Powering The Digital World Is About To Get More Expensive

What impact will Russian aggression against Ukraine have on your digital use? Given the resulting displacement in energy supply, probably a lot.  Everything we do on our phones, tablets, and laptops involves a network of fortressed buildings around the globe, called the data center.  Inside the data center sits racks of computers called servers, upon which powerful algorithms run, so we can best live our lives in this digital world.  Beyond the obvious space capacity limitations, each data center operator has to purchase enough energy to power these mighty operations, to keep the facilities cool, to ensure optimal performance.  Who will absorb these increased costs?  Will the data center operators pass on these costs to firms who lease space inside the data center?  Will they in turn pass these costs on to consumers?  Who’s in a stronger position to manage their p&l performance?

In a report issued in December 2020, the global data center power market was forecast to grow from $19.1 billion in 2020 to $26.1 billion by 2025.  This on new data center construction globally to meet storage demand, and on the unprecedented rise in power consumption to support new cutting edge technology, which has increased both operational and power costs.  Global Data Center Power Market

Layer in the actual and projected rise in crude oil and natural gas, brought about by firmly united NATO country sanctions against non-team player Putin’s Russia, you can quickly see we’re going to have an expense problem.  Swift NATO response to the February 24, 2022 invasion has resulted in member countries instituting crippling financial sanctions, including shutting down imports of oil and gas from Russia.  The battle in Ukraine further disrupts the supply.

Goldman Sachs, who attributes their success to a very intentional team culture, has issued a report by their Commodities Research Team.  As Russia and Ukraine supply 17% of oil and 11% of gas to the rest of the world, the energy sanctions hit will be painful.  The impact will be greatest in Europe, particularly Germany, but will certainly be felt here in the United States.  Russia and Ukraine supply three million barrels of crude oil a day.  Goldman predicts the west can offset half of this by releasing strategic oil reserves, and relaxing sanctions in Iran and Venezuela.  The remaining 1.5 million daily shortfall in crude oil will result in higher prices to reduce energy consumption, forecasted at a range of $125 – $175 per barrel in 2022.  The April 1, 2022 price sits around $100, with the 52 week range at $57.63 to $130.501.  Goldman Sachs Podcast Impact of Russian Invasion on Global Economy

Data centers are primarily powered by electricity, which are impacted by rising natural gas prices.  According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (eia), wholesale electricity prices trended higher in 2021 due to increasing natural gas prices.  Our reluctance to date to address the major impacts of climate change have resulted in especially volatile storm and temperature conditions, which in turn puts pressure on prices.  More on that here.   Since the onset of the war, natural gas has risen from $4.79 on March 1 to about $5.60 on April 1, 2022.  The 52 week range is $2.45 to $6.471.  

The good news is that major data center providers like Equinix, who benefit from veteran and strategic thinking management, have made significant advancements in energy efficiency and sustainability innovation. In December 2021, the Clean Hydrogen Partnership announced EUR 2.5 million in funding, choosing seven companies – Equinix, InfraPrime, Rise, Snam, SOLIDpower, TEC4FUELS, and Vertiv, to develop low-carbon fuel cells to power data centers.  The EcoEdge PrimePower (E2P2) project aims to provide economic and resilient prime power solutions for the data center environment.  It is hoped this could also reduce carbon emissions from operations by up to 100%.  Consortium to Lead Fuel Cell Development for Data Centers

In January 2022, Equinix announced its first Co-Innovation Facility (CIF) located at its Ashburn Campus in the Washington, D.C. area.  This is part of a broader Data Center of the Future initiative.  The CIF is a new capability that enables partners to work with Equinix on trialing and developing innovations to define the future of sustainable digital infrastructure.  Equinix Joins Partners in Sustainability Innovation

Broadly speaking, Equinix has been engaged for some time in transforming energy efficiency.  Since 2011, they have invested more than $130 million to reduce energy consumption within their data centers.  Equinix Energy Efficiency  The other major data center provider globally is Digital Realty.  For information on their operations and sustainability efforts, read more here.

