logo
‘Exorbitant privilege': Can the US dollar maintain its global dominance?

‘Exorbitant privilege': Can the US dollar maintain its global dominance?

Al Jazeera6 days ago
Since the 1940s, the US dollar has held firm as the global reserve currency, driving international trade and reinforcing the status of the United States as an economic superpower.
In recent years, however, some countries have expressed opposition to the US dollar's longstanding economic dominance.
The BRICS economic bloc, named for its founding members, Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, has actively sought to reduce its reliance on the US dollar. China has even pushed for 'de-dollarisation', by promoting its currency, the yuan, and forming currency swap agreements with other countries.
Christine Lagarde, president of the European Central Bank, recently noted that a 'shift' was under way that would allow for the 'euro to gain global prominence'.
Lagarde said in June that the euro accounts for approximately 20 percent of global foreign exchange reserves, and that the 'dominant role of the US dollar', which accounts for 58 percent, 'is no longer certain'.
'History teaches us that regimes seem enduring – until they no longer are. Shifts in global currency dominance have happened before. This moment of change is an opportunity for Europe. It is a 'global euro' moment,' Lagarde said.
The dollar has also weakened this year, experiencing its sharpest six-month decline in decades.
Global investors have been reacting to policy uncertainty under the administration of US President Donald Trump, rising debt, and shifting interest rate expectations – with some questioning its 'safe-haven' appeal.
Experts say that in the unlikely event that the US were to lose its reserve currency status, the impact would be profound, as the country would lose much of its leverage to influence global trade and enforce sanctions – international trade that does not directly involve the US often runs through the dollar.
Or, as Trump told reporters earlier this month, 'If we lost the world standard dollar, that would be like losing a war.
'We would not be the same country.'
'Exorbitant privilege'
As the global reserve currency, the US dollar underpins a monetary system where central banks rely on it to stabilise their economies, manage debt and implement trade policies.
Historically seen as a safe investment, the dollar remains so deeply embedded in the global system that, despite recent shake-ups, it is unlikely to be dethroned anytime soon, emboldened by a longstanding history of resilience.
The US dollar was put on this course in the 1930s, when then-President Franklin D Roosevelt centralised US gold reserves and tied the dollar to a fixed supply of gold.
Then, in 1944, the US spearheaded the Bretton Woods Agreement, which pegged international currencies to the dollar, leading to the creation of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank.
With much of the world recovering from war and the US holding the majority of global gold reserves, the dollar emerged as the anchor of the post-war financial system, and by the 1960s, gave the US what former French Minister of Finance Valéry Giscard d'Estaing called an 'exorbitant privilege'.
In 1971, US President Richard Nixon severed the last remaining ties to the gold standard, an action that became known as the 'Nixon shock', allowing the dollar to float freely in the open market. Despite the wave of changes, the US economy remained strong, bolstered by its growth in manufacturing and information, which helped the dollar maintain its status.
Since the Nixon era, the dollar's dominance has mostly only strengthened, even as countries like China have outpaced the US in economic growth, population and manufacturing output. The US has continued to wield disproportionate influence through trade agreements and financial sanctions.
'Many times, even between emerging markets when one converts a currency, like the Brazilian real and the South African rand, for example, there is a transaction to US dollars in between, and so, the US extraterritorial power here stems from the fact that other countries, global banks, don't want to lose their access to the US dollar-based financial system,' Rachel Ziemba, adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security, told Al Jazeera.
This also adds weight when the US imposes sanctions.
'From a geopolitical standpoint, the US having a reserve currency gives it more flexibility to weaponise its currency via financial sanctions and the like,' Ziemba said.
Because transactions often pass through banks that work in tandem with the US Federal Reserve, they can be subject to US sanctions – even if the US is not directly involved.
That is why the financial sanctions imposed on Russia after its invasion of Ukraine led to a default on Moscow's sovereign debt. In 2022, sanctions from the administration of former US President Joe Biden effectively cut Russia off from dollar-based trade, freezing $300bn in assets held by its central bank and crippling its economy. As a result of the sanctions led by the US, Russia's gross domestic product (GDP) fell by $104bn.
If the dollar did lose its status, domestically, it would mean higher borrowing costs. Without foreign demand for US debt, interest rates would rise, driving up the cost of mortgages and credit cards. This is because private banks peg their interest rates to those of the Federal Reserve.
'It would mean the US no longer has this big pool of foreign savings to rely on to keep the US borrowing costs down. It's kind of a fundamental threat to the US economic model of the past few decades, which has generally been relatively low interest rates, which has enabled consumers, firms and the government to finance a lot of debt at relatively cheap prices,' Pearce said.
'A loss of dollar dominance for the US means higher interest rates in the US, and that's really going to put pressure on demand. Mortgages are gonna get a lot more expensive,' he added.
A new era of economic uncertainty
Unlike in Nixon's era, when US dominance was largely uncontested, the current global economy is more interconnected.
Emerging powers such as China and India have expanded their global influence, and alternative financial systems, including the rise of cryptocurrencies, have gained traction. Repeated policy whiplash from one US administration to the next risks undermining that stability in a landscape of growing threats.
Trump's erratic approach to tariffs and global agreements has revived doubts about the US's reliability on the world stage and raised long-term concerns about the stability of the dollar.
'I think Trump has done more than anybody in modern history to undermine key institutions,' said Alex Jacquez, a special assistant to the president for economic development at the White House National Economic Council under Joe Biden.
After Trump's first term, global partners felt the US had returned to diplomacy under Biden, Jacquez told Al Jazeera.
'When I came in with the Biden administration and worked on these issues, certainly, we had our disputes and our issues with our trading partners, but the international community welcomed us back with good-faith negotiations. But that came with scarring and pain with their interactions with the Trump administration.'
However, Jacquez noted that regaining that trust may now be harder. This is not simply because of Trump, but also because of the broader pattern of reversals in US policy that his administration has driven.
Jacquez argues that frequent U-turns, abrupt withdrawals from agreements and threats to longstanding alliances have created global instability, making it difficult for other nations to formulate long-term plans, which could compromise the long-term stability of the dollar.
That comes alongside Trump's tax legislation, which he recently signed into law, and is expected to add $3.4 trillion to the federal deficit. This is stoking fears about long-term US economic stability, potentially raising borrowing costs that could impact global investors, central banks and everyday consumers.
In 2023, then-Senator JD Vance questioned the value of the dollar as the global reserve currency in an exchange with Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell.
'I think in some ways, you can argue that the reserve currency status is a massive subsidy to American consumers, but a massive tax on American producers,' Vance said.
But since Trump took office with Vance as vice president, tariffs have put pressure on US producers, not the status of the dollar.
There are also concerns over Trump's attempts to influence the Federal Reserve, which could impact the status of the dollar. The president has long criticised Powell for not lowering interest rates, and has threatened to fire and replace him.
Earlier this month, US Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent told Bloomberg that the White House has begun the formal process of finding a successor for Powell, whose term ends in 2026. This comes amid reporting from CBS News that last week, the president asked a group of Republican lawmakers if he should fire Powell.
However, Trump told reporters later that firing Powell was 'highly unlikely'.
'Policies of that nature, which would make investing in US treasuries risky, particularly for foreign investors, I think that would make me a bit more concerned about a loss of reserve currency status,' Michael Pearce, deputy chief economist at Oxford Economics, told Al Jazeera.
'Tariffs and other policies have taken that kind of US exceptionalism off the table at least for this year. We expect the US to be relatively hard-hit by these tariffs compared to the rest of the world. However, when you think of the long-term performance, it's still a relatively dynamic economy,' Pearce added.
Contenders for the global reserve currency
There are groups of nations that are increasingly positioning themselves to take on a larger role in global finance, but none has yet matched the dollar's influence. This means it is unlikely that any currency could replace the dollar as the de facto global reserve currency.
But there are attempts to challenge the US's influence. BRICS nations have moved to reduce their reliance on the US dollar in recent years, which has become a growing concern for Trump.
At the same time, the European Central Bank is also pushing for the euro to play a more central role in the global system, but as Lagarde noted in her essay, a 'step towards greater international prominence for our currency will not happen by default: it must be earned'.
Despite attempts by other nations to expand their influence over the global reserve, and the recent decline in the dollar's value, economists argue that it is unlikely the dollar will lose its status as the world's reserve currency. And, if it did, it might take decades to even see a minor shift.
'It's definitely premature to worry about the dollar losing the global reserve currency status. Even if [it did], that would take multiple years for that to happen,' Hong Cheng, the head of fixed income and currency research at Morningstar, told Al Jazeera.
Pearce also said that a change in the global reserve hierarchy was unlikely.
'A dramatic shift in which the US clearly loses its place atop the pile, I think that's far off the cards. I find it difficult to see any viable contender emerging to the dollar in that sense,' Pearce said.
Instead, experts say a more realistic future could involve a multipolar currency system, where the dollar shares its role with other major currencies, including China's renminbi.
'We could be heading into some kind of multipolar reserve currency environment where there is an additional role for currencies like China's renminbi. There's no one clear alternate currency,' said Ziemba, the adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security.
Even if a transition were to occur, it would take decades.
'You would need kind of a managed unwinding through either coordination or kind of some sort of alternative system to emerge, which again would take time,' Jacquez said.
While the dollar's share in global reserves has declined, it is not at an unprecedented low.
'The dollar share in FX [foreign exchange] reserves was lower in the early 1990s, so the recent decline in its share is not completely out of the norm to just under 60 percent,' according to JPMorgan Chase.
In emerging markets, 'the same ratio of USD reserves as in 1995' still holds. Even after recent sell-offs, including one by China in April, analysts do not expect a major impact.
Countries often hold US Treasuries as liquid assets, which provides stability to their own currencies, so unravelling the US dollar's status could also undermine their own interests.
'With more than 30 percent of foreign Treasury holdings maturing in the next 2 years, international investors are more likely to let these assets mature and choose to reinvest part of the proceeds elsewhere. We think large-scale selling is unlikely,' the note added.
That signals that the US dollar will likely remain dominant for the foreseeable future.
'I don't think there's one dominant currency that's gonna replace the dollar. And if there was hypothetically a change, I think that's going to take many years to shift,' Cheng added.
'We're talking about the next 20, 30, or even 50 years.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Swiss luxury watchmakers slip after Trump tariff blow
Swiss luxury watchmakers slip after Trump tariff blow

