Business League logoBusiness League
Chapter 16: Exchange Rates and International Capital Flows

16.4Exchange Rate Policies

Argentina’s banks found themselves unable to pay back what they had borrowed in U.S. dollars. Banks play a vital role in any economy in facilitating transactions and in making loans to firms and consumers. When most of a country’s largest banks become bankrupt simultaneously, a sharp decline in aggregate and a deep results. Since the main responsibilities of a are to control the supply and to ensure that the banking system is stable, a must be concerned about whether large and unexpected will drive most of the country’s existing banks into bankruptcy. For more on this concern, return to the chapter on The International Trade and Capital Flows.

Summing Up Public Policy and Exchange Rates

Every nation would prefer a stable to facilitate international trade and reduce the degree of and uncertainty in the economy. However, a nation may sometimes want a weaker to stimulate aggregate and reduce a , or a stronger to fight . The country must also be concerned that rapid movements from a weak to a strong may hurt its export industries, while rapid movements from a strong to a weak can hurt its banking sector. In short, every choice of an —whether it should be stronger or weaker, or fixed or changing—represents potential tradeoffs.

16.4 Exchange Rate Policies

LEARNING OBJECTIVES By the end of this section, you will be able to:

  • Differentiate among a , a , a , and a
  • Identify the tradeoffs that come with a , a , a , and a

policies come in a range of different forms listed in : let the determine the ; let the set the value of the most of the time, but have the sometimes intervene to prevent fluctuations that seem too large; have the guarantee a specific ; or share a currency with other countries. Let’s discuss each type of policy and its tradeoffs.

FIGURE 16.10A Spectrum of Policies A nation may adopt one of a variety of regimes, from floating rates in which the determines the rates to pegged rates where governments intervene to manage the 's value, to a common currency where the nation adopts another country or group of countries' currency.

Floating Exchange Rates

We refer to a policy which allows the to set exchange rates as a . The U.S. dollar is a , as are the currencies of about 40% of the countries in the world economy. The major concern with this policy is that exchange rates can move a great deal in a short time. Consider the U.S. expressed in terms of another fairly stable currency, the Japanese yen, as shows. On January 1, 2002, the was 133 yen/dollar. On January 1, 2005, it was 103 yen/dollar. On June 1, 2007, it was 122 yen/dollar, on January 1, 2012, it was 77 yen per dollar, and on March 1, 2015, it was 120 yen per dollar. Since 2015, it has dropped again; by the end of December 2020, the stood at 103 yen per dollar. As investor sentiment swings back and forth, driving exchange rates up and down, exporters, importers, and banks involved in international lending are all affected. At worst, large movements in exchange rates can drive companies into bankruptcy or trigger a nationwide banking collapse. However, even in the moderate case of the yen/dollar , these movements of roughly 30 percent back and forth impose stress on both economies as firms must alter their export and import plans to take the new exchange rates into account. Especially in smaller countries where international trade is a relatively large share of GDP, movements can rattle their economies.

FIGURE 16.11U.S. Dollar in Japanese Yen Even seemingly stable exchange rates such as the Japanese Yen to the U.S. Dollar can vary when closely examined over time. This figure shows a relatively stable rate between 2000 and 2007 of over 25%. Beginning in 2007 until 2012, there was a significant appreciation of the Yen (relative to the U.S. Dollar) by about 14% and again at the end of the year in 2014 also by about 14%. Since then, between 2016 and 2020 there was an appreciation of about 13% from 118 yen per dollar to 103 yen per dollar. (Source: Federal Reserve Economic Data (FRED) https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/DEXJPUS) However, movements of floating exchange rates have advantages, too. After all, prices of goods and services rise and fall throughout a , as and supply shift. If an economy experiences strong inflows or outflows of international , or has relatively high , or if it experiences strong productivity growth so that purchasing power changes relative to other economies, then it makes economic sense for the to shift as well. advocates often argue that if government policies were more predictable and stable, then rates and interest rates would be more predictable and stable. Exchange rates would bounce around less, too. The economist Milton Friedman (1912–2006), for example, wrote a defense of floating exchange rates in 1962 in his book Capitalism and Freedom: Being in favor of floating exchange rates does not mean being in favor of unstable exchange rates. When we support a free system [for goods and services] at home, this does not imply that we favor a system in which prices fluctuate wildly up and down. What we want is a system in which prices are free to fluctuate but in which the forces determining them are sufficiently stable so that in fact prices move within moderate ranges. This is equally true in a system of floating exchange rates. The ultimate objective is a world in which exchange rates, while free to vary, are, in fact, highly stable because basic economic policies and conditions are stable. Advocates of floating exchange rates admit that, yes, exchange rates may sometimes fluctuate. They point out, however, that if a focuses on preventing either high or deep , with low and reasonably steady interest rates, then exchange rates will have less reason to vary.