All that being said, with the clear acknowledgement that I’m a big Equinix fan who follows their financial performance closely, it remains to be seen how this current global energy firestorm will impact p&l performance in 2022

Keeping it simple, I turn to the latest guidance provided by Equinix CFO Keith Taylor on February 16, 2022, a mere eight days before the invasion.  Following Q4 2021 revenues of $1.706 billion and adjusted EBITDA of $788 million, Q1 2022 guidance informs a revenue range of $1.726 – $1.746 billion, and adjusted EBITDA of $781 – 801 million.  FY 2022 guidance for revenue is projected to be $7.202 – $7.252 billion, adjusted EBITDA $3.307 – $3.337 billion. 

Clearly there are many variables that will determine any forecast variances that may occur.  If the energy cost scenario plays out as anticipated, I would expect that adjusted EBITDA will show unfavorable variances to forecast, likely starting in the second quarter.  Even if the decision is made to pass on these increased costs, the timing of client contract renewals will affect this decision.  I will look to the upcoming quarterly investor calls for guidance, and keep you all updated.  Please join in the conversation and let me know your thoughts!  Stay safe and be well!

Feature Image: Please enjoy my favorite digital photo of my amazing brother Geoffrey and I at Lady Gaga’s performance at the L.A. Forum in December 2017! Yes we are a very musical family! #DigitalMemoriesToLastALifetime

Data sourced from the Wall Street Journal.

The Long Game

Thank you to Slash and Betty White for reminding us to be cool and play the long game!

By now everyone has seen last week’s earnings highlights.  The one that really caught my attention read “Goldman Pays Up for Talent, Sending Profits Down”.  Huh?  In 2021, Goldman reported record net earnings of $21.6 billion, more than double 2020 results of $9.5 billion, and more than double results in recent history, $8.5 billion in 2019, and $10.5 billion in 2018. 

JP Morgan was hit with a similar headline, “Wells Fargo Up, JP Morgan Down”.  This on 2021 net earnings of $48.3 billion, which soared 66% to 2020 results.  

These onerous headlines were referring to quarterly changes.  Goldman Q4 net earnings of $3.9 billion fell (27%) to Q3, and (13%) year over year.  JP Morgan Q4 results of $10.4 billion fell (11%) to Q3 and (14%) year over year.  This is important because long term capital appreciation demands a long term growth strategy.  The problem is short-termism.  CEO’s are under enormous pressure to deliver strong quarterly earnings reports and to distribute wealth rather than reinvest.  Investors responded this time by sending shares of Goldman and JP Morgan down.  

In a 2015 article I wrote, McKinsey’s Dominic Barton, BlackRock’s Laurence Fink, and Rodel CEO Bill Budinger intensified the debate on the short term approach, challenging leaders to play the long game.

I think Jamie Dimon got it right in his response to investors, “We will be competitive in  pay.  If that squeezes margins a little bit for shareholders, so be it.”  Further, Mr. Dimon asserted that JP Morgan wouldn’t meet its longer-term target returns this year and maybe next year.  I’d say that qualifies as playing the long game, as Laurence Fink’s 2015 letter to Fortune 500 CEOs urged.

While Wells Fargo is cutting costs, other banks with bigger Wall Street operations reported higher expenses, largely because investment banking and trading results have soared, with the demand for talent high.  It has taken more than ten years for global markets volume to rebound since the near collapse of the world financial system in 2008 and 2009.  This is welcome news not only for an industry forever changed by these events, but for New York City and State tax coffers.  This will also help small business in the New York metro area, COVID notwithstanding, in a city metropolis plagued by increasing income disparity.

What else are the big banks investing in?  The answer is technology.  Advances in artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) factor squarely in post trade settlement.  Ongoing transformation in cloud operations, interconnection, communication services, payments, and enhanced data security are also garnering noteworthy investment.  

Technology spend worldwide is projected to grow 5.5% in 2022 to $4.5 trillion.  This follows a robust level of investment in 2021.  As one example, investments in European tech firms soared to $93.3 billion last year, a record, and a 142% increase over the year before, according to CB Insights. 

