跳过导航

自动生成的音频
自动生成的音频

Editorial Rating

8

Qualities

  • Innovative

Recommendation

Policies that regulate money moving into or out of a country’s capital markets have a bad reputation. Critics emphasize misgivings about capital controls without discerning whether they regulate incoming or outgoing funds. Indeed, curbs on capital outflows – often associated with authoritarian states – can constrain trade. Yet subduing influxes of speculative “hot money” can prevent debt bubbles. This cogent article from economists Atish Rex Ghosh and Mahvash Saeed Qureshi analyzes the pros and cons of sovereign capital controls in each direction and makes a strong argument for properly administered inflow regulators as tools for macroeconomic stabilization. getAbstract recommends this article to policy makers and others interested in the effectiveness of capital controls.

Take-Aways

  • By the early 21st century, distinctions between capital controls on inflows and outflows had become blurred in the eyes of policy makers.
  • Capital outflow restrictions resulted in collapsing global trade and other economic dislocations following the stock market crash of 1929.
  • Capital controls became closely associated to dictatorial governments, especially that of Nazi Germany.

About the Author

Atish Rex Ghosh and Mahvash Saeed Qureshi are professionals at the International Monetary Fund.


Comment on this summary or 开始讨论