Talk:Capital control

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Capital Controls, or Controlled Capital Accounts, are a fundamental component of modern monetary policy. The IMF exists to surveil and assist countries in their management and/or transition of their capital account regimes.

Extensive research on this topic has been done by the world's top economists, at the the world's leading institutions...

Normalsynthesis 19:45, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] This article needs help

You get the impression from this article that opinion against capital controls began in the 1990s. Actually, most developed markets removed their own capital controls in the 1970s, after the controls they imposed earlier proved so damaging to their markets. Also, there is no widespread view today that capital controls are a good thing for developing markets. On the contrary, I strongly suspect that most economists would view them as detrimental, notwithstanding the 1997 Asian Crisis. Epstein's Mother 06:43, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I am not an economist but my gutt tells me that if the Economist supports state intervention in a field (look here), there has to be some reason for it (in case you don't know: the Economist is a pretty hardcore liberal paper). I was also surprised that Jagdish Bhagwati is supporting them in his book on globalization ("In defense of globalization", 2004). Also not a usual suspect in the field. But it is of course hard to say if "most" or "some" argue, guess we have to leave it as you wrote it. Maybe look at the IMF and find out what their oppinion is today? If even they have changed I would tend to write most, if the didn't, well, let's settle with "some". Don't have the time for research right now, though. --Lamme Goedzak 20:50, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't consider the IMF to be a bellweather of economic thought. They adhere to a lot of economic policies that academic theorists object to. On the other hand, the Economist's views on capital controls are quite nuanced, far more than this article. Basically, it believes that certain types of rapid investment (primarily bank accounts used for currency speculation purposes) should be controlled, but that broader capital controls (basically tying investor assets in a country or prohibiting domestic investors from investing abroad) are deeply problematic. "Capital controls" cover all of this. Epstein's Mother 23:26, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Probably there should be a differentiation between FDI and portfolio-investment, that is as I understand it what the Economist is doing. FDI is good, portfolio is problematic, if institutions are not mature.

One thing that would be interesting here and is right now being debated in Germany is direct investment of state-controlled funds or companies, that have a purpose that goes beyond economics. People are thinking about defining a few industries that would be protected from takeover (weapons, high-tech, energy etc.). The IMF is also viewing that kind of investment sceptically. I unluckily only have a German source [1]. Another example of this is here: [2] (in case you cannot see the full articles tell me, I can put them on your talk page). --Lamme Goedzak 13:38, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

PS: In the US there is the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, CFIUS, it stopped Dubai Ports World from buying some east-coast ports and the Chinese CNOOC from buying Unocal.

[edit] Examples of capital controls

This article needs examples of capital controls and the types of restrictions that governments typically put in place to restrict capital flows. Finnancier (talk) 07:47, 2 February 2008 (UTC)