U.S. Banks are very focused on this.  JP Morgan has instituted a technology in residence program and recruited McKinsey Partner Neha Gargi as their new Head of Global Technology Strategy. 

Goldman is leaning forward as well with deep talent search.  In Spring 2021, they reached out to me, having identified my trading technology FP&A background.  I interviewed with a veteran new hire leading their technology efforts in their Americas Operations group.  This person had an engineering and product background outside capital markets, most recently within the APAC region.  I didn’t land the role but it really caught my attention, revealing the intensity of their strategic focus.

Where is this all leading?  Utilizing the long game, I’m bullish on America and believe we can transform the U.S. economy and regain the top spot from China.  But we need to get going on this.  

In some related good news, mountains have moved on Capitol Hill with groundbreaking bipartisan support in the U.S. Senate, with passage of the $250 billion U.S. Innovation and Competition Act, also known as the Endless Frontier Act.  This week the U.S. House takes up this effort, largely seen as a critical and effective means to counter China’s technological ambitions. 

So let’s get moving!  What are your thoughts on this?  I’d love to hear!

As always I’m reminded that nothing lasts forever, even cold November rain.  Hmm, sounds like song lyrics. Enjoy!

Guns N’ Roses November Rain

Feature Photo courtesy of the IMGUR platform and the L.A. Zoo, on whose Board Slash sits, along with Betty White when she was still with us.

Please note Addendum links below to supporting articles.

Goldman Sachs Sees Profits Slips

Wells Fargo Up, JP Morgan Down

Cynthia 2015 Article Long Term Capital Appreciation  

Banks like JP Morgan: Inflation Is A Double Edged Sword

Gartner projecting $4.5 trillion Tech Spend

European Tech Scene

JP Morgan Technology In Residence

JP Morgan hires new Head of Global Technology Strategy

Bipartisan Senate Passes Bill To Boost China Competitiveness

U.S. House Takes Up China Competitiveness Bill

Global Leadership: U.S. Call To Action!

The United States of America is at an inflection point in the global economy, $20.8 trillion in 2020 to China $24.2 trillion.  The dominant leader since WWII, the U.S.’s reign was first challenged in 2008 with the near collapse of the global economy.  The first unprecedented U.S. bailout of $466 billion, in combination with a ($243) billion drop in gross domestic product (GDP) in one year, kicked off new levels of debt that, in the absence of transformative GDP growth, would be hard to overcome.  JP Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon, in a keynote interview at the Wall Street Journal’s (WSJ) CEO Summit in early May, says the U.S. hasn’t experienced healthy growth in the last twenty years.

U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, the second keynote speaker at the Summit, acknowledged that it took the U.S. almost a decade to get back on track following the 2008 financial crisis, and that we lost a lot in the process.  So where are we now?  After U.S. Debt to GDP hit 52.2% in 2009, it has risen further still to 71.9% in 2015, and 78.4% in 2019.

During that same period, China’s long term ability to recover and grow has exceeded that of its only serious competitor, the United States of America.  After flirting with the top spot in 2009, China’s economy first took a small lead over the U.S. in 2017, then widened that in 2020.  The International Monetary Fund (IMF) projects China’s economy will grow to $35.9 trillion by 2025, far outpacing the U.S. forecast of $25.8 trillion.  GDP figures adjusted for purchasing power parity provide the true picture.  India is in a distant third at $8.7 trillion, while Japan, Germany, and the top 10 European economies have barely moved, huddled under $5 trillion in 2020.

The COVID pandemic and America’s second unprecedented bailout and stimulus package totaling $6.2 trillion raised the ante again, bringing the United States debt level to $21 trillion entering 2021, exceeding GDP at a 101% total Debt to GDP ratio.

To be clear, economists will tell you that a 4% deficit to GDP annual spending ratio is normal.  But that guidance takes on new meaning when you’ve experienced a 9.8% and 15.1% deficit to GDP spending ratio in two of the last twelve years.

