New Articles

Why Brazil Could Be the U.S.’s Next Great Trade Partner

Brazil

Why Brazil Could Be the U.S.’s Next Great Trade Partner

The U.S. and Brazil are the largest economies in the Americas, and all signs point to an even more active relationship between the two powerhouses in the future. Just this year it was confirmed that U.S. citizens would no longer need a visa to travel to Brazil and can remain in the country for at least 90 days, allowing for more frequent interactions at a very basic level. Since that announcement, Brazil has seen increased travel interest from American tourists, with searches for flights from the U.S. to Brazil up more than 30 percent in March alone, compared to the previous year. 

While tourism is a great way to build strong country relationships, what’s even more significant is a recent report that shows investment interactions between the U.S. and Brazil increased – and improved – between 2008 and 2017. More specifically, the report highlighted growth and opportunity across three of the most powerful indicators of economic health between 2008 and 2017: direct investments, exportation and employment. 

Consider that by the end of 2017, U.S. investments into the Brazilian economy reached a whopping $68 billion, comprising nearly 3.3 percent of Brazil’s overall gross domestic product (GDP) – according to the report. For its part, Brazil’s foreign direct investments into the U.S. surged dramatically (356.5 percent) over the last decade, reaching over $42 billion in 2017. What’s more, from an exportation standpoint, the U.S. is a key destination for Brazilian exports. In fact, in 2017 alone, Brazil exported goods worth over $27 billion to the U.S. Similarly, the U.S. was the second main source of imports to Brazil in 2017. 

Naturally, prolific trade and investment between the two countries is already leading to job creation in both countries. U.S.-controlled multinational companies employed nearly 655,000 Brazilians in 2015 and generated 131,900 new jobs in Brazil between 2009 and 2015. On the other hand, Brazilian companies in the U.S. employed over 74,000 Americans in 2015. Further, for Brazil, increasing trade with the U.S. also eases the country’s access to other international markets, boosting Brazil’s clout internationally while also broadening the job market and improving the Brazilian economy. In turn, increased trade with Brazil offers the U.S. access to resources that are critical to the American economy, such as oil and gas, mining, and chemicals. 

As these initial results suggest, the opportunities on the horizon for a mutually beneficial relationship between the two countries are seemingly limitless. Currently, the U.S. is investing heavily in sectors across the Brazilian economy, focusing especially on mining, finance and insurance – and the U.S. is also especially well positioned to take advantage of unprecedented access and opportunity in one particular sector: oil. In light of that fact that the global demand for oil is rising, potentially reaching 102.3 million barrels per day by 2022, the Brazilian oil and gas industry presents the next great investment opportunity for foreign investors, especially those from the U.S. 

Indeed, Brazil’s oil reserves are enormous – the 15th largest in the world, with over 15 billion barrels – and are located mostly offshore in deep waters. Brazilian oil companies are already pushing the boundaries of innovation when it comes to deep water exploration. Petrobras, for example, discovered pre-salt oil reserves – which are entirely unique to Brazil – off the coast of Rio de Janeiro in the Santos Basin in 2006. This initial discovery led the company to find a series of even larger oil reserves containing potentially billions of barrels of light oil. As oil experts will know, pre-salt extraction is more painstaking and complicated than other forms of oil and gas removal. However, investing in exploration and production in the pre-salt regions is becoming absolutely critical as the world’s post-salt reserves dwindle. Since discovering these reserves, Petrobras has actually developed many of the technologies needed to overcome harsh oceanographic conditions and create production infrastructure. 

Of course, breaking into a new foreign market is always daunting. To entice foreign investors who are best equipped to efficiently and responsibly drill at these pre-salt reserves, Brazil’s National Petroleum Agency is organizing seven auctions (also known as “bidding rounds”) between 2019 and 2021, during which they’ll auction off areas containing billions of barrels of oil. These bidding rounds are designed to formally and transparently assign blocks from the pre-salt reserves that Petrobras currently has ownership over. During an upcoming bidding round on November 6, for instance, the Brazilian government will auction off the rights to extract the excess of 15 barrels of oil from across four fields called Atapu, Buzios and Itapu e Sépia. The winners will be able to utilize Petrobras’ technical data for pre-salt exploration and extraction in return for reimbursing Petrobras for a portion of its investment costs.

Encouraging bilateral trade and investment between Brazil and the United States is already leading to economic growth for both countries, and – as the data from recent years shows – the opportunities for future mutual prosperity are endless. By continuing to create unique investment opportunities, such as those offered to foreign investors during the upcoming oil auctions, Brazil will be able to court U.S. investors and further solidify its standing as America’s next great international trade partner. 

