U.S. Trade Deficit Rose about 50% from 2016 to 2021
[ABS News Service/09.06.2022]
The
Numbers:
Q1/2022 -
4.9%
2021
-4.0%
2016
-2.7%
2005
-5.7%*
* Highest
on record; GDP stats begin in 1929. Deficits for 1815-1816 may have been higher,
but GDP for those days is guess-work. In dollar terms, the 2016 deficit
(goods/services) has grown by about 80%, from $481 billion; to a 2021 deficit
of $861 billion.
What They
Mean:
The
Trump administration’s first “President’s Trade Agenda” report, released in
March of 2017, cited U.S. manufacturing trade balance data as an index of the
failures of previous administrations:
“In
2000, the U.S. trade deficit in manufactured goods was $317 billion. Last year
it was $648 billion — an increase of 100%.”
The
next “President’s Trade Agenda” report of 2018 used “bilateral” trade balance
to assert a failure of the North American Free Trade Agreement and set a goal
for the “USMCA” which succeeded it:
“Our
goods trade balance with Mexico, until 1994 characterized by reciprocal trade
flows, almost immediately soured after NAFTA implementation, with a deficit of
over $15 billion in 1995, and over $71 billion by 2017.” … “USTR has set as its
primary objective for these renegotiations to improve the U.S. trade balance
and reduce the trade deficit with the NAFTA countries.”
The
two assertions’ use of trade-balance data as a way to judge policies
have well-known logical,* data,** and economic
theory*** problems. This duly noted, how do they look on their own terms five
years later? By 2021, U.S. exports had dropped from the 11.9% share of GDP they
held in 2016 to 10.8%; imports, meanwhile, had grown a bit from 14.6% to 14.8%
of GDP. Here then are the same two trade-balance statistics for 2021 and (very
tentatively, based on one quarter’s worth of trade data) so far in 2022:
1. The U.S. manufacturing deficit in 2021 was $1.07 trillion. The last four
months’ data suggest a 2022 total somewhere around $1.3 trillion. If this ends
up about right, the 2016 manufacturing deficit noted in the 2017 “President’s
Trade Agenda” would have doubled in five years.
2.
The trade balance with Mexico (again, goods only) was $108 billion in 2021, a
year after USMCA implementation. It looks likely to top $125 billion in
2022, with tariffs on Chinese consumer goods still shifting some purchasing of
TV sets, auto parts, etc., to Mexico.
* The “post hoc, ergo propter hoc” fallacy.
** Comparison of nominal-dollar balance in 2000 to the
nominal-dollar balance in 2016, unadjusted for inflation.
*** Global trade balance will always equal national investment minus
national savings; if tax cuts and large fiscal-stimulus programs reduce
savings, trade balances will automatically go into deficit unless investment
collapses for some reason. So the 2017 comment is not a useful comment on trade
agreements, and the 2018 objective likely not one achievable through
policy.