China’s entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001 changed the game.  That, coupled with U.S. corporations’ short term profit focus, with increasing levels of service outsourcing and product importing, has put the United States of America in a position of catch up.

As the United States Trade Data Trends graph demonstrates, U.S. corporations have been betting against American ingenuity and talent since 1980, exporting services and talent overseas, and then importing resulting product.  You could argue this strategy has worked well, as the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) has grown exponentially from $963.99 in 1980 to $30,606.48 to end 2020.

Multiple well respected business minds argue otherwise, and have been raising the alarms in recent years. The pressure for CEOs to deliver in the short term is significant.  Outsourcing is a quick solution in a truly global world, where the rules are not all the same.

BlackRock’s Larry Fink led his 2021 annual address to shareholders expressing “steadfast commitment to long-termism”.  This follows his 2016 letter to every Fortune 500 CEO, urging corporate leaders to “play their part by persuasively communicating their company’s long-term strategy for growth”.

In 2015, McKinsey & Company Global Managing Director Dominic Barton and Canada Pension Plan Investment Board CEO Mark Wiseman launched an initiative to promote a longer term focus in business, following a survey of 1,000+ C level executives and board members, where 79% said they felt pressure to deliver financial results in a two year time frame.

Bill Budinger, inventor, entrepreneur, founder & CEO of Rodel, Inc., a firm that manufactures electronics products, argues American investors are killing their golden geese, where planting has been replaced by harvesting.

Can we reclaim our intended position as economic leader of the free world?  Absolutely!  America is the land of dreams and innovation! But we have a lot of work to do, in areas that to date, have alluded us.  This includes investment in education and training in manufacturing, and enduring development of STEM talent in segments of the population known to deliver, in particular women.

Ironically, timing of the COVID-19 pandemic recovery is in our favor.  JP Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon believes we are at a near “Goldilocks” level of recovery, that will deliver fast growth with mild inflation.  Janet Yellen agrees.  We need to seize this moment and to coin a gymnastics phrase, we need to hit four of four routines.

We must invest where ROI potential is greatest!  We can do that while also helping small business and people on the lower end of the income spectrum, who have been disproportionately hit by the COVID pandemic.  Brilliant!

A great example of this is Goldman Sachs’ pledge of $10 billion to their “One Million Black Women” Initiative, launched in March 2021.  They believe that reducing the earnings gap for Black women could create up to 1.7 million jobs and add $450 billion to U.S. GDP annually.  This follows on Goldman’s long term recognition of the power of the purse of women broadly.  Lloyd Blankfein, in a 2008 speech for their 10,000 Women Initiative had this to say.  “When you get to the topic of trying to invest and create GDP, there is no better, more efficient investment, there’s no lower hanging fruit in the world to pick, than the investment you make in women.”

Further, many U.S. firms are leaning in on digital transformation and ESG initiatives, recognizing the serious ROI potential.  It’s an exciting time where, not only do we have the opportunity to drive transformative innovation and restore balance on earth, but we can also restore broad based prosperity to the shrinking middle class, which after all, is the engine of the U.S. economy.

In 2016, following a decades long career in technology, most notably as the CIO of Verizon, Dr. Judith Spitz founded Break Through Tech at Cornell Tech in New York City, an initiative making headway increasing the number of women in computer science and tech careers.  An article in the WSJ reports that STEM fields are some of the fastest growing and most lucrative.  Increasing the number of women would likely have big  implications for the economy.

Another great organization, Girls Who Code, founded by Reshma Saujani, and currently led by CEO Tarika Barrett, is doing important work in education, trying to close the gender gap in tech.

A recent Newsweek survey notes that more than 4.5 million fewer women are employed now than at the beginning of the pandemic, bringing the labor participation rate for women to its lowest levels since 1988.  Some 44% of women who were unemployed in April 2021 have been out of work for longer than six months.  We need to act on that!  We need to action where GDP potential is greatest, if we’re serious about taking on China!

