The coronavirus and the economy
1 April 2020
We have seen quite a lot of commentary advocating fiscal measures to combat the spread of coronavirus, to provide services for those infected, and to counter the impact of the coronavirus on the economy. While no-one can articulate a fully worked out set of proposals, and their costs and financing, in a rapidly changing situation, we publish this brief to indicate principles we think should guide thinking about the relationship of the epidemic and the economy. These principles are as follows:
1. First, and foremost, we believe that the government should do everything possible to slow the spread of the coronavirus (‘flatten the curve’) to assist the infected, and to assist people to cope with the adverse effects on their livelihoods. In order to maximize government achievement, it must be recognized that there are limits to the rate that administrative capacity can be developed, that this capacity has to be financed by the National Treasury which already has to struggle with a difficult fiscal situation, and that new capacity needs to be deployed on the ground. This entails prioritization and effective planning. We would welcome government communication about the progress it is making, and how and when people are expected to respond to new initiatives, in terms of making claims on them.
2. We think it entirely inappropriate for anyone to try and leverage the coronavirus crisis to press for their favourite general public policy positions, especially if they are hugely expensive (for instance, a basic income grant) or would have detrimental consequences in the short and medium term (such as demands which are unsustainable in macroeconomic terms). While many proposals which have been put forward over the past few days may seem attractive at first glance, especially if money is to be put in people's pockets, they ignore the reality of the government's financial position. In everyday language, the government's position is that of a private household which has maxed out its credit card and now suddenly has to pay to repair the house's roof which has collapsed in a storm. The government's annual debt service is already at R230bn (Treasury's 2020/21 estimate, as published in the 2020 Budget Review), which is the same as its health budget. If debt is increased further, it means that interest payments have to increase, which in turn leads to funds being taken away from operational budgets to fund that rising interest expense. The only alternative is that debt increases further to pay interest on the debt, which leads to debt spiralling out of control. Look no further than Eskom to see the process at work. The focus should be on what needs to be done here and now.Make no mistake: the impact of the coronavirus and the essential measures to combat its effects will stretch an already weak economy to its limits. Broader public policy debate can be resumed when the crisis is over.
3. We believe that it would help stabilize expectations, and hence the economy, if government publishes estimates of the cost of its programmes and the way in which these costs will be financed, to the extent possible. For instance, the Reserve Bank could publish the extent of its acquisition and disposal of government bonds week by week, the National Treasury and the South African Revenue Services estimates of foregone revenue as a result of tax concessions, the Department of Health estimates of the costs of new health programmes, the Unemployment Insurance Fund the demands on its reserves, and the National Treasury revised projections of the Public Sector Borrowing Requirement. The more transparent all this is, the lower will be unfounded anxieties about the fiscal position. Moreover, the private sector should communicate as well. For instance, the banks could produce accounts of how the coronavirus is impacting on their positions.