assets. The author argues a current account surplus dominated by investment income, which tends to be reinvested abroad, generates less currency appreciation pressure than one driven by trade.

Udith Sikand Gavekal
Date Posted:
October 2, 2026

Northeast Asia’s ~$10T in net foreign assets would yield $400B annually at 4%, versus its ~$600B mean current-account surplus. Unlike export earnings, much investment income is reinvested abroad, creating less appreciation pressure.

Does investment income create less currency appreciation pressure than trade surpluses?

Core argument: Japan, China, South Korea and Taiwan together hold just under $30tn in gross foreign assets, a five-fold increase over the past two decades, with net foreign assets of about $10tn after liabilities to foreigners.

Japan, China, South Korea and Taiwan now hold nearly US10T net. At a 4% return, those net assets would generate roughly $600B over the past decade. The composition matters for exchange rates: exporters typically convert more of their foreign earnings into local currency to meet domestic costs, while foreign investment income is more likely to be reinvested abroad. A current-account surplus increasingly driven by investment income therefore creates less appreciation pressure than an equivalent trade surplus.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. Japan, China, South Korea and Taiwan together hold just under $30tn in gross foreign assets, a five-fold increase over the past two decades, with net foreign assets of about $10tn after liabilities to foreigners.
  2. At the current 4% federal funds rate, $10tn of net foreign assets would imply roughly $400bn a year in net investment income for the four Northeast Asian economies, against a combined current account surplus averaging about $600bn over the last decade.
  3. A current account surplus dominated by investment income generates less appreciation pressure than one dominated by trade, as exporters are more likely to repatriate and convert dollar earnings to cover domestic input costs while investment-income earners are more likely to reinvest abroad.

Related Articles:

  • Understanding Global Imbalances — The US, China, Germany, and Japan account for roughly two-thirds of global current account imbalances, with the US deficit at 4% of GDP financed by capital inflows into dollar assets. The average duration of a surplus or deficit spell roughly doubled since the 1980s, building large net foreign asset and liability positions.
  • Who Will Win The War Of Neo-Mercantilists? — China's manufacturing export surplus is around 2% of world GDP, roughly twice the largest surplus Japan ever ran, while domestic demand has stalled. Unexplained negative net income of about $125bn on its $4tn in net foreign assets, versus an expected $100bn surplus, supports the argument that the renminbi is about 30% undervalued.
  • The Real Problem With Global Trade — Asia's $1.5tn trade surplus is larger as a share of world output than at any point since 1945 and is the only large surplus in the global economy. Exchange rates have a meaningful impact on trade balances: China's surplus reached about 10% of its output amid renminbi depreciation, then fell below 2% after a 40% real appreciation.
  • GDP
    • Financial Markets
    • Savings Glut/Trade Deficit
    • Trade (not deficits)

USA: Pushing Back Fed Rate Hike on Lower Core PCE Inflation; Q2 GDP Revised Up to +2.2%; Trade Deficit Widens More Than Expected; Lowering Q3 GDP Tracking to +3.3%

AI Summary. Second-quarter real GDP growth was revised up 0.7 percentage points to +2.2% at an annual rate, reflecting upward revisions to consumption (to +3.8%) and investment (to +4.6%). Private fixed investment was revised up to +9.0%, driven by data center spending in nonresidential structures.

Jan Hatzius, David Mericle, Alec Phillips, Ronnie Walker, et al. Goldman Sachs
Date Posted:
October 2, 2026

GS forecasts that the FOMC will not hike in October, will do one 25bp hike in December and “ultimately conclude that additional rate hikes are unnecessary.”

What drove the upward revision to second-quarter GDP growth?

Core argument: U.S. real GDP growth in Q2 was revised up 0.7pp to +2.2% quarter-over-quarter annualized, led by upward revisions to consumption (+0.4pp to +3.8%) and investment (+1.9pp to +4.6%).

Real GDP was revised up by 0.7pp to +2.2% in Q2 (quarter-over-quarter annualized), largely reflecting upward revisions to consumption (+0.4pp to +3.8%) and investment (+1.9pp to +4.6%) growth. The strength in consumer spending in Q2 likely continued to reflect the boost to consumer cashflow from larger-than-usual tax refunds, but we continue to expect consumer spending growth to slow somewhat in 2026Q4 as the fiscal support fades and the headwind from higher energy prices remains. Stronger investment growth reflected an upward revision to private fixed investment (+0.5pp to +9.0%), driven by data center investment in the nonresidential structures category (+1.9pp to +0.1%), and an upward revision to the contribution from inventories (+0.2pp to -0.5pp).

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. U.S. real GDP growth in Q2 was revised up 0.7pp to +2.2% quarter-over-quarter annualized, led by upward revisions to consumption (+0.4pp to +3.8%) and investment (+1.9pp to +4.6%).
  2. Private fixed investment growth in Q2 was revised up 0.5pp to +9.0%, driven by data center investment in nonresidential structures, revised up 1.9pp to +0.1%, alongside a +0.2pp revision to the inventory contribution, to -0.5pp.
  3. Q2 consumer spending strength likely reflected the cashflow boost from larger-than-usual tax refunds, with spending growth expected to slow somewhat in 2026Q4 as fiscal support fades and higher energy prices remain a headwind.