Turning to U.S. legislative initiatives, the likely to pass U.S. Senate led $190 billion Innovation and Competition Act, is intended to directly take on rising competition from China.  It includes $100 billion for R&D and investments in emerging technologies where the country that leads, will have a significant advantage in the global economy.  Artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning (ML), robotics, and high performance computing are critical areas of capability in practice today across the globe.  We have to get out in front on this!  And yes, unfortunately this is already impacting lower skilled workers who perform repetitive tasks.  Investment in our workforce with education and training is crucial.

$10 billion has been allocated to the U.S. Commerce Department to establish at least ten regional technology hubs, intended to take on the serious talent shortage we have in U.S. manufacturing.  It is estimated that 3.5 million U.S. manufacturing jobs will need to be filled in the next ten years, where the current U.S. skills gap will prevent 2 million of those jobs from being filled.  This could cost the U.S. economy as much as $1 trillion.

A newer level of concern surrounds a study published in early May 2021 by Deloitte and the National Association of Manufacturers.  It reports that while the COVID pandemic wiped out about 1.4 million manufacturing jobs, the industry has only been able to hire back about 820,000.

$52 billion has been designated to incentivize domestic semiconductor fabrication. Given the alarming 60 Minutes segment in early May, where we learned that Intel’s share of the market has dwindled to just 12%, and that the Republic of China’s Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) is producing chips that are 30% faster and more powerful than what we are able to make in the U.S, this is an area that requires intense focus and actionable strategy.  Chips are integral to our way of life.  Without them, we don’t use our phones or computers, and we don’t drive cars.

Everyone is in agreement on the value of investment in education and training, from the authors of the Penn Wharton Budget Model (PWBM) to Janet Yellen.  Jamie Dimon offers some targeted perspective.  He agrees that the Biden agenda is right on the issues, but that you can’t just throw money at them.  You have to be specific with measurable outcomes.  He made reference to his role on the New York Business Council where they’re trying to match education with jobs.

I recommend bringing together the Innovation and Competition Act’s $10 billion regional technology hubs plan with the $1.4 billion education investment piece of Biden’s American Families Plan.  We need committed resource at community and four year colleges, working in direct coordination with these regional technology hubs, in direct coordination with regional employers in need of specific talent.  Free college is only helpful if each and every student lands a job, that helps us drive innovation and GDP growth, in direct competition with China.  Yes we need that level of actionable specificity.

We need to bring the supply chain back to America.  Two words.  PPE.  Chips.  Before the COVID pandemic, China based firms produced about 50% of the world’s PPE supply.  One example where this really hurt us, follows a yearlong investigation by The Guardian and Kaiser Health.  They found that 3,607 U.S. healthcare workers lost their lives to COVID in the first year.  Many of these deaths were avoidable, with widespread PPE and mask shortages a contributing factor. That’s completely unacceptable!

Further, the U.S. is in an extremely vulnerable position with poor market share in the global semiconductor chip industry.  How is that playing out right now?  According to a May WSJ article, Americans are shopping for cars in near-record numbers, but the world’s computer-chip shortage has left dealers with the fewest offerings in decades, forcing auto makers to cut production of more than 1.2 million vehicles in North America.  If you’re really paying attention, then you’ll recall the $80 billion auto industry bailout in 2009.  What is the longer term ROI impact on that spend, given this current situation?  It’s clear we need a broader focus across American industry.

We need to make investments in infrastructure, where we currently rank 12th in the world.  We need specific focus on rail, water and the electric grid, and renewable energy where we rank 48th, 23rd, and 24th in the world respectively.  Negotiations continue on Capitol Hill to reach consensus on a spending plan, with the Biden administration currently at $1 trillion to the GOP’s $928 billion.  Sounds like we’re almost there!

We need to stop the global tax race to the bottom.  The Washington Post reported on May 31 that the G-7 is set to support Biden’s minimum global corporate tax.  While it’s early in the game, this is very encouraging news.

Please see graphs and article addendum below.  I hope I’ve got you thinking!  I’d love to hear your thoughts and questions!