Using Soft Pegs and Hard Pegs

When a government intervenes in the so that the currency's is different from what the would have produced, it establishes a “peg” for its currency. A is the name for an policy where the government usually allows the to set , but in some cases, especially if the seems to be moving rapidly in one direction, the will intervene in the . With a policy, the central bank sets a fixed and unchanging value for the exchange rate. A central bank can implement soft peg and hard peg policies. Suppose the market exchange rate for the Brazilian currency, the real, would be 35 cents/real with a daily quantity of 15 billion real traded in the market, as the equilibrium E0 in (a) and (b) show. However, Brazil's government decides that the should be 30 cents/real, as (a) shows. Perhaps Brazil sets this lower to benefit its export industries. Perhaps it is an attempt to stimulate aggregate by stimulating . Perhaps Brazil believes that the current is higher than the long-term purchasing power parity value of the real, so it is minimizing fluctuations in the real by keeping it at this lower rate. Perhaps the government set the target sometime in the past, and it is now maintaining it for the sake of stability. Whatever the reason, if Brazil’s wishes to keep the below the level, it must face the reality that at this weaker of 30 cents/real, the of its currency at 17 billion reals is greater than the of 13 billion reals in the foreign exchange market.

FIGURE 16.12Pegging an (a) If an is pegged below what would otherwise be the , then the currency's will exceed the . (b) If an is pegged above what would otherwise be the , then the currency's exceeds the . The Brazilian could weaken its in two ways. One approach is to use an that leads to lower interest rates. In foreign exchange markets, the lower interest rates will reduce demand and increase supply of the real and lead to depreciation. Central banks do not use this technique often because lowering interest rates to weaken the currency may be in conflict with the country’s monetary policy goals. Alternatively, Brazil’s central bank could trade directly in the foreign exchange market. The central bank can expand the money supply by creating reals, use the reals to purchase foreign currencies, and avoid selling any of its own currency. In this way, it can fill the gap between quantity demanded and quantity supplied of its currency. (b) shows the opposite situation. Here, the Brazilian government desires a stronger of 40 cents/real than the rate of 35 cents/real. Perhaps Brazil desires the stronger currency to reduce aggregate and to fight , or perhaps Brazil believes that that current is temporarily lower than the long-term rate. Whatever the reason, at the higher desired , the of 16 billion reals exceeds the of 14 billion reals. Brazil’s can use a to raise interest rates, which will increase and reduce currency supply on foreign exchange markets, and lead to an appreciation. Alternatively, Brazil’s central bank can trade directly in the foreign exchange market. In this case, with an excess supply of its own currency in foreign exchange markets, the central bank must use reserves of foreign currency, like U.S. dollars, to demand its own currency and thus cause an appreciation of its exchange rate. Both a soft peg and a hard peg policy require that the central bank intervene in the foreign exchange market. However, a hard peg policy attempts to preserve a fixed exchange rate at all times. A soft peg policy typically allows the exchange rate to move up and down by relatively small amounts in the short run of several months or a year, and to move by larger amounts over time, but seeks to avoid extreme short-term fluctuations.

Tradeoffs of Soft Pegs and Hard Pegs

When a country decides to alter the , it faces a number of tradeoffs. If it uses to alter the , it then cannot at the same time use to address issues of or . If it uses direct purchases and sales of foreign currencies in exchange rates, then it must face the issue of how it will handle its of foreign currency. Finally, a pegged can even create additional movements of the . For example, even the possibility of government intervention in markets will lead to rumors about whether and when the government will intervene, and dealers in the will react to those rumors. Let’s consider these issues in turn. One concern with pegged exchange rate policies is that they imply a country’s monetary policy is no longer focused on controlling inflation or shortening recessions, but now must also take the exchange rate into account. For example, when a country pegs its exchange rate, it will sometimes face economic situations where it would like to have an expansionary monetary policy to fight recession—but it cannot do so because that policy would depreciate its exchange rate and break its hard peg. With a soft peg exchange rate policy, the central bank can sometimes ignore the exchange rate and focus on domestic inflation or recession—but in other cases the central bank may ignore inflation or recession and instead focus on its soft peg exchange rate. With a hard peg policy, domestic monetary policy is effectively no longer determined by domestic inflation or unemployment, but only by what monetary policy is needed to keep the exchange rate at the hard peg. Another issue arises when a central bank intervenes directly in the exchange rate market. If a central bank ends up in a situation where it is perpetually creating and selling its own currency on foreign exchange markets, it will be buying the currency of other countries, like U.S. dollars or euros, to hold as reserves. Holding large reserves of other currencies has an opportunity cost, and central banks will not wish to boost such reserves without limit. In addition, a central bank that causes a large increase in the supply of money is also risking an inflationary surge in aggregate demand. Conversely, when a central bank wishes to buy its own currency, it can do so by using its reserves of international currency like the U.S. dollar or the euro. However, if the central bank runs out of such reserves, it can no longer use this method to strengthen its currency. Thus, buying foreign currencies in exchange rate markets can be expensive and inflationary, while selling foreign currencies can work only until a central bank runs out of reserves. Yet another issue is that when a government pegs its exchange rate, it may unintentionally create another reason for additional fluctuation. With a soft peg policy, foreign exchange dealers and international investors react to every rumor about how or when the central bank is likely to intervene to influence the exchange rate, and as they react to rumors the exchange rate will shift up and down. Thus, even though the goal of a soft peg policy is to reduce short-term fluctuations of the exchange rate, the existence of the policy—when anticipated in the foreign exchange market—may sometimes increase short-term fluctuations as international investors try to anticipate how and when the central bank will act. The following Clear It Up feature discusses the effects of international capital flows—capital that flows across national boundaries as either portfolio investment or direct investment. CLEAR IT UP How do Tobin taxes control the flow of capital? Some countries like Chile and Malaysia have sought to reduce movements in exchange rates by limiting international financial capital inflows and outflows. The government can enact this policy either through targeted taxes or by regulations. Taxes on international capital flows are sometimes known as Tobin taxes, named after James Tobin, the 1981 Nobel laureate in economics who proposed such a tax in a 1972 lecture. For example, a government might tax all foreign exchange transactions, or attempt to tax short-term portfolio investment while exempting long-term foreign direct investment. Countries can also use regulation to forbid certain kinds of foreign investment in the first place or to make it difficult for international financial investors to withdraw their funds from a country. The goal of such policies is to reduce international capital flows, especially short-term portfolio flows, in the hope that doing so will reduce the chance of large movements in exchange rates that can bring macroeconomic disaster. However, proposals to limit international financial flows have severe practical difficulties. National governments impose taxes, not international ones. If one government imposes a Tobin tax on exchange rate transactions carried out within its territory, a firm based someplace like the Grand Caymans, an island nation in the Caribbean well- known for allowing some financial wheeling and dealing might easily operate the exchange rate market. In an interconnected global economy, if goods and services are allowed to flow across national borders, then payments need to flow across borders, too. It is very difficult—in fact close to impossible—for a nation to allow only the flows of payments that relate to goods and services, while clamping down or taxing other flows of financial capital. If a nation participates in international trade, it must also participate in international capital movements. Finally, countries all over the world, especially low-income countries, are crying out for foreign investment to help develop their economies. Policies that discourage international financial investment may prevent some possible harm, but they rule out potentially substantial economic benefits as well. A hard peg exchange rate policy will not allow short-term fluctuations in the exchange rate. If the government first announces a hard peg and then later changes its mind—perhaps the government becomes unwilling to keep interest rates high or to hold high levels of foreign exchange reserves—then the result of abandoning a hard peg could be a dramatic shift in the exchange rate. In the mid-2000s, about one-third of the countries in the world used a soft peg approach and about one- quarter used a hard peg approach. The general trend in the 1990s was to shift away from a soft peg approach in favor of either floating rates or a hard peg. The concern is that a successful soft peg policy may, for a time, lead to very little variation in exchange rates, so that firms and banks in the economy begin to act as if a hard peg exists. When the exchange rate does move, the effects are especially painful because firms and banks have not planned and hedged against a possible change. Thus, the argument went, it is better either to be clear that the exchange rate is always flexible, or that it is fixed, but choosing an in-between soft peg option may end up being worst of all.

