Summary of Guilt by Association

Finance & Development ,

Get the Article

Guilt by Association summary
Painting controls on capital inflows and outflows with the same broad brush may be a mistake.

Rating

8 Overall

9 Importance

8 Innovation

8 Style

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.

In this summary, you will learn

  • Why many policy makers view capital controls negatively
  • Why incoming and outgoing limits are distinctly different macroeconomic tools
  • Why policy makers should consider using capital inflow restrictions to dampen speculative risk
 

Summary

By the early 21st century, distinctions between inflow and outflow capital controls had become blurred in the eyes of policy makers, who tend to abhor all controls. The aversion is historically well grounded in the experiences of nations restricting outbound money flows. Autocrats taking desperate measures...
Get the key points from this article in less than 10 minutes. Learn more about our products or log in

About the Author

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


Comment on this summary

More on this topic

Customers who read this summary also read

More by category