The IMF has been reluctant to participate in the aid package to Greece that
runs out the middle of next year. It does not believe that Greek debt
is sustainable. Nevertheless, it did recently agree to provide a precautionary
line of credit at the end of the program.
The IMF decision required the approval of the board, and we thought there
was a reasonable chance the US would block it. That would have
been significant, as the German and Dutch parliaments require the IMF
participation, but there is no compelling reason for the IMF to
participate. The sustainability of Greece's debt is such an open
question that the ECB, which accepts Greek bonds as collateral (for weekly
operations) will not include Greek bonds in its asset purchase program.
Moreover, Europe can take care of its own
problems. Isn't that what the European Stabilization Mechanism is meant
to do?
The Trump Administration has shown little sympathy for Europe.
The US President has been particularly critical of Germany. The new
sanctions that the US Senate has approved and are now before the House of
Representatives would make it more difficult to complete the Nord Stream 2
pipeline that is supposed to bring Russian gas to western Europe bypassing
Ukraine. The US commercial interest is clear too. It wants to
export more natural gas to Europe. The US has been critical that not all
European members of NATO are spending 2% of GDP on defense.
Nevertheless, US Treasury Secretary Mnuchin appears to have approved the
IMF's precautionary line of credit to Greece. Mnuchin praised the IMF
for helping stabilize the situation in Greece by working with Europe.
Mnuchin said that without the IMF's help, Greece could have once again roiled
the markets.
At the same time, the US Treasury Secretary played down the
significance. He noted that the IMF's commitment was quite small and
would likely not even be used.
Mnuchin seemed to suggest it was mostly for appearances, and that it would not
cost US taxpayers a penny. He expressed support for the IMF but noted that the US was reviewing all of
its contributions.
On another front, findings of the investigation into US steel imports on
national security grounds are still expected
in the coming days. Commerce Secretary Ross had indicated the results
would be ready by the end of the month.
It appears that the investigation is over and the debate over the policy
response is in high gear.
The President reportedly wants to impose tariffs and use them as the
model for action on aluminum and other industries (reportedly including
semiconductors, paper, and household
appliances). Reports suggest that most cabinet officials are opposed
to the 20% tariff Trump is pushing. One compromise would be a
combination setting a quota on steel imports and a tariff on imports above the
quota.
US steel imports have fallen for the past two years.
Setting a quota at the 2016 levels would guard against backtracking.
The prospects of a 20% tariff, however, appears to be underpinning the share prices of
some of the largest US producers. On the other hand, as consumers and
producers wait for a decision, some reports suggest that it is dampening
activity.
Disclaimer
Two Policy Updates
Reviewed by Marc Chandler
on
June 30, 2017
Rating: