Page 719

but the unseen effects are ignored. For example, funding for one industry or firm might take more jobs away from other industries and firms, resulting in a net job loss even though jobs are created for the financed firm. At best, it could be said that the Bank redistributes employment from unsubsidized firms to subsidized firms.

However, with very rare exceptions, most exports financed by EXIM would have taken place without government support. Many companies have said so themselves;'’ the procurement happens before the decision to get government support; and, as noted above, most EXIM deals go to large companies with easy access to capital. Thus, the agency is taking credit for jobs that would have existed in any event.

The Bank does not promote exports. EXIM presidents commonly claim that the agency’s mission is to support U.S. jobs by facilitating American exports through its export-financing tools. However, trade economists have long known that export credit subsidies merely redistribute exporting opportunities to subsidized firms instead of increasing the net number of exports—something that also slows economic growth."*

Even more telling is the performance of the U.S. economy and American exports during the four years when EXIM lacked a board quorum (2015-2019) and was barred from finalizing deals in excess of $10 million. During that time, EXIM authorizations fell from $21 billion in FY 2014 to $3.6 billion in FY 2018 (adjusted for inflation).'* However, also during that time, regular big-ticket EXIM beneficiaries continued to benefit from their easy access to capital markets and still had the ability to finance their export activities.

Further, U.S. exports were utterly unaffected by the reductions in the Bank’s activities.’° U.S. unemployment fell to a level not seen in halfa century, but exports soared with financing provided by commercial lenders. The only negative economic impact from EXIM’s lack of a board quorum was its effect on the Bank itself. This contradicts EXIM’s claim that its activities are crucial for the success of U.S. exporters and economic growth. Instead, it shows that economic growth is the best booster of U.S. exports and job creation and that it does not depend on EXIM subsidies.

Subsidy-boosted exports do not boost economic growth. EXIM’s primary reason for existing is to increase exports, as if more exports themselves represent more jobs and economic growth. Recent expressions of this fallacious belief can be found in a book by former EXIM President Fred Hochberg. According to Hochberg,

“We know that trade, and exports in particular, can have a big impact on jobs.””” While this is acommon misconception about exports, it is one worth correcting. As trade economists know, exports are a cost to the economy: They subtract from GDP. Imports, on the other hand, add to GDP. If the U.S. could acquire all of the imports that it currently gets without exporting anything in exchange, that would be the best of all worlds. Unfortunately, one reason that foreigners are so eager