Over the past year, Australia’s recovery under the transition from the
mining boom has continued despite setbacks.
Domestic demand growth has strengthened, and employment growth has picked
up markedly since the beginning of the year, most of it in full-time jobs.
[1]
But labor market slack remains present, and wage growth has remained weak.
Beyond wages, stronger retail competition and continued declines in import
prices have contributed to inflation outcomes below the mid-point of the
Reserve Bank of Australia’s target range of 2 to 3 percent. With stronger
terms of trade, the current account deficit has narrowed substantially and
the trade balance has moved into surplus, primarily because of higher
global prices for coal and iron ore.
Looking forward, conditions are in place for a pick-up in economic
growth to above-trend rates.
The improved picture reflects a stronger global outlook, recent stronger
employment growth, and a stronger contribution from infrastructure
investment with positive spillovers to private investment and the rest of
the economy, more than offsetting the declining contribution from dwelling
investment. Non-mining private business investment should rebound further,
while the drag from mining investment should be ending.
The pickup in growth is likely to be modest, while inflation and wages
will be slow to rise.
Household consumption is expected to be held back by low real wage growth,
given labor market slack and structural change in some sectors. Economic
slack is projected to decline gradually. Upward pressure on prices and
wages should emerge once the economy has been at full employment, including
lower underemployment, for some time.
With stronger momentum in domestic demand and inflation close to the
midpoint of the target range not yet secured, continued macroeconomic
policy support will remain essential
. With a welcome pickup in public investment, the overall fiscal stance is
expected to be broadly neutral in 2017 and 2018. With the cash rate at 1.5
percent, monetary policy remains appropriately accommodative. With
Australia’s recovery lagging that of other major advanced economies,
monetary policy should remain firmly focused on ensuring stronger sustained
momentum in domestic demand and inflation.
The Commonwealth government’s budget repair strategy is appropriately
anchored by medium-term budget balance targets
. The strategy is predicated on a rapid rebound of nominal growth to trend,
leading to structural revenue and expenditure improvements. The risk is
that with a gradual recovery, the rebound to trend might not be as quick as
expected. Australia has the fiscal space to absorb this risk and protect
or, if needed, increase the spending envelopes for infrastructure
investment, structural reforms supporting trend growth and productivity.
Near-term risks to growth have become more balanced, but large external
shocks, including their interaction with the domestic housing market,
are an important downside risk.
On the positive side, the improved global outlook could lead to a
stronger-than-expected recovery, underpinned by a larger pickup in
non-mining business investment. On the downside, there is the risk of
unexpectedly tighter global financial conditions flowing through to
domestic financial conditions in Australia while the economy is still
recovering. Australia is also particularly exposed to downside risk from
China through its trade links in commodities and services. Domestically,
growth in consumer spending could weaken if improvements in household
incomes turn out to be more gradual than expected, or if a cooling housing
market and high debt to income ratios discourage further declines in
household saving rates.
Managing Housing Imbalances and Financial Sector Risks
The housing market is expected to cool, but imbalances---lower housing
affordability and household debt vulnerabilities---are unlikely to be
corrected soon.
In the absence of a major shock to the economy, the cooling is expected to
be driven mainly by the building completion rate catching up with demand in
the major eastern capital regions. But given continued strong population
growth and foreign buyer interest, demand growth for housing is expected to
remain robust, and, in the absence of a large inventory of vacant
properties, prices should stabilize, rather than fall significantly.
Declines in household debt-to-income ratios would thus need to be driven by
strong nominal income growth and amortization.
The Commonwealth and States have appropriately used a multi-pronged
approach to address increasing housing market imbalances and related
systemic risks to banks.
Prudential policies by the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority
(APRA) have lowered the risks to the banking sector from their large
exposure to the housing market in a low-interest rate environment,
primarily through a sequential tightening of required underwriting
standards. The latest round involved tighter standards on the origination
of interest-only loans, and reinforced a cap on lending growth to
investors. On the demand side, some States have helped qualified first-time
homebuyers to enter the market, including through grants and exemption from
stamp duty. In addition, the Commonwealth is assisting those buyers to
build savings more quickly for a home deposit via the superannuation
system.
Supply-side policies will be most effective in achieving housing
affordability in the longer term.
The housing supply response is being strengthened through a variety of
measures at the State and Commonwealth levels, increasing the supply of
developable land and the efficiency of its use. including higher housing
densification. These include ramping up infrastructure spending and reforms
to planning and zoning. These steps have appropriately been complemented by
measures to provide for increases in the supply of affordable housing
targeted to lower- and middle-income households.
Supply-side policies could also help in raising productivity and trend
growth.
Ensuring longer-term affordability in housing, and location cost more
broadly, could lower risks that businesses and people are not able to move
to the urban areas where they would be most productive because of
agglomeration and other network externalities. This, in turn, would also
help lower risks to longer-term growth.
