Yılmaz added that Turkey's growth model needs to be reconsidered and that
Turkey needs to take bold, determined steps in three areas: boosting domestic
savings, successfully completing the settlement process with the Kurdistan
Workers' Party (PKK) and making structural reforms. The settlement process is
widely commented on every day by the columnists of Today's Zaman. Let me
focus on domestic savings, which has multiple links with structural reforms.
|
TÜSİAD President Muharrem Yılmaz worried on savings and reforms |
The ratio of domestic savings to gross domestic product (GDP) has
declined dramatically since 2000, from more than 20 percent in the 1990s to
12 percent in 2012. Low domestic savings is certainly the most important obstacle
but not the only one to balanced, satisfactory economic growth. A sizable
increase in domestic savings is a necessary condition for the growth regime
to change, but it will not be sufficient alone. The Turkish economy must at
the same time be able to export the surplus of goods that will not be
consumed in the domestic market due to the increase in savings. If not, the
economy will go into recession due to insufficient aggregate demand. We know
this because of the “paradox of thrift” popularized by John Maynard Keynes.
This paradox would be mitigated by Turkish industry strengthening its
competitiveness, which would require radical reforms in education,
innovation, etc., as stated by Babacan and reiterated by Yılmaz.
The TÜSİAD president said that at least three percentage points must be
added to the current domestic savings rate. This effort would not be enough,
but it would certainly be welcome. Yılmaz noted policies in a five-year plan
that aim to increase domestic savings: fighting the informal economy,
strengthening the social security model, enhancing insurance systems and
facilitating access to financial tools. I must say that even if these goals
are achieved, they will hardly increase the domestic savings rate by three
percentage points.
Indeed, the first two policies aim to increase public savings. Public
savings constitutes approximately 3 percent of GDP. Even if different aspects
of the informal economy are addressed, such as the non-registration and
under-registration of wage earners in the social security system, public
income would only rise 0.3 percentage points at best, according to my
estimations. If serious income tax reform to widen the tax base is
implemented to complement the fight against the informal economy, then public
savings would certainly increase further. Nevertheless, even a one percentage
point increase in GDP -- which would mean more than a 30 percent increase of
public savings -- would be a great success. That said, do not forget that
increasing the average tax rate would also adversely influence the savings of
households and companies through the crowding out effect.
The remaining two percentage points should come from the savings of
households and companies. Here we have a basic problem. In the case of
household savings, I should remark that it would be very difficult to change
the current consumption patterns of Turkish households. They have started to
consume more, thus save less thanks to the credit glut and much lower
interest rates than in the 1990s. Households are also much less worried about
unexpected health expenses thanks to improved and extended social coverage.
The two policies in the five-year plan aiming to boost private savings only
“enhance insurance systems and facilitate access to financial tools.” These policies
may well be helpful, but only marginally. The best tool in this area would be
radical severance pay reform, but this reform project continues to rot in the
drawer.
So, what about the savings of companies? Nobody talks about this burning
issue. Turkish corporations can save more if profits increase and are then
invested instead of distributed to shareholders. The most straightforward way
to increase profits would be to decrease wages, but this can hardly be done.
The cost of labor may be lowered, but this would require difficult labor
market reforms. Another option is the depreciation of the lira as this would
boost export profits, but this has its limits because of high inflation.
Indeed, the most effective option would be to increase productivity. This is
possible if comprehensive productivity-enhancing reforms in education,
technology and innovation are realized, as was underlined by the TÜSİAD
president. We are impatiently awaiting them.
|
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder