负利率政策会对消费者产生怎样的影响

 Sean Ross  2016年8月20日

2016年4月，BlackRock Inc.的CEO Larry Fink抱怨说全球正在朝负利率的趋势发展并表示这些政策注定会适得其反。Larry Fink指出负利率政策将使储蓄不再产生回报，因此迫使工人储蓄更大的比例的收入。这种观点恰恰与负利率政策相反，例如现在在日本、瑞典和欧盟的其他国家实行的负利率政策。无论Fink的观点正确与否，他提出了一个有趣的问题，那就是负利率对投资者和消费者的影响。

负利率政策的推出是为了鼓励大型银行房贷或者投资他们多余的存款储备并减少国家政府的利率负担。听起来有点怪的是消费者通常不会与这发生关系，因为他们不会参与折扣率或者大量政府债券买入。经典经济学分析人士仅仅认为低利率将会减少储蓄并鼓励借贷、投资和消费。

经济学理论的解释

多年来，负利率政策一直被当成经济矛盾。逻辑上，如果放贷人更愿意接受在未来比现在更少的消费，一份贷款合约就能用于合理的申请真实负利率付款。例如，如果你现在购买1000美元的负真实收益债券，那么在未来某个时间你的债券价格可能变为950美元。很少有人会愿意接受这样的合约。

负利率政策只与名义利率有关，所以负利率贷款合约可能在通货紧缩时产生更有意义的结果。当然，低利率合约对借款人非常有利，至少从表面上看是这样的，因为它们减少利率支出。负利率也会降低存款账户的利率，例如储蓄账户和定期存款。一些宏观经济学家希望低利率能鼓励借款并使资金流出储蓄账户并进入风险更高的投资，例如股票和共同基金。

凯恩斯宏观经济理论说如果实际GDP和潜在GDP之间存在巨大鸿沟，负利率政策可能是必要的。新的消费和投资应该促进企业发展和就业。凯恩斯只考虑了零利率政策无效时的负利率政策。

奥地利经济学家担心零利率政策和负利率政策会引发不需要的通货膨胀并允许企业参与更加有风险的项目，因为融资更加容易。当未来消费者的储蓄被证明不足以支付这些项目，一个必要修正可能导致另一个衰退。

如果低利率使资金从储蓄中流出并进入其他资产，这些资产的价格可能会被高估。这可能能解释为什么美国住宅和股票的价格一直在上涨而不是持平或者下降。随着资产价格上涨这些资产的实际回报可能会下降。这使投资对投资者的吸引力降低，并可能使投资者对泡沫和修正产生担心。

对低收入消费者的冲击

负利率推动更多的货币进入流通，鼓励更多的房贷。其他条件都不变的情况下，货币流通量的增加会使产品的价格更高。这意味着你购买汽油、食品、住房、衣服和其他商品与服务的价格更昂贵。这对所有的消费者来说都不是理想状态，但是低收入和固定收入消费者受到的冲击最大。那些依靠政府援助、养老金或者低薪工作生活的人不太可能看到实际收入的相应增加。

银行将成本转移给消费者

负利率将积压银行利润。如果一个银行必须接受更加具有风险的贷款或者因为存款向银行付费，它可能决定将成本传递给存款人。这样做的一个方式是对活期账户收取存款和安全费用，但是也可能采取ATM取款费用等其他措施。

更便宜的车贷和房贷

如果不考虑其他因素，负利率政策应该会鼓励车贷和房贷。毕竟，更便宜的利息意味着你可能能支付一辆更好的汽车和更大的房子。不幸的是，大多数美国人现在都是净贷款人并且需要偿还现在的贷款，不能进行更多的贷款。

增加流动性的不稳定性和需求

到目前为止，低利率政策并未对经济增长产生效果。公司在2016年贷款比经济大萧条以来的其他年份都更高，而实际收入并没有跟上生活成本增长的步伐。人们普遍担心金融市场在2016年末和2017年初出现衰退。消费者可能发现他们正在储蓄更多的钱并避免投资股票。

How Negative Interest Rates Can Affect Consumers

By Sean Ross | Updated August 20, 2016 — 1:00 PM EDT

In April 2016, BlackRock Inc. (NYSE: BLK) CEO Larry Fink cried out against the global trend toward negative interest rates and argued that such policies were doomed to backfire. Fink pointed out that nonexistent interest rates make it impossible to generate a return on savings, thereby forcing workers to save larger proportions of their income. This is precisely the opposite of what negative interest rate policies (NIRPs), such as those implemented in Japan, Sweden and the rest of the European Union (EU), hope to accomplish. Regardless of whether Fink is correct, he raises an interesting question about the impact of negative rates on investors and consumers.