I’d like to lead us out with this epic Rock&Roll ballad from the wildly talented, science minded Kiszka brothers.  Here’s Greta Van Fleet with their newly released album The Battle At Gardens Gate.  Out of silence, we will sing! Broken Bells

Graphs:

DJIA Trend

U.S. Trade Data Trends

US Deficit to GDP Trend

US Debt to GDP Trend

Top 10 EUR Economies Trend to US & China

US Trade Balance Top 5 Economies Trend

US China Trade Balance Trend

US Germany Trade Balance Trend

Addendum for your reference and knowledge:

McKinsey Dominic Barton Focusing Capitol on the Long Term

American Investors Killing Their Golden Geese

In the capital markets and technology space, check out these four firms leading on digital transformation and sustainability.

BNY Mellon Future First

Equinix Sustainability

Zscaler Zero Trust

CITI ESG

WSJ Women In Technology

Newsweek Pandemic Cost To Women

U.S. Innovation and Competition Act

Deloitte Manufacturing Skills Gap

PBS News Hour Cutthroat Global Competition For PPE

60 Minutes Semiconductor Chip Shortage

The Guardian U.S. Healthcare Workers Lost to COVID

China Trade Dilemma

As the 2016 campaign races on, Presidential candidates are determined to sell, how they will solve American household pain points. Donald Trump has certainly tapped into one of those, the outsourcing of manufacturing jobs to Asia, “We’re going to get things coming. We’re gonna get Apple to start building their damn computers and things in this country instead of in other countries.” It’s a loaded statement that requires considerable clarification. Trump on Apple.

While Apple does manufacture iPhones, iPads, and Macs in China, a practice that began in the late 1990’s, Apple research and design programming continues to grow at its headquarters in Cupertino, California. In October 2013, building on the original Apple Campus I, 6 buildings on 32 acres, on private U-shaped street “Infinite Loop”, the Cupertino City Council unanimously approved plans for Apple Campus II, at a projected $5 billion construction cost, with worldwide acclaimed architect Lord Norman Foster in charge of the design. Apple has had a presence in Cupertino since 1977, which is why they chose to expand there, rather than move to a cheaper distant location. Apple Campus II update.

In 2013, Apple employed 16,000 on Campus I, the second largest technology employer in Silicon Valley, and is projected to add 7,400 more jobs with the addition of the $5 billion Campus II in 2016, despite a $44 decline in stock price from $100 in September 2012 to $56 in April 2013. Today it closed at $109.81. In total, Apple is projected to employ 41,000 in Santa Clara County in 2016. Cupertino employees earned an average $125,000 salary in 2012, with most living in San Jose, the 7th most expensive city in America. In 2012, Apple generated $103 million in gross sales to the local economy, and $25 million in local property tax. Interesting Apple facts.

In 2015, Apple become the first Silicon Valley tech firm to top $200 billion in revenue, on net sales of $233.7 billion resulting in $53.4 billion net income, 23% net margin, and earnings per share of $9.28, a masterful performance compared to 2014, up 35% to net income of $39.5 billion, and up 43% to earnings per share of $6.49. Compared to 2011, net income has more than doubled, earnings per share is up 62%, and Apple has been able to maintain consistent net margin at 22- 24%.  Apple 2015 Financials.  I wonder if Donad Trump has stock in Apple.

Back to the issue at hand, manufacturing jobs in Asia. CEO Tim Cook has tried to bring manufacturing jobs back home, but a widening skills gap in the U.S. makes that very difficult. While our economy continues to improve, U.S. manufacturers face significant challenges as a sizeable gap exists between the need to grow their business, and the talent available. The challenge will only increase. As nearly 3.5 million manufacturing jobs will likely need to be filled in the next 10 years, 2.7 million on baby boomer retirement and 0.7 million on natural business growth, the skills gaps is projected to result in 2 million unfilled jobs. Other factors include movement of experienced workers, a negative image of the manufacturing industry among younger generations, lack of STEM skills among workers, and a gradual decline of technical education in public high schools. U.S. manufacturing has shifted to more streamlined and automated processes. While some roles will require less technical aptitude, these trends in innovation actually demand more skilled workers. Manufacturing Skills Gap.

