Can Increasing the Export Tax Rebate Stabilize Employment and Foreign Trade?
WANG Junbin, LIU Hebei
School of Public Finance and Taxation, Southwestern University of Finance and Economics; Maritime Silk Road and Guangxi Regional Development Institute, Guangxi University of Finance and Economics
Summary:
In recent years, trade protectionism has increased globally, exacerbating trade frictions between countries, such as those between China and the United States. To cope with these adverse effects, the Ministry of Finance and the State Taxation Administration of China have successively increased the export tax rebate for some products. Meanwhile, employment and foreign trade are major issues in China's economy. Therefore, exploring the effect of China's export tax rebate policy on employment and foreign trade is of great theoretical and practical significance. Taking Sino-US trade friction as an example, this paper examines the mechanism by which China's export tax rebate policy stabilizes employment and foreign trade and how it mitigates trade friction using dynamic stochastic general equilibrium (DSGE) model. First, this paper studies the cyclical characteristics of China's employment and net exports. Quarterly data from 1994 to 2020 show that employment is relatively stable. However, net exports are highly volatile. China's employment and net exports have weak procyclical characteristics that are significantly different from other countries and the simulation results of other DSGE models in the literature. Second, to explain the cyclical characteristics of China's employment and net exports, this paper constructs a symmetrical two-country open-economy DSGE model with an incomplete financial market and incomplete price pass-through. Using macro data from China and the United States to calibrate the model, the numerical simulation shows that the model better fits the cyclical characteristics of China's employment and net exports under the shock of domestic export tax rebates and other countries' technology shock. The wealth and expenditure transfer effects caused by the change in terms of trade are the main internal transmission mechanisms. To clarify the mechanism of the export tax rebate effect, this paper uses Sino-US trade friction to conduct a counterfactual experiment to explore whether increasing the export tax rebate can stabilize employment and foreign trade. The simulation shows that when China unilaterally increases its export tax rebate by 1%, employment increases by 0.05%, and net exports increase by 0.28% and then decrease gradually, showing strong persistence. Increasing the export tax rebate can stabilize employment and foreign trade. A 1% increase in both China's export tax rebate and the United States' import tariff increases employment in China by 0.03% and net exports by 0.16%, and then employment and net exports decrease gradually and show strong persistence. Lerner neutrality is not established. Although the effect of the export tax rebate in stabilizing employment and foreign trade is currently weakened, it remains effective. Therefore, China's export tax rebate policy not only completely offsets the adverse impact of other countries' tariff increased on China's employment and net exports, but also produces a positive net effect. Although the net effect of increasing the export tax rebate is small, it indeed helps stabilize employment and foreign trade. Furthermore, the Bayesian estimation method proves that this conclusion is robust. This paper makes two contributions to the literature. First, it expands the literature on the cyclical characteristics of China's employment and net exports. The two-country open-economy model in this paper not only explains these cyclical characteristics but also explores the internal mechanism of the effect of China's export tax rebate policy. Second, the two-country open-economy model can simulate and evaluate the effect of China's increasing export tax rebate on stabilizing employment and foreign trade in various circumstances.
王君斌, 刘河北. 提高出口退税能够“稳就业”和“稳外贸”吗?[J]. 金融研究, 2021, 498(12): 152-169.
WANG Junbin, LIU Hebei. Can Increasing the Export Tax Rebate Stabilize Employment and Foreign Trade?. Journal of Financial Research, 2021, 498(12): 152-169.