A Merged Currency

A final approach to policy is for a nation to choose a common currency shared with one or more nations is also called a . A approach eliminates foreign exchange altogether. Just as no one worries about movements when buying and selling between New York and California, Europeans know that the value of the euro will be the same in Germany and France and other European nations that have adopted the euro. However, a also poses problems. Like a , a means that a nation has given up altogether on domestic , and instead has put its policies in other hands. When Ecuador uses the U.S. dollar as its currency, it has no voice in whether the Federal Reserve raises or lowers interest rates. The European that determines for the euro has representatives from all the euro nations. However, from the standpoint of, say, Portugal, there will be times when the decisions of the European Central Bank about monetary policy do not match the decisions that a Portuguese central bank would have made. The lines between these four different exchange rate policies can blend into each other. For example, a soft peg exchange rate policy in which the government almost never acts to intervene in the exchange rate market will look a great deal like a floating exchange rate. Conversely, a soft peg policy in which the government intervenes often to keep the exchange rate near a specific level will look a lot like a hard peg. A decision to merge currencies with another country is, in effect, a decision to have a permanently fixed exchange rate with those countries, which is like a very hard exchange rate peg. summarizes the range of exchange rates policy choices, with their advantages and disadvantages. Floating Exchange Situation Rates Often considerable in the short term Maybe less in the , but still large changes over time None, unless a change in the fixed rate Large short-run fluctuations in exchange rates? None Cannot happen unless changes, in which case substantial volatility can occur Large long-term fluctuations in exchange rates? Can often happen Can often happen Cannot happen Flexible exchange None; nation Some power, although conflicts may arise Very little; central Power of to conduct ? rates make stronger does not have its own currency between policy and policy bank must keep fixed Do not need to hold reserves Hold moderate reserves that rise and fall over time No need to hold reserves Costs of holding foreign exchange reserves? Hold large reserves Risk of ending up with an exchange rate that causes a large trade imbalance and very high inflows or outflows of financial capital? May end up over time either far above or below the market level Adjusts over the medium term, if not the short term Cannot adjust Adjusts often TABLE 16.3Tradeoffs of Exchange Rate Policies Global macroeconomics would be easier if the whole world had one currency and one central bank. The exchange rates between different currencies complicate the picture. If financial markets solely set exchange rates, they fluctuate substantially as short-term portfolio investors try to anticipate tomorrow’s news. If the government attempts to intervene in exchange rate markets through soft pegs or hard pegs, it gives up at least some of the power to use monetary policy to focus on domestic inflations and recessions, and it risks causing even greater fluctuations in foreign exchange markets. There is no consensus among economists about which exchange rate policies are best: floating, soft peg, hard peg, or merged currencies. The choice depends both on how well a nation’s central bank can implement a specific exchange rate policy and on how well a nation’s firms and banks can adapt to different exchange rate policies. A national economy that does a fairly good job at achieving the four main economic goals of growth, low inflation, low unemployment, and a sustainable balance of trade will probably do just fine most of the time with any exchange rate policy. Conversely, no exchange rate policy is likely to save an economy that consistently fails at achieving these goals. Alternatively, a merged currency applied across wide geographic and cultural areas carries with it its own set of problems, such as the ability for countries to conduct their own independent monetary policies. BRING IT HOME Is a Stronger Dollar Good for the U.S. Economy? The foreign exchange value of the dollar is a price and whether a higher price is good or bad depends on where you are standing: sellers benefit from higher prices and buyers are harmed. A stronger dollar is good for U.S. imports (and people working for U.S. importers) and U.S. investment abroad. It is also good for U.S. tourists going to other countries, since their dollar goes further. However, a stronger dollar is bad for U.S. exports (and people working in U.S. export industries); it is bad for foreign investment in the United States (leading, for example, to higher U.S. interest rates); and it is bad for foreign tourists (as well as U.S hotels, restaurants, and others in the tourist industry). In short, whether the U.S. dollar is good or bad is a more complex question than you may have thought. The economic answer is “it depends.”

