Recent commentary has expressed concern that investors are “taking their money out of America”. Such claims invoke the idea of capital flight, a concept historically relevant under fixed exchange rate systems. However, applying this term to modern floating exchange rate systems is misleading. While significant shifts in investment preferences can have major economic impacts, no actual “flight” of capital, in the sense of a net reduction, can occur—only balanced exchanges.
Fixed Exchange Rates: A Conversion Process
Under a fixed exchange rate system, governments or central banks peg their currencies to physical items like gold or foreign currency. The process underpinning capital movement is essentially a conversion:
- Withdrawal and Conversion:
- An investor withdraws domestic currency (Zone A) from their bank.
- They take this cash to Zone A’s central bank and convert it into the reserve asset (e.g., gold, foreign currency). This action reduces the money supply and reserves in Zone A. The central bank effectively destroys the domestic currency it receives.
- Transport and Re-issuance:
- The investor transports the reserve asset to Zone B.
- They convert this asset at Zone B’s central bank into its domestic currency, which expands the money supply in Zone B as the central bank creates new currency against the received reserve asset.
In this scenario, capital demonstrably “flees” Zone A and “arrives” in Zone B. Zone A experiences a tangible loss of monetary base and reserves, potentially forcing policy responses like higher interest rates to attract capital back. Zone B experiences an inflow. The system passively facilitates this physical movement initiated by the investor.
Floating Exchange Rates: An Exchange Process
In contrast, modern floating exchange rate systems operate through decentralised market exchanges, not central bank conversions:
- Market-Driven Exchange:
- An investor wanting to move out of Zone A’s currency (e.g., USD) must find someone willing to buy that USD and sell another currency (e.g., EUR). This is a direct exchange between market participants, typically facilitated by financial institutions.
- For every seller of USD wanting EUR, there must be a buyer of USD offering EUR. The transaction occurs at a mutually agreed-upon exchange rate determined by supply and demand.
- No Net Change in Quantity:
- Crucially, no USD is destroyed, and no EUR is created out of thin air by a central authority in this process. The total stock of USD and EUR remains unchanged. Ownership simply shifts: one person now holds EUR instead of USD, and the counterparty holds USD instead of EUR.
Therefore, in a floating exchange rate system, the concept of capital “flight”—a net outflow—is mechanically impossible. For every $100 sold, a corresponding $100 must be bought. The total quantity of domestic currency remains the same, residing within the domestic banking system, albeit with different owners (who might now be foreign entities).
Why the Perception of ‘Flight’ Persists
If capital cannot technically “flee” a floating exchange rate system, why is the term so common? The persistence of the “capital flight” narrative stems from misinterpreting the outcomes of large-scale shifts in investor preference.
When many participants try to sell assets denominated in a particular currency (like shares or bonds) or the currency itself, they need buyers. While any individual can sell, in aggregate, these assets cannot be “dumped” or destroyed through exchange. The total quantity remains unchanged, merely shifting ownership. The narrative of “flight” often ignores the necessary presence of the buyers who facilitate these sales.
What does change is the price. To induce others to buy, sellers must accept a lower price, which manifests as:
- Falling asset prices: Stocks and bonds denominated in the currency may decrease in price.
- Currency depreciation: The exchange rate falls, meaning the currency exchanges for fewer units of other currencies.
People observe these falling prices, particularly the lower exchange rates, and mistakenly label them “capital flight,” confusing a change in price or relative valuation with a change in quantity.
However, the fundamental nature of the domestic currency remains unchanged by these market dynamics. A $100 bill still represents a $100 credit against the issuing authority and retains its power to extinguish a $100 tax obligation or settle a $100 domestic debt. These nominal obligations are unaffected by fluctuations in the currency’s exchange rate or the market price of domestic assets.
Similarly, exchange rate shifts are separate from real-world productivity. A change in the USD/EUR rate doesn’t alter the underlying efficiency of producing aircraft engines or growing tomatoes. These physical production capabilities determine the fundamental basis for trade between economies. While financial market activity causes exchange rates to fluctuate, sometimes significantly in the short term, these rates tend to adjust to reflect the relative productivity governing sustainable trade patterns. Money and financial assets operate within their own logic of debits and credits, interacting with but not rigidly determining physical output.
Conclusion
The term “capital flight” accurately describes a phenomenon possible under fixed exchange rates involving physical conversion and changes in money supply. However, it’s a misnomer in today’s floating exchange rate systems. Capital changes hands via exchange, not conversion. Every seller must have a buyer; the total quantity of domestic currency remains unchanged.
The myth persists because the mirror image—the buyer—too often goes unmentioned.
Chat about this and any other MMT topics on Discord with the growing New Wayland community . New members can click this invite link which will add the server to your Discord account