cross-posted from : https://lemmy.zip/post/68761705
Those exports are so cheap and ubiquitous that they’re reducing inflation in some developed markets, according to Goldman Sachs.
https://fortune.com/2026/07/28/china-exports-lowering-inflation-in-other-countries/
cross-posted from : https://lemmy.zip/post/68761705
Those exports are so cheap and ubiquitous that they’re reducing inflation in some developed markets, according to Goldman Sachs.
5 Comments
Sepia@mander.xyz · 6 pts · 6d
This is not true.
U.S. imports from China in the first five months 2026 are around a third lower than in the comparable 2025-period, according to the U.S. census data (you can safely forget trade data published by the Chinese government, especially since Beijing introduced a very weird methodology to calculate its export/import data during the pandemic).
U.S. imports from China in 2025 were around a third lower than in 2024.
Unfortunately, Goldman Sachs, which was one of the first Western banks to open a Chinese branch in China more than 30 years ago with strong ties to the ruling party, does not elaborate here.
The 'perceived inflation benefit' (is the inflation now perceived or real?) comes at a lower GDP, lower level of employment, and, therefore, a lower disposable income for other markets (such as Europe); not to forget that it makes countries vulnerable for Chinese political and economic coercion as we have increasingly seen in recent years.
It is particularly noteworthy that the alleged inflation is being paid to a large extent by people in China and China-controlled supply chains who work under forced labour schemes.
These are major points in my opinion which Goldman Sachs has forgotten to mention.
I don't understand that. Domestic supply and demand isn't in balance in China, that's for sure. Maybe someone can enlighten me.
0_o7@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 4 pts · 5d
It's cute you think China is manipulating data but US is not, especially with this administration.
But hey, if the "government site" says they're winning, it must be true. It's only bad data when China and Russia do the same.
Sepia@mander.xyz · 1 pts · 5d
For the time being I trust the U.S. statistics.
The Chinese official data is mostly rubbish. As for the trade data: Since the beginning of the pandemic, China’s own official balance of payments trade surplus even diverges significantly from China’s customs trade surplus, particularly since 2022.
The obvious objective for cooking the books: China is artificially reducing its trade surplus.
We would think that if a foreign firm (or a joint venture between a foreign firm and a Chinese firm operating in China) is manufacturing goods in China for sale in China, the deal would not end up in China's official trade balance, because no good crosses the border.
However, Chinese officials seem to have a different view. In its balance of payments data, China basically reports a trade deficit with itself because of foreign firms producing in China.
Appendix VII of the International Monetary Funds's China Assessment in 2024 - opens pdf - which is when the change in China's statistics was evident - is very revealing.
Factoryless is, in this case, the wrong concept as the factories are all in China, they are just (partly) owned by a foreign company.
If the foreign firm then sells the goods that a contract manufacturer produced for it inside China, these goods are counted as an import in the balance of payments data.
As we can reasonably assume, the firms' sales prices for the goods are usually higher than prices the contractors have billed them. The result, therefore, is a trade deficit in the balance of payments.
Simply speaking, if a foreign firm in China produces goods for the Chinese domestic market, it generates a trade deficit, and, therefore, China produces a trade deficit with itself.
The linked IMF report states,
And:
All this, of course, makes no sense.
And this is one reason why you can't trust Chinese official data.
titty_wizard@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 6d
lemmyng@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 6d
Looks around in US
WHERE?!