A negative rate regime is designed to encourage huge banks to lend or invest their excess reserve deposits, and to reduce the interest burden on national governments. As strange as it sounds, consumers do not usually enter the equation because they do not directly interact with discount rates or huge government bond purchases. Classic economic analysis only suggests that low interest rates should discourage savings and encourage borrowing, investing and spending.

What Economic Theory Says

For years, negative interest rates were supposed to be an economic oxymoron. Logically, a loan contract could only reasonably apply real negative interest payments if the lender preferred less future consumption to more present consumption. For example, you would only buy a $1,000 bond with a negative real yield if you valued holding $1,000 today less than, say, $950 at some point in the future, even after adjusting for potential deflation. Very few, if any, people would accept such a contract.

NIRPs only deal in nominal interest rates, so negative rate loan contracts might make more sense in an economy with deflationary expectations. Of course, low-rate contracts are great for borrowers, at least superficially, because they reduce interest payments. Negative rates also depress interest on deposit accounts, such as savings accounts or certificates of deposit (CDs). Some macroeconomists hope low interest rates will encourage borrowing and drive money out of savings accounts and into higher-risk investments, such as stocks or mutual funds.

Keynesian macroeconomic theory says NIRP might be necessary if there is an output gap or when actual GDP is below potential GDP. New spending and investment should promote business expansion and hiring. Keynesians only consider NIRP when a zero interest rate policy (ZIRP) proves ineffective.

Austrian economists worry that NIRP or ZIRP encourages unwanted inflation and allows businesses to undertake riskier projects because financing is cheaper. When future consumer savings prove insufficient to pay for such projects, a necessary correction could lead to another recession.

A Deterrent for Investors

If negative rates drive money out of savings and into other assets, the price of those other assets may become overvalued. This may explain why housing prices and stock prices keep rising in the United States despite flat or declining profitability, dividends and rents. As asset prices rise, potential real returns from those assets decline. This makes investments less enticing to investors, and may deter investors who are concerned about a bubble or correction.

Hard on Low-Income Consumers

Negative interest rates drive more currency into circulation by encouraging more loans. All else equal, higher volumes of circulated currency force prices higher than they otherwise would have been. This means it costs you more to buy gas, food, housing, clothing and other goods and services. This is suboptimal for all consumers, but it tends to hit low-income and fixed-income consumers the hardest. Those living on government assistance, pensions or low-wage jobs are less likely to see a corresponding boost in real income.

Banks Pass Costs to Consumers

Negative rates put a squeeze on bank profits. If a bank has to either accept riskier loans or pay fees to store deposits at the central bank, it may decide to compensate by passing costs along to its depositors. One way to do this is to charge a storage and security fee on demand deposit accounts, but other measures such as higher ATM fees could be more likely.

Cheaper Auto and Home Financing

Absent other factors, NIRP should encourage car loans and home mortgages. After all, cheaper interest payments mean you might be able to afford a nicer car or bigger home. Unfortunately, most Americans are already net debtors and need to pay down their existing loans, not take out more.

Added Uncertainty Increases Demand for Liquidity

Thus far, low-interest rate policies have been ineffective at promoting economic growth. Businesses are more leveraged in 2016 than at any point since the Great Recession, and real incomes are not keeping pace with the cost of living. There is widespread concern in financial markets about a possible global recession in late 2016 or 2017. Consumers may find themselves saving more money and avoiding equities as a cautionary practice.

本文翻译由兄弟财经提供

文章来源：http://www.investopedia.com/articles/markets/080916/how-negative-interest-rates-can-affect-consumers.asp