Of course the dramatic growth in trade between China and the US, since the 2001 entry of China to the World Trade Organization, has had a profound effect on the U.S. worker economy. The initial vision of China’s WTO entry predicted U.S. job creation and trade deficit improvement with China; and was rooted in history growing out of the 1944 Bretton Woods agreements, negotiated by the Allied nations, that created the IMF and World Bank. The 1947 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) followed, establishing the international trading system that refined the rules to lower tariffs and non-tariff barriers. This finally led to the creation of the World Trade Organization in 1994, whose mission was to settle disagreements arising from GATT treaty rules. The WTO was authorized to take action if decisions were ignored or rejected by member governments. It broadly expanded coverage on points never before included in trade agreements, including food safety, environmental laws, social service policies, intellectual property standards, and government procurement rules. Over time, this attracted countries who were never a part of GATT, to gain improved market access for their goods at lower tariff levels. China’s entry was supposed to bring the country into compliance. The U.S. also negotiated measures to limit surging imports from China on domestic U.S. producers. In the end though, China’s currency manipulation, wage and labor rights suppression, and foreign country direct investment in Chinese enterprise, has created a huge trade deficit problem for the U.S., which in turn has disrupted 2.1 million U.S. manufacturing jobs between 2001 and 2011, with 1 million in the computer and electronic products industry.

The major cause of the growing U.S. trade deficit with China is currency manipulation. Unlike most major currencies, the Chinese yuan does not float freely against the dollar. As Chinese productivity has soared, its currency should have too, to maintain balanced trade. It has instead remained artificially low on aggressive acquisition of foreign exchange reserves to increasingly depress the value of the yuan. In 2012, noted economist H.W. Brock estimated the Chinese currency to be “arguably one-sixth of what it should be”. 2012 research by Economist Joseph E. Gagnon, estimated that massive currency manipulation, especially in countries in Asia, had raised “the current account of the developing economies by roughly $700 billion per year, relative to what it would have been.” He also notes this “amount is roughly equivalent to the large output gaps in the United States and Euro area. In other words, millions more Americans and Europeans would be employed if other countries did not manipulate their currencies…” For more of his thoughts on a broader view of global currency manipulation, please refer here.

The US trade deficit with China was ($365.7) billion in 2015, more than tripling since 2000 at ($83.8) billion, increasing nearly 11% annually on average over this 15 year period. The annual trade deficit growth has slowed since the global financial crisis in 2008, averaging 16% pre crisis, to 5% in the period since. To access the source data I used to create this graph, please refer here.

Untitled

As an analyst with 25 years experience helping global business heads drive P&L growth, I must confess it’s a sobering picture. I suppose you can say Donald Trump is technically correct when he says we negotiated bad trade deals with China. The pain point to solve though, will require diligent and carefully crafted strategy among WTO members, to punish currency manipulators in a meaningful way that packs a punch. The U.S. and Euro area countries, as main targets of currency manipulation, will have to play tough. The WTO has the ability to impose tariffs on imports from currency manipulators, with such practices consistent with international law. This ideally could lead to full revaluation of the yuan, which a 2011 report showed would improve the current U.S. account deficit by $190.5 billion, add 2 million jobs, and reduce the federal deficit by up to $857 billion over 10 years.

Clearly this is a complex global issue. The purpose here is to highlight and frame the key issues, with a particular focus on currency manipulation only. For a more thorough read on this complex broad topic, please refer to this publication produced by the labor movement affiliated Economic Policy Institute, plus any other sources you deem appropriate to get an accurate and representative understanding.  

To wrap up, as I become nostalgic thinking back to my undergraduate Economics classes in the early 80’s, my Rock&Roll tee shirts manufactured in the good old USA, that I still wear today; and to Steve Jobs who began his mission with Apple in 1977 to transform our world with passionate innovation, I leave you with this classic performance, “.. and it makes me wonder.  She does..” Enjoy!