Interest rate hikes ‘net positive’ for economy but not everyone
Here’s a sentence which might sound a little odd: higher interest rates have been good news for the UK economy.
For the first time in many decades, the pain faced by borrowers from higher interest rates has been more than balanced out by the benefit experienced by savers from those interest rates.
If this sounds a little odd it’s partly because invariably, when people – the media, politicians and economists – talk about interest rates they focus unduly on one side of the equation: the plight of the borrower. And there’s an understandable reason for that: in previous “hiking cycles”, when the Bank of England raises interest rates, that pain has invariably outweighed the windfall.
Money latest: Mortgage price war ‘likely’ as 3% interest rates predicted
That was the case when borrowing rates were lifted in 1988; it was the case in 1996, in 2003 and in 2006.
In each case the overall impact, across the economy, on households’ balance sheets was negative.
But not so this time around.
According to the Resolution Foundation, the net income we’ve earned, across the economy, as a result of interest rates, has actually risen rather than fallen – up by a percentage point since rates started going up.
To put that into perspective, the “interest rate effect” on incomes in the late 1980s was -1.5 percentage points.
And what’s striking, when you compare the UK to the euro area and the US, is that we are a bit of an outlier: the interest rate effect, across the economy, was much more positive than it was in those two other areas.
This, says the Resolution Foundation, is at least part of the explanation for how the UK hasn’t yet slipped into the recession a lot of people anticipated this time last year.
Part of the explanation for this is that it so happened, in large part because of the pandemic lockdowns, that people began this hiking cycle with a lot of savings in their bank accounts – far more than usual.
Read more:
Mortgage approvals up as more lenders cut rates
First-time buyers fall to ‘lowest level in a decade’
FTSE 100 bosses ‘earn typical UK annual salary in three days’
The upshot was that, across the economy, the benefit from those savings (and savings rates went up very quickly – albeit not to the levels of borrowing rates) was greater than the impact on mortgages and loans. Another part of the explanation is that so far only around half of those with fixed-rate mortgages have re-fixed their loans.
But there are a few very important provisos here. The first and perhaps most important is that while the above is certainly true across the whole economy, there’s a dramatic difference of experience for different categories of people.
Those whose debts outweigh their savings (which in this case mostly means younger people) will certainly see a negative impact from higher rates. Those with far more savings than debts – the older segments of the population – will see a benefit. In other words, the pain and the dividends are not being equally shared out. The old are doing much better; the young are doing worse.
And there are two other provisos. The first is that this positive impact will begin to wear off as more and more people re-fix their mortgages and go up from low-interest rates to higher rates. Even though the typical fixed-rate deal has been coming down recently, it’s still far higher than it was two or five years ago.
Click to subscribe to The Ian King Business Podcast wherever you get your podcasts
The final proviso is that none of the above takes into account the broader impact of the cost of living crisis.
Everyone is having to pay higher prices for nearly everything. And while the annual rate at which those prices are increasing (inflation) has decelerated, the level of prices remains more than 15% above where it was a couple of years ago.
That’s a painful adjustment for everyone. The good news is that the impact of rates – across the economy as a whole – has actually been positive rather than negative. But not everyone will be seeing the benefits.
Business
Vivergo: How US-UK trade deal could bring about collapse of huge renewable energy plant in Hull
The smell of yeast still hangs in the air at the Vivergo plant in Hull but the machines have fallen quiet.
More than 100 lorries usually pass through here each day, carrying 3,000 tonnes of wheat. It is milled, fermented and distilled. The final product is bioethanol, a renewable fuel that is then blended into E10 petrol.
This is a vast operation. It took several years to build, with considerable investment, but it is on the verge of closing down. Management and staff are holding out for a last-minute reprieve from the government but time is running out.
It’s been a turbulent journey. The plant was already being annihilated by US rivals, losing about £3m a month. Vivergo and Ensus, based in Teesside, blamed regulations that enable US companies to earn double subsidies.
They were pushing for regulatory change but then a killer blow: The US-UK trade deal, which allows 1.4 billion litres of American ethanol into the UK tariff-free (down from 19%).
“We’ve effectively given the whole of the UK market to the US producers,” said Ben Hackett, managing director at Vivergo.
“If we were to have the same support that the US industry has, if we could use genetically modified crops, we wouldn’t need that tariff. We would be able to compete. If we had the same energy costs. We wouldn’t need those tariffs.”
The government has the weekend to come up with a plan that could keep the business running. If it fails, Vivergo will begin issuing redundancy notices to its 160 staff.
Ben Hackett
It’s a devastating prospect for workers, many of them live in Hull and are nervous about alternative opportunities in the area.
Mike Walsh, a logistics manager who has been working at the plant for 14 years, said: “It’s not a great place to be at the moment. It’s a very well paid, very high-skilled role and they’ve (Vivergo) given everybody an opportunity in an area that doesn’t pay that well…. The jobs market isn’t as good as what people would like. So it does impact the local economy.”
He called on the government to “help us, save us, give this industry a future”.
His colleague Claire Wood, lead productions engineer, said: “I moved here after a career in oil and gas for 10 years, partly because I want to be part of the transition to renewable fuels. I can see so much potential here and it’s absolutely devastating to know that this place might be closed very, very shortly and that all that potential just goes away.”
Thousands more could be affected. Haulage companies may have to lay off truck drivers and farmers could also suffer a blow.
Vivergo makes bioethanol using wheat. That wheat is bought from farms from Yorkshire and Lincolnshire.
Claire Wood
The National Farmers Union has sounded the alarm, saying: “Biofuels are extremely important for the crops sector, and their domestic demand of up to two million tonnes can be very important to balance supply and demand and to produce up to one million tonnes of animal feed as a by-product.”
Another bioproduct is carbon dioxide. The gas can be captured and used to put the fizz in drinks or injected into packaging to preserve food.
If Vivergo and Ensus were to go, Britain would lose as much as 80% of its output of carbon dioxide. Supplies are already tight across Europe, meaning this decision could compound shortages across a range of sectors, from meat-packing to healthcare.
The industry is calling on the government to help. Vivergo says it needs temporary financial support but that the government must create a regulatory and commercial environment in which it can thrive.
It says rules that award double subsidies to companies that use waste product in their bioethanol must be changed. At present, these rules are being used by US companies that make ethanol from Uldr – a by-product of processing corn. They argue this is not a genuine waste product.
Read more money news:
Something for everyone in latest economic data
Claire’s falls into administration
Lola’s Cupcakes bakes £30m takeover by Finsbury Food
Another option is to grow the market. Industry leaders are calling on ministers to increase the mandated renewable fuel content in petrol from 10% to 15% and for an expansion into aviation fuels. That would allow British companies to carve out a space.
The government has been locked in talks with the company since June.
It said: “We will continue to take proactive steps to address the long-standing challenges it faces and remain committed to a way forward that protects supply chains, jobs and livelihoods.”
However, the time for talking is almost over.
Mr Hackett said he had no idea how the government would respond but he was firm with his stance, saying: “In times of global uncertainty, losing that energy certainty and supply from the UK is a problem.
“I think what they’re missing out on is the future growth agenda. We’re the foundation on which the green industrial strategy can be built. We make bioethanol that today decarbonises transport. Tomorrow it will decarbonise marine. It will decarbonise aviation.”
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike