The UK’s trade performance remains dire | 英国的贸易表现依然严峻 - FT中文网
登录×
电子邮件/用户名
密码
记住我
请输入邮箱和密码进行绑定操作:
请输入手机号码,通过短信验证(目前仅支持中国大陆地区的手机号):
请您阅读我们的用户注册协议隐私权保护政策,点击下方按钮即视为您接受。
FT英语电台

The UK’s trade performance remains dire
英国的贸易表现依然严峻

Deals struck recently with the US, EU and India will not make a significant difference to Britain’s parlous position
英国最近与美国、欧盟和印度达成的协议不会对其岌岌可危的贸易前景产生重大影响
00:00

This month the UK has signed trade deals with India, the US and the EU. At a time of worry about the prospects for world trade, this should be a reason for feeling less depressed about the outlook for Britain. But the deals, while better than none, might not merit even one cheer.

The deal with the US will merely limit the damage done by Donald Trump’s trade war, one that is particularly unjustified in the case of a loyal ally that does not even have a bilateral trade surplus in goods with his country. The other two are marginal liberalisations. In all, the UK’s trade opportunities have been unambiguously worsened since Brexit and now Trump’s trade war, relative to what they were before 2016.

Any improvement in market access might seem a good thing. But it can easily not be good enough, because the deals themselves are too small or because the performance is too feeble. In “A perfect storm: Britain’s trade malaise, weak growth and a new geopolitical moment”, published by the Centre for European Reform last week, Anton Spisak lays out the latter story.

undefined

Between 2019 and 2024, the volume of UK trade grew at a compound annual rate of only 0.3 per cent. This compares terribly with the 4.9 per cent achieved between 1980 and 2008 and the 2.6 per cent achieved between 2008-19. Declines in growth rates also occurred in France, Germany, the EU, Japan and the US since the financial crisis and even more so since the pandemic. But the UK’s growth between 2019 and 2024 was well below that of those other economies — 0.7 per cent for France, 0.8 per cent for Germany, 1.9 per cent for the EU, 1.4 per cent for Japan and 2.4 per cent for the US. For an open economy such as the UK’s, a trade performance this poor is truly worrying.

Not surprisingly, exports have, for the first time in decades, become a net drag on the UK’s economic growth, rather than a contributor to it. Thus between 2020 and 2024, the average contribution of exports to real economic growth was minus 0.4 percentage points.

This dire performance was driven by what was happening to exports of goods: in real terms, they were 20 per cent lower in the fourth quarter of 2024 than five years before, while exports of services rose by 22 per cent over the same period. Yet, surprisingly, the performance of UK exports of goods to the EU, which were down 19 per cent over this period, was much the same as that of exports of goods to the rest of the world, which were down by 20 per cent. It is indeed puzzling that exports have fallen to a very similar extent to the EU and the rest of the world. One fairly plausible explanation is that supply chains from the EU have been disrupted and that has undermined the competitiveness of UK goods in third markets.

undefined

Whatever the causes, a trade performance this poor will, if continued, inevitably undermine economic growth, not least via its impact on productivity growth. Unfortunately, there is only one element in the three deals in question that could possibly bring about any noticeable improvement in trade performance. That is the decision of the US to keep in place the 10 per cent tariffs on most British exports. Last Friday, Trump even proposed a 50 per cent general tariff on EU exports to the US. Earlier this month, he also agreed a 30 per cent tariff on China.

Such blatant discrimination violates the most fundamental principle of the World Trade Organization. Yet, on the face of it, this situation might be beneficial to the UK. Two rather large caveats to such optimism can be identified, however. One is that this relatively favourable relationship might shift many times. The other is that even a 10 per cent tariff is about four times higher than average US tariffs used to be before this presidential term. So UK exporters of goods to the US, while perhaps in a favourable position relative to those from China and the EU (and maybe many others), will be at a big disadvantage vis-à-vis domestic US producers.

undefined

Moreover, the deal with the EU, welcome though it is, will not change the situation on trade to any significant extent. The main exception is the agreement to work towards an agreement to ensure that the “vast majority” of agrifood exports to the EU will happen without checks or certificates. Yet, in the end the UK is never going to get rich by expanding exports of farm products.

What we are seeing then is an economy whose trade performance is dire, above all in goods. This reflects an underlying loss of competitiveness and dynamism. A possible response would be deeper integration with the EU. More important still would be to focus all attention on strengthening the underlying fundamentals of economic performance for an unfriendly world.

版权声明:本文版权归FT中文网所有,未经允许任何单位或个人不得转载,复制或以任何其他方式使用本文全部或部分,侵权必究。

印度的俄罗斯石油难题

面对特朗普的施压,莫迪要么接受美国的关税,要么从俄罗斯转向其他供应国,要么尝试与特朗普达成某种妥协。

梅德韦杰夫:从自由派希望到核威胁的漫长转变

这位俄罗斯前总统在社交媒体上公开挑衅特朗普。他已从俄罗斯自由派和白宫决策者眼中的白衣骑士,变成了莫斯科的“核战争狂人”。

数千公司董事在工党税改后离开英国

FT的分析发现,从去年10月到上月,有3790名公司董事报告离开英国,阿联酋成为首选目的地。

局长遭解雇前,美国劳工统计局就已然陷入困境

经费和人员削减阻碍了美国劳工统计局汇总重要报告的能力。

FT社评:特朗普对经济数据的攻击产生寒蝉效应

特朗普解雇美国劳工统计局局长会破坏关键国家统计数据的公信力。

特朗普的阿拉斯加州液化天然气项目未能打动亚洲盟友

日本和韩国抵制美国压力,拒绝将对管道项目的承诺纳入贸易协议。
设置字号×
最小
较小
默认
较大
最大
分享×