Qatar Tribune

time12 hours ago

  • Qatar Tribune

Swiss luxury watchmakers slip after Trump tariff blow

Agencies Shares in Swiss luxury watchmakers, including Richemont and Swatch, were volatile in early trade on Monday, underscoring the challenge the industry faces after U.S. President Donald Trump imposed a steep 39% tariff on Switzerland. The sector, which exported watches worth 26 billion Swiss francs ($32.79 billion) in 2024, is already under pressure from a stronger franc and falling global demand. Watch exports are on track to hit their lowest levels since the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. 'The impact of the U.S. tariffs, if they stay at 39%, could be devastating for numerous brands in Switzerland,' said Jean-Philippe Bertschy, an analyst at Vontobel. Shares in Richemont and Swatch were both down around 1% at 09:06 a.m. GMT, paring back losses after earlier falling as much as 3.4% and 5%, respectively. Bertschy linked the move to hopes of Switzerland still getting a better deal as the tariffs are effective as of August 7. Swatch Group CEO Nick Hayek, meanwhile, called on Swiss President Karin Keller-Sutter to meet Trump. A separate report by Reuters said Switzerland's government would hold an extraordinary cabinet meeting on Monday to discuss its response to tariffs, which threaten to inflict heavy damage to its luxury goods industry. The duties are scheduled to go into effect on Thursday, giving Switzerland a small window to strike a better deal. Switzerland was left stunned on Friday after Trump hit the country with one of the highest tariffs in his global trade reset, with industry associations warning that tens of thousands of jobs were at risk. President Keller-Sutter told Reuters on Friday that Switzerland had given U.S. goods virtually free access to its market, and Swiss companies had made very important direct investments in the U.S. 'The president (Trump) is really focused on the trade deficit, because he thinks that this is a loss for the United States, that every year with Swiss exports, the United States loses, well, 38.5 billion (francs),' she told Reuters. 'Tariffs can change at any moment due to the unpredictability of the Trump administration,' said Georges Mari, co-owner of Zurich-based investment firm Rossier, Mari & Associates, which holds shares in Swatch, adding that it is 'impossible to make a serious forecast.' Monday was the first day of trading following the U.S. tariff announcement, as markets were closed on Friday for the Swiss National Day holiday. Stocks and the Swiss franc both tumbled in response to heavy levies. An index of Swiss blue-chip stocks hit its lowest level since mid-April on Monday, as shares in banks, luxury retailers, and pharma companies dropped. The SMI index was last down 0.6% on the day, compared with a 0.6% rise in the regional STOXX 600 index. The Swiss franc was the worst-performing major currency against the dollar, which was last up 0.7% at 0.809 francs, not far off Friday's one-month highs.

Legal challenge to Trump's tariffs likely headed to Supreme Court
Legal challenge to Trump's tariffs likely headed to Supreme Court

