The Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) discussed the IMF staff policy paper on Understanding Global Imbalances on Wednesday, April 1, 2026.

Against the backdrop of persistent and recently widening global imbalances, the paper presents a structured framework for understanding how domestic policies can influence current account positions by altering domestic saving and investment decisions. Staff analysis finds that traditional macroeconomic policies remain the dominant drivers of imbalances, but certain types of industrial policies could also play a role. Micro industrial policies—those targeting specific sectors or firms—generally have ambiguous and limited effects on the current account depending on their impact on aggregate productivity. Macro industrial policies—those deployed economy-wide and often paired with restrictions such as capital flow management measures—can materially affect the current account but come at a cost to consumption. Trade restrictions, often deployed to counter imbalances, would only meaningfully alter current account balances when used temporarily or to support higher public savings.

Using scenario analysis, the paper shows how domestic rebalancing, undertaken simultaneously, across deficit and surplus economies yields both a reduction in global imbalances and higher global output. The report concludes that the future path of global imbalances will be largely shaped by domestic macroeconomic trajectories. Durable rebalancing is a collective endeavor: it requires sound domestic policy action across major economies and works best when countries move together. To help design such policies, the Fund is pursuing a multipronged approach by strengthening data, analysis, surveillance and dialogue across the member countries.

Executive Board Assessment[1]

Executive Directors welcomed the paper on Understanding Global Imbalances, noting its timeliness particularly as imbalances have widened again and remain concentrated and persistent. They agreed that the paper provides a clear and coherent analytical framework to analyze the drivers, risks, and policy implications of global imbalances, and usefully contributes to the Fund’s multilateral and bilateral surveillance by clarifying how macroeconomic, trade, and industrial policies interact to shape external positions. Directors broadly agreed with the paper’s conclusions, while also encouraging further efforts to enhance the Fund’s evaluation of global imbalances, including tackling statistical and methodological gaps, financial stocks and flows, and refining the External Balance Assessment.

Directors emphasized that persistent and large surpluses or deficits, beyond those justified by fundamentals, warrant close assessment, given potential risks to macroeconomic and financial stability. They agreed that the saving–investment framework remains the appropriate conceptual anchor for monitoring and diagnosing global imbalances. They welcomed the paper’s emphasis on forward‑looking saving and investment decisions as the core determinants of current account balances, and its clear articulation of the links between flow imbalances, stock positions, valuation effects, and financial stability risks. Directors underscored that the analysis of imbalances should also encompass capital flows and external balance sheet positions, stock‑flow dynamics, and the role of expectations and strategic behavior.

Directors agreed that the paper usefully highlights the conditions under which trade and industrial policies may affect current account balances. They generally concurred with the finding that tariffs and sectoral (micro) industrial policy have limited and ambiguous effects on current account dynamics. It was also noted, however, that this finding may reflect model dependency and data limitations. Directors noted that certain economywide policy combinations—such as sustained foreign reserve accumulation combined with capital flow restrictions or other policies that suppress domestic consumption—can have more material and persistent effects on external balances, with important cross border spillovers. Many Directors cautioned, however, that such policies may, when appropriate, be deployed for macroeconomic stabilization objectives, and stressed the importance of careful clarification and country specific assessments to avoid conflicting with existing Fund guidance, including under the Integrated Policy Framework. A few Directors called for further analysis of the role of the international monetary system in shaping saving–investment dynamics.

Directors agreed that domestic rebalancing, through a better mix of macroeconomic and structural policies, is central to an orderly resolution of global imbalances. They underscored that effective adjustment requires actions by both surplus and deficit economies, and that industrial and trade policies cannot substitute for reforms that support productivity growth, resilient domestic demand, and macroeconomic stability. Directors welcomed the scenario analysis which points to the benefits of simultaneous and symmetrical domestic policy reforms in terms of both reducing imbalances, preserving financial stability and increasing global growth.

Directors emphasized the need to continue refining the External Balance Assessment (EBA) models, to better capture policy interactions, and further analyze the role of capital flows and stock imbalances. They emphasized the importance of further engagement with the Board and country authorities on the EBA methodology refinement. Directors also stressed the importance of addressing remaining statistical and data gaps in external sector statistics and improving transparency around trade and industrial policies. They encouraged staff to develop more comprehensive datasets and dashboards in these areas, while continuing close collaboration with other international institutions. Directors welcomed ongoing efforts under the Comprehensive Surveillance Review and encouraged staff to further strengthen the integration of external sector analysis into surveillance, including outward spillovers.

Going forward, Directors encouraged staff to build on this work through continued analytical refinement, regular monitoring of global imbalances, enhancement of databases, and clear communication of policy tradeoffs. They underscored the importance of maintaining evenhanded, evidence‑based surveillance that supports international cooperation and contributes to global economic and financial stability.

[1] At the conclusion of the discussion, the Managing Director, as Chairman of the Board, summarizes the views of Executive Directors, and this summary is transmitted to the country's authorities. An explanation of any qualifiers used in summings up can be found here: http://www.IMF.org/external/np/sec/misc/qualifiers.htm.