Key Terms

when a currency is worth more in terms of other currencies; also called “strengthening” the process of buying a good and selling goods across borders to take advantage of international differences when a currency is worth less in terms of other currencies; also called “weakening” a country that is not the United States uses the U.S. dollar as its currency a country lets the determine its currency's value foreign direct investment (FDI) purchasing more than ten percent of a or starting a new enterprise in another country the in which people use one currency to buy another currency an exchange rate policy in which the central bank sets a fixed and unchanging value for the exchange rate hedge using a financial transaction as protection against risk international capital flows flow of financial capital across national boundaries either as portfolio investment or direct investment merged currency when a nation chooses to use another nation's currency portfolio investment an investment in another country that is purely financial and does not involve any management responsibility purchasing power parity (PPP) the exchange rate that equalizes the prices of internationally traded goods across countries soft peg an exchange rate policy in which the government usually allows the market to set the exchange rate, but in some cases, especially if the exchange rate seems to be moving rapidly in one direction, the central bank will intervene Tobin taxes see international capital flows

Key Concepts and Summary

16.1 How the Foreign Exchange Market Works

In the , people and firms exchange one currency to purchase another currency. The for dollars comes from those U.S. export firms seeking to convert their earnings in foreign currency back into U.S. dollars; foreign tourists converting their earnings in a foreign currency back into U.S. dollars; and foreign investors seeking to make financial investments in the U.S. economy. On the supply side of the for the trading of U.S. dollars are foreign firms that have sold in the U.S. economy and are seeking to convert their earnings back to their home currency; U.S. tourists abroad; and U.S. investors seeking to make financial investments in foreign economies. When currency A can buy more of currency B, then currency A has strengthened or appreciated relative to B. When currency A can buy less of currency B, then currency A has weakened or depreciated relative to B. If currency A strengthens or appreciates relative to currency B, then currency B must necessarily weaken or depreciate with regard to currency A. A stronger currency benefits those who are buying with that currency and injures those who are selling. A weaker currency injures those, like importers, who are buying with that currency and benefits those who are selling with it, like exporters.

16.2 Demand and Supply Shifts in Foreign Exchange Markets

In the extreme , ranging from a few minutes to a few weeks, speculators who are trying to invest in currencies that will grow stronger, and to sell currencies that will grow weaker influence exchange rates. Such speculation can create a self-fulfilling prophecy, at least for a time, where an expected appreciation leads to a stronger currency and vice versa. In the relatively , differences in rates of return influence markets. Countries with relatively high real rates of return (for example, high interest rates) will tend to experience stronger currencies as they attract from abroad, while countries with relatively low rates of return will tend to experience weaker exchange rates as investors convert to other currencies.

Simpler explanation — Cambridge AS & A Level Economics

The foreign is the of one currency in terms of another currency; that is, the of the domestic currency in terms of a foreign currency. For example, the of US$1 may be 50 Indian rupees. This would mean that a 5000-rupee product would sell in the US for US$100. A rise in India’s foreign against the US dollar would increase the of India’s in terms of US dollars and would lower the of India’s in terms of rupees. For example, the value of the rupee might rise to US$1 equals 40 rupees so that a US dollar may be purchased with fewer rupees.

Now a 5000- rupee product would sell in the US for US$125. A US $20 import that would have initially sold in India for 1000 rupees, will now sell in India for 800 rupees. Remember when examining the effects of a change in the that there is a difference between the external and internal value of a currency. The shows the external value and the level shows the internal value. 28.2 How a is determined A is one determined by forces.

Currencies are bought and sold on the . This does not exist in a single location but is made up of financial institutions that buy and sell foreign currency on behalf of private and business customers. Large values of currencies are bought and sold on any particular day. The of the currency is determined by the relative strengths of the for and supply of the currency. There are various reasons why currency traders will buy the domestic currency.

Text from Principles of Macroeconomics 3e, OpenStax, licensed CC BY-NC-SA 4.0. Access for free at openstax.org.

My notes

No notes yet on this page.