Qatar Tribune

time12 hours ago

  • Qatar Tribune

Legal challenge to Trump's tariffs likely headed to Supreme Court

Agencies A federal appeals panel on Thursday appeared skeptical of US President Donald Trump's argument that a 1977 law historically used for sanctioning enemies or freezing their assets gave him the power to impose tariffs. Regardless of how the court rules, the litigation is almost certainly headed to the US Supreme Court. Here is what you need to know about the dispute, which Trump has called 'America's big case,' and how it is likely to play out in the months ahead. The litigation challenges the tariffs Trump imposed on a broad range of US trading partners in April, as well as tariffs imposed in February against China, Canada and Mexico. It centers around Trump's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which gives the president the power to address 'unusual and extraordinary' threats during national emergencies. Trump has said that trade imbalances, declining manufacturing power and the cross-border flow of drugs justified the tariffs under IEEPA. A dozen Democratic-led states and five small US businesses challenging the tariffs argue that IEEPA does not cover tariffs and that the US Constitution grants Congress, not the president, authority over tariffs and other taxes. A loss for Trump would also undermine the latest round of sweeping tariffs on dozens of countries that he unveiled late Thursday. Trump has made tariffs a cornerstone of his economic plan, arguing they will promote domestic manufacturing and substitute for income taxes. The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit heard oral arguments on Thursday in the case. The panel of 11 judges sharply questioned the government about Trump's use of IEEPA, but did not rule from the bench. The Federal Circuit has not said when it will issue a decision, but its briefing schedule suggests it intends to move quickly. Meanwhile, the tariffs remain in effect after the Federal Circuit paused a lower court's ruling declaring them illegal. A Federal Circuit ruling would almost certainly not end the litigation, as the losing party is expected to appeal to the Supreme Court. If the Federal Circuit rules against Trump, the court could put its own ruling on hold while the government appeals to the Supreme Court. This approach would maintain the status quo and allow the nine justices to consider the matter more thoroughly. The justices themselves could also issue an 'administrative stay' that would temporarily pause the Federal Circuit's decision while it considers a request from the Justice Department for more permanent relief. The Supreme Court is not obligated to review every case appealed to it, but it is widely expected to weigh in on Trump's tariffs because of the weighty constitutional questions at the heart of the case. If the Federal Circuit rules in the coming weeks, there is still time for the Supreme Court to add the case to its regular docket for the 2025-2026 term, which begins on October 6. The Supreme Court could rule before the end of the year, but that would require it to move quickly. There is no consensus among court-watchers about what the Supreme Court will do. Critics of Trump's tariffs are optimistic their side will win. They point to the Supreme Court's decision from 2023 that blocked President Joe Biden from forgiving student loan debt. In that ruling, the justices limited the authority of the executive branch to take action on issues of 'vast economic and political significance' except where Congress has explicitly authorized the action. The justices in other cases, however, have endorsed a broad view of presidential power, especially when it comes to foreign affairs. Can importers seek refunds for tariffs paid? If Trump loses at the Supreme Court, importers are likely to seek refunds of tariffs already paid. This would be a lengthy process given the large number of anticipated claims. Federal regulations dictate that such requests would be first heard by US Customs and Border Protection. If that agency denies a refund request, the importer can appeal to the Court of International Trade. There is precedent for tariff refund requests being granted. Since May, CBP has been processing refunds to importers who inadvertently overpaid duties because of tariff 'stacking' — where multiple overlapping tariffs are applied to the same imports. And in the 1990s, after the Court of International Trade struck down a tax on exporters that was being used to finance improvements to US harbors, the court set up a process for issuing refunds. That decision was upheld by both the Federal Circuit and the Supreme Court. Would a courtroom defeat unravel Trump's trade deals? Trump has used the threat of emergency tariffs as leverage to secure concessions from trading partners. A loss at the Supreme Court would hamstring Trump in future negotiations. The White House, however, has other ways of imposing tariffs, like a 1962 law that allows the president to investigate imports that threaten national security. Trump has already used that law to put tariffs on steel and aluminum imports, and those levies are not at issue in the case before the Federal Circuit. Some legal experts say a loss for Trump at the Supreme Court would not impact bilateral trade agreements the US has already inked with other countries. Others say that the trade deals alone might not provide sufficient legal authority for taxes on imports and may need to be approved by Congress.

Why have relations between Trump and Modi nosedived so quickly?
Why have relations between Trump and Modi nosedived so quickly?

Al Jazeera

time14 hours ago

  • Al Jazeera

Why have relations between Trump and Modi nosedived so quickly?

The United States slaps 25 percent tariffs on a nation long viewed as an ally. The United States has imposed a punitive 25 percent tariff on India. US President Donald Trump warns that more could follow. It's a spectacular change from six months ago, when the leaders of the two nations declared their friendship at the White House. So what went wrong – and what will happen next? Presenter: Dareen Abughaida Guests: Brahma Chellaney – Professor of Strategic Studies at the Centre for Policy Research in New Delhi and a former adviser to India's National Security Council Elizabeth Threlkeld – Senior fellow and director of the South Asia Program at the Stimson Center Sumantra Bose – Political scientist and professor of International and Comparative Politics at Krea University in India

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store