These policy efforts should be complemented by tax reform
. Housing-related tax settings can also play a role in strengthening supply
and efficient use of land and, in the longer term, should limit potential
distortions they might introduce in the demand for property. The State
stamp duty tax regimes are inefficient—they have narrow tax bases, and
discourage mobility and transactions in existing properties that could have
more productive alternative uses. It should be replaced with a systematic
land tax regime applying to all residential and commercial properties. As
demonstrated by the recent reform in the Australian Capital Territory, the
transition can be gradual, which helps to avoid a disruptive impact on
State revenues. Cash flow problems for low-income homeowners can be
addressed through deferment options.
Prudential reform efforts on lifting banks’ mortgage asset quality are
appropriately complemented by reforms refining the capital adequacy
framework.
In combination with higher capital adequacy and liquidity requirements,
tighter mortgage underwriting standards have strengthened banks’ resilience
to housing market shocks. APRA is in the process of further refining the
capital adequacy framework. In July 2017, it clarified the capital
requirements for Australian banks’ to “be unquestionably strong,” as
suggested by the 2014 Financial Sector Inquiry. It is also
preparing regulations to address the systemic risk from banks’ concentrated
exposure to residential mortgages through capital requirements.
Fostering Long-Term Growth Opportunities
Reforms could lift productivity growth
. The decline in trend output growth in Australia over the past decade or
so was driven mainly by lower labor force growth and lower rates of capital
accumulation, both developments reflecting corrections after the mining
investment boom which are likely to have run their course. Average
productivity growth has picked up recently, primarily because of the
transition to higher capital stock utilization in the mining sector.
Nevertheless, productivity growth could be lifted by reforms.
There is scope to expand infrastructure spending beyond the recent
increase in the fiscal envelope.
According to some international metrics, Australia has a notable
infrastructure gap compared with many other advanced economies. While the
recent boost has helped to narrow the gap, it might not be enough to close
it. Further increases in investment have the potential to improve physical
and digital interconnectivity, both internally and with Australia’s trading
partners, thereby contributing to higher growth.
Fostering innovation, research and workforce skills upgrades, would
complement the productivity effects from more infrastructure.
-
Australia’s research and development (R&D) share of GDP lags
other OECD members. But the relatively small scale National
Innovation and Science Agenda (NISA) is only funded through
FY2018/19. A clear implementation of the upcoming
2030 Strategic Plan for the Australian Innovation, Science and
Research System
by defining the scope and funding of policy instruments would help
strengthen the reach and magnitude from its possible positive
productivity externalities.
-
Flexible labor markets have contributed to relatively smooth
adjustment after the end of the mining boom. But with continued
structural change and higher under- or unemployment in some age and
skill cohorts, defining a longer-term envelope for active labor
market policies for workforce re-education and skill upgrades can
help raise human capital and labor force participation, such as the
levy proposed to maintain the new Skilling Australians Fund.
Productivity and inclusion could also be supported with a broad tax
reform package
. The Commonwealth government has implemented a reform by lowering the
corporate income tax rate for SMEs, with the goal of broadening it to all
firms at an even lower rate. A more comprehensive tax reform has the
potential to increase efficiency of the tax system, increase investment and
labor demand, and reduce inequality. This would entail lowering taxes on
income from mobile factors of production (capital and labor) and increasing
reliance on taxes on immobile factors of production (land) and indirect
taxes on consumption, undertaken in a revenue neutral way. Such a reform
would complement the switch to a broad-based tax on land instead of stamp
duties already discussed.
Reconsidering broad tax reforms.
Concerns about the regressive nature of higher taxes on consumption at a
time of low wage growth could be addressed by broadening the base, reducing
generous tax concessions (some of which are not means-tested or are
limited), and revising the design of the income tax reform. Two
developments could encourage reconsideration of tax reform. First,
significant corporate income tax reductions in other large advanced
economies, which would have capital flow implications of potential concern
for Australia. Second, the ongoing Horizontal Fiscal Equalisation Review by the Productivity
Commission is reopening consideration of the distribution of GST revenues,
which could allow for a broader package for agreement between the
Commonwealth and the States.
The proposed areas of reform suggested above could draw further
measures from the recent work by the Productivity Commission.
In its inaugural 5-Year Productivity Review, the Commission has
proposed structural reforms in health, education, urban development, and
regulatory aspects of market efficiency. These proposals could define new
policy parameters, which could also increase certainty about policy
directions for business investment decisions. These would also build upon
the recently enacted legislative agenda of the Competition Policy Review (the Harper report) at the Commonwealth
level. At the State level, there are still further agreements needed to
fulfill the Harper report’s implementation.
We would like to thank the authorities and counterparts in universities
and think tanks, private sector, and other organizations for frank and
engaging discussions.
[1]
In this document, “States” will refer to both the States and
Territories of Australia.