To consult the schedule of bids and more information, please, refer to: http://rodadas.anp.gov.br/en/

 

Sergio Ricardo Segovia Barbosa, 55, is a retired Rear Admiral in Brazilian Navy. With recognized professional experience in military, managerial and governmental areas, he has worked in Intelligence Analysis, Military Operations, and Logistics. He also worked in Emergency and Risk Management, Maritime Safety, Strategic Planning, Navigation and Maritime Operations. In addition, in the foreign trade area, he was responsible for logistics and international acquisition processes, when he was in charge of the group for ship receiving abroad.

Mr. Segovia has a postgraduate degree in Politics and Strategy from the War College. He is fluent in English and Spanish.

COMING AND GOING, THE U.S. WINS FROM FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT

Think of it as strength through diversification

Foreign direct investment (FDI) is a vehicle for gaining entry into growth markets. Companies might decide the best approach is to acquire products and technologies already in the target market, or to secure distribution and retail channels for their existing products, or they might decide to launch greenfield production to serve the local or regional markets, or some combination. Whatever their approach, their goal is to generate additional sales. Investors reward companies that diversify their sales and income. Multinational companies typically look to grow global market share, not just shift market presence.

For the host economy, FDI often brings new well-paying jobs, an expanded tax base (if they don’t offset with too generous a tax holiday), stronger productive capacity, transfer of technological expertise, improvements in infrastructure, and stronger economic growth. In theory and in general, it’s a win-win. In practice and locally, it will depend on each deal.

Companies are not multinational, they are “multi-local”

A.T. Kearney produces an annual Foreign Direct Investment Confidence Index that surveys investor intentions. More than 75 percent of companies say they invest to be close to market, putting them in a better position to cater to local culture and customs, navigate the idiosyncrasies of the local business environment, and embed themselves in the community as a local partner with deeper roots beyond their core business.

Large cities and megacities are the most popular destinations for FDI – nearly two-thirds of the companies surveyed have more than half their FDI in cities, attracted by the concentration of talent, clusters of R&D or related activities, and availability of infrastructure. Fifty-nine percent of respondents said their companies begin their FDI assessments at the regional or city level, rather than take into account national considerations.

Many large cities have built their economic reputations on particular sectors. For example, an information technology investor looking at Asia would identify Hyderabad or Bangalore in India as among their top targets. Companies looking to locate an overseas headquarters in cities with strength in business services might look to Singapore, Hong Kong or Dubai first.

States and cities compete for foreign direct investment – why?

Countries, states and localities compete for capital by offering streamlined administrative procedures, incentives like tax breaks and grants, and by establishing special economic and free trade zones. Many U.S. states have permanent investment promotion offices overseas. South Carolina has offices in Shanghai, Tokyo and Munich. Florida maintains offices in 13 countries.

U.S. states and cities work hard to attract foreign investors because of the benefits they bring to local economies. The U.S. affiliates of majority-foreign owned firms employed more than seven million American workers in 2016, invested $60.1 billion in U.S.-based research and development, and contributed $370 billion to U.S. exports.

According to OFII, the trade association that represents foreign investors in the United States, international companies employ 20 percent of America’s manufacturing workforce and 62 percent of the manufacturing jobs created in the past five years can be attributed to international companies investing in the United States.

foreign direct investment FDI employment revenue

What goes out also comes in – how the U.S. wins with overseas FDI

There are two sides to the FDI coin, and the U.S. economy is positioned to win whether the FDI is coming or going.

A common perception exists that American companies who invest overseas are sell-outs, moving jobs in search of lower wages, and that the host country is the only beneficiary.

Politicians stoke this fear. The rhetoric will only heat up in the run up to the 2020 presidential election, but the data tell a surprising and different story.

In fact, economists Oldenski and Moran, who are leaders in studying FDI, have found that increased offshoring of manufacturing by U.S. multinationals is actually associated with increases in the size and strength of the manufacturing sector in the United States.

More specifically, they found that when a U.S. firm increases employment at its foreign affiliate by 10 percent, employment by that same firm in the United States goes up by an average of four percent, capital expenditures and exports from the United States by that firm also increase by about four percent, and R&D spending increases by 5.4 percent.

The idea that outward FDI is associated with expansion of economic activity at home feels counterintuitive, and critics would rightly point out that the overall result for the U.S. economy doesn’t mean there isn’t labor dislocation of some kind.

Demand for certain types of production occupations might increase (e.g., engineering or sales) at the expense of workers with skills that are less or no longer in demand. Or, some local labor markets might be adversely affected despite overall gains, or some manufacturing subsectors may wane as others rise.