Related Articles:

  • The Fed Finally Gets It — Federal Reserve officials' assessed risks to their employment and price stability mandates had tended to move together rather than inversely, suggesting common forces were driving both. That pattern has now shifted, with officials more optimistic on growth and employment and less concerned about downside risks than before the pandemic.
  • The Diesel Shock Is a Core Inflation Shock — The US Gulf Coast diesel crack spread cleared $100 per barrel for the first time on record, against a normal range of $15 to $30. Because diesel is an intermediate input embedded in the delivered cost of nearly every physical good, the author argues the increase migrates with a lag into core goods and services inflation.
  • Warsh’s Fed Soars Like a Hawk Into a Hiking Cycle — The Federal Reserve described its rate increase as having "removed a dose of accommodation" and as a start to showing it is serious, implying the policy rate remains accommodative and further increases are coming. Market-implied expectations have shifted to price in three additional hikes before the tightening cycle ends.
  • Growth
  • GDP
    • Inflation
  • Monetary Policy

The Two Charts Any Social Security Reformer Should Understand

AI Summary. An analysis finds a Social Security tax-increase package lowers the debt-to-GDP ratio by 14.3 percentage points, with 97% of that coming from smaller Social Security deficits rather than economic growth. A benefit-reduction package cuts the ratio by 29.2 percentage points, raising long-run GDP by 12.1% versus 0.4%.

Andrew Biggs American Enterprise Institute
Date Posted:
October 2, 2026

A Penn-Wharton simulation finds that restoring Social Security solvency with tax increases alone would cut debt/GDP by ~14pp by 2060, while a fix based only on benefit cuts would cut it by ~29pp.

How do benefit cuts and tax increases differ in reducing debt-to-GDP?

Core argument: The benefit-reduction package cuts the debt/GDP ratio by 29.2 percentage points in the long run, more than twice the 14.3 percentage points under the tax-increase package.

The first figure [in the gallery] decomposes the tax-increase reform package’s improvement to the debt/GDP ratio into separate effects: how much does it cut debt versus how much does it raise GDP? Almost all of the tax-increase plan’s improvement in debt/GDP comes from lowering federal debt by raising taxes. The plan has a small negative effect on the economy in the short run and a small positive effect in the long run. But 97% of its 14.3 percentage point long-run reduction in debt/GDP comes simply from reducing Social Security’s deficits. The economy is little-changed relative to a baseline in which Congress simply borrows to pay Social Security benefits. The benefit-reduction package [second figure in the gallery] tells a different story. It reduces debt/GDP by 29.2 percentage points, more than twice as much as the tax-increase package. Part of that comes from a larger reduction in debt: 17.2 percentage points versus 13.9. But the real kicker comes from higher long-run GDP: 12.1% under the benefit-reduction package versus just 0.4% under the tax-increase package.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. The benefit-reduction package cuts the debt/GDP ratio by 29.2 percentage points in the long run, more than twice the 14.3 percentage points under the tax-increase package.
  2. Of the tax-increase plan’s 14.3 percentage point long-run reduction in debt/GDP, 97% comes from reducing Social Security’s deficits, leaving the economy little changed relative to a baseline in which Congress borrows to pay benefits.
  3. Long-run GDP rises 12.1% under the benefit-reduction package versus 0.4% under the tax-increase package, with debt falling 17.2 percentage points versus 13.9.

Related Articles:

  • The Fairest Way to Reform Social Security May Also Be the Worst Way to Grow the Economy — Fully closing Social Security's funding gap by raising the payroll tax rate would require an immediate, permanent increase from 12.4% to 17.6%, which would reduce labor supply and economic growth. Research on a prior benefit cut found affected Americans raised earnings by 61 cents per dollar of lost benefits, generating additional payroll tax revenue.
  • How Federal Spending is Distributed by Age — An analysis classifying $4.4tn of $7tn in federal spending by age finds retirees aged 65 and older receive $2.7tn, 38.6% of total outlays and 61.9% of age-assignable spending, versus $1.2tn for working-age adults and $449bn for those under 26. Social Security and Medicare account for 80% of age-assignable spending on older adults.
  • The Great “Transfer”-mation — Government transfers rose from 8.2% of Americans' total personal income in 1970 to 17.6% in 2022, making them the third largest income source after work and investments. The share of U.S. counties drawing a quarter or more of personal income from transfers rose from under 1% in 1970 to 53% in 2022.
  • Government Spending
  • Fiscal Policy
    • Taxation


Loading More Posts

End of content

No more pages to load

© Copyright 2026 Coherent Research Institute · All Rights Reserved · Privacy · Terms