[1]丁剑平和鄂永健,2005,《实际汇率、工资和就业——对中国贸易部门和非贸易部门的实证研究》,《财经研究》第11期,第41～49页。 [2]李浩、胡永刚和马知遥,2007,《国际贸易与中国的实际经济周期——基于封闭与开放经济的RBC模型比较分析》,《经济研究》第5期,第17～26页。 [3]黄志刚,2009,《加工贸易经济中的汇率传递:一个DSGE模型分析》,《金融研究》第11期,第32～48页。 [4]吕朝凤和黄梅波,2012,《国际贸易、国际利率与中国实际经济周期——基于封闭经济和开放经济三部门RBC模型的比较分析》,《管理世界》第3期,第34～49页。 [5]梅冬州、雷文妮和崔小勇,2015,《出口退税的政策效应评估——基于金融加速器模型的研究》,《金融研究》第4期,第50～65页。 [6]钱学锋、潘莹和毛海涛,2015,《出口退税、企业成本加成与资源误置》,《世界经济》第5期,第80～106页。 [7]童锦治、赵川和孙健,2012,《出口退税、贸易盈余和外汇储备的一般均衡分析与中国的实证》,《经济研究》第4期,第124～136页。 [8]王孝松和谢申祥,2010,《中国出口退税政策的决策和形成机制——基于产品层面的政治经济学分析》,《经济研究》第10期,第101～114页。 [9]王君斌和薛鹤翔,2010,《扩张型货币政策能刺激就业吗?——刚性工资模型下的劳动力市场动态分析》,《统计研究》第6期,第7～16页。 [10]王君斌、郭新强和蔡建波,2011,《扩张性货币政策下的产出超调、消费抑制和通货膨胀惯性》,《管理世界》第3期,第7～21页。 [11]姚洋和余淼杰,2009,《劳动力、人口和中国出口导向的增长模式》,《金融研究》第9期,第1～13页。 [12]谢建国和吴春燕,2012,《出口退税与就业增进——基于我国数据的协整研究》,《国际贸易问题》第2期,第25～32页。 [13]Ascari, G., and L.Rossi.2012.“Trend Inflation and Firms Price-setting: Rotemberg versus Calvo”, Economic Journal, 122(563):1115～1141. [14]Backus, D.K., P.J.Kehoe, and F.E.Kydland.1994.“Dynamics of the Trade Balance and the Terms of Trade: the J-curve?” American Economic Review, 84(1):84～103. [15]Barbiero, O., E.Farhi, G.Gopinath, and O.Itskkoki.2018.“The Macroeconomics of Border Taxes”, NBER Working Paper, No.24702. [16]Baxter, M., and M.J.Crucini.1995.“Business Cycles and the Asset Structure of Foreign Trade”, International Economic Review, 36(4):821～854. [17]Christiano, L.J., M.Eichenbaum, and C.L.Evans.2005.“Nominal Rigidities and the Dynamic Effects of a Shock to Monetary Policy”, Journal of Political Economy, 113(1):1～51. [18]Correia, I., J.C.Neves, and S.Rebelo.1995.“Business Cycles in a Small Open Economy”, European Economic Review, 39(6):1089～1113. [19]Corsetti, G., L.Dedola, and S.Leduc.2008.“International Risk Sharing and the Transmission of Productivity Shocks”, Review of Economic Studies, 75(2):443～473. [20]Cooley, T.F., and E.Prescott.1995.“Economic Growth and Business Cycles”, pp.1～38.In “Frontiers of Business Cycle Research”, edited by T.F.Cooley. [21]Engel, C.2002.“Expenditure Switching and Exchange Rate Policy”, NBER Macroeconomics Annual 2002, 17:231～300. [22]Farhi, E., G.Gopinath, and O.Itskhoki.2014.“Fiscal Devaluations”, Review of Economics Studies, 81(2):725～760. [23]Galí, J.1999.“Technology, Employment, and the Business Cycle: Do Technology Shocks Explain Aggregate Fluctuations?” American Economic Review, 89(1):249～271. [24]Galí, J., and T.Monacelli.2005.“Monetary Policy and Exchange Rate Volatility in a Small Open Economy”, Review of Economics Studies, 72(3):707～734. [25]Gopinath, G.2017.“A Macroeconomic Perspective on Border Taxes”, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 48(2):433～447. [26]Gust, C., S.Leduc, and R.Vigfusson.2010.“Trade Integration, Competition, and the Decline in Exchange-rate Pass-through”, Journal of Monetary Economics, 57(3):309～324. [27]Handley, K., and N.Limão.2017.“Policy Uncertainty, Trade, and Welfare: Theory and Evidence for China and the United States”, American Economic Review, 107(9):2731～2783. [28]King, R.G., and S.T.Rebelo.1999.“Resuscitating Real Business Cycles”, Handbook of Macroeconomics, 1(1):927～1007. [29]Lerner, A.P.1936.“The Symmetry between Import and Export Taxes”, Economica, 3(11):306～313. [30]Linde, J., and A.Pescatori.2019.“The Macroeconomic Effects of Trade Tariffs: Revisiting the Lerner Symmetry Result”, Journal of International Money and Finance, 95(C):52～69. [31]Mendoza, E.G.1991.“Real Business Cycles in a Small Open Economy”, American Economic Review, 81(4):797～818. [32]Monacelli, T.2005.“Monetary Policy in a Low Pass-through Environment”, Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 37(6):1047～1066. [33]Neumeyer, P.A., and F.Perri.2005.“Business Cycles in Emerging Economies: the Role of Interest Rates”, Journal of Monetary Economics, 52(2):345～380. [34]Stock, J.H., and M.W.Watson.1999.“Business Cycle Fluctuations in US Macroeconomic Time Series”, Handbook of Macroeconomics, 1(1):3～64.