But on balance, across the U.S. economy, Oldenski and Moran conclude that the foreign operations of multinational firms tend to be complements, not substitutes for domestic U.S. operations.

Myth busting on foreign direct investment

Global FDI flows are waning

Globally, companies are engaging in less FDI. For the third year in a row, global FDI flows have fallen. In 2018, FDI flows dropped 19 percent from to $1.47 trillion to $1.2 trillion.

Developed country recipients saw the biggest hit with a 37 percent decline. Part of the explanation is fewer megadeals and corporate restructurings – the large value of those in previous years inflated the overall value of FDI flows.

Tax reform in the United States has also set in motion a shift in FDI flows. Most outward FDI from U.S. companies is in the form of more than $3.2 trillion in retained earnings held overseas. Changes to the U.S. corporate tax regime prompted a 78 percent increase at the end of 2017 in companies reinvesting overseas earnings in the United States. The inward investment took the biggest bite from FDI into the European Union.

Another major factor was China’s FDI outflows which reversed for the first time since 2003, declining 36 percent largely in response to the government’s restrictions on capital outflows directed to investments in assets such as real estate, hotels and entertainment facilities.

Wait and see?

According to A.T. Kearney’s annual Foreign Direct Investment Confidence Index, 77 percent of responding companies said FDI will be more important for corporate profitability in coming years and 79 percent said they intend to increase FDI over the next three years, pending their assessments of the availability of quality targets, the macroeconomic environment, and their availability of funds.

But in reality, multinationals may be taking a wait and watch stance as trade tensions between the United States and China escalate. At the same time, a number of countries have implemented tighter screening of proposed investments, citing national security concerns associated with foreign ownership of strategic technologies and other assets. Overall, the investment policy climate is becoming less, not more, favorable with greater restrictions and regulations than liberalization.

Investor confidence in the United States is still strong

On A.T. Kearney’s index, developed markets dominate 22 of the top 25 spots on the list of countries considered the top targets by corporate investors. Despite trade tensions and risks of economic downturn, these economies offer relatively stable regulatory environments, legal protections, skilled workers and the availability of technological and innovation capabilities, all qualities multinational companies seek in FDI targets. Size and market potential matter too. China, India and Mexico are emerging markets where multinationals must be players to be globally competitive.

For the seventh year running, the United States tops the index as the most attractive target for FDI. FDI inflows to the United States fell 18 percent in 2018, part of a broader decline in FDI flows to developed markets and fewer large mergers and acquisitions, but the United States still receives more FDI than any other country.

China, which held the top spot from 2002 to 2012, dropped to seventh. European countries hold 14 of the top 25 spots. The only emerging markets on this year’s list were China, India, Taiwan and Mexico. Singapore holds the 10th position and South Korea the 17th spot. Notably, the United Kingdom is holding steady in fourth place, despite the uncertainties surrounding Brexit.

The transition from physical to digital

FDI accounts for 39 percent of capital flows for developing countries as a group and around one-quarter for the least developed countries. FDI is less volatile than liquid financial assets and more resilient during global economic and financial downturns.

Unfortunately for developing countries particularly outside Asia, there’s not only less foreign direct investment to go around, the type of FDI is slowing changing too. As digital technologies become more diffuse, companies are shifting to “asset light” forms of international production. In more cases, companies no longer need the same level of physical production assets or employees overseas to achieve growth. The drop in the value of announced greenfield investments may be a sign that growth in global value chains is stagnating.

A more nuanced conversation in U.S. politics

Global FDI flows are critical for growth in developing and developed markets alike, including the United States. Multinationals are stronger in their home economies when they diversify, and we should seek to have a more nuanced conversation about the role of FDI in the U.S. economy – including its impact on job creation and job shifting – rather than simply demagoguing the companies who invest overseas or the foreign companies who invest here. An evidence-based and comprehensive policy dialogue would better serve American workers in the long run.

line

Key resources:

  • To keep track of global FDI flows, consult UNCTAD’s annual reports which include statistics and analysis of investment policy trends. Access the 2018 Global Investment Report here.
  • Economists Theodore Moran and Lindsay Oldenski debunk some prevailing myths about the strength of the U.S. manufacturing base and the role of FDI in an excellent policy brief found here.

 

______________________________________________________________

 

 

Andrea Durkin is the Editor-in-Chief of TradeVistas and Founder of Sparkplug, LLC. Ms. Durkin previously served as a U.S. Government trade negotiator and has proudly taught international trade policy and negotiations for the last fourteen years as an Adjunct Professor at Georgetown University’s Master of Science in Foreign Service program.

This article originally appeared on TradeVistas.org. Republished with permission.