Macron says €300B in EU savings sent to the US every year will be invested in EU

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Macron’s claim and numbers

  • Many doubt the €300B figure, calling it “made up” or at least very fuzzy.
  • Unclear what’s included: US bonds, equities, pensions, military spending, or “everything” is suggested, but no consensus.
  • Others note the EU already holds about $8T in US assets; €300B/year is small relative to that stock.

Capital flows, currencies, and “imbalances”

  • One line of argument: without formal or de‑facto capital controls, investors will still send money where returns are highest, so rhetoric won’t change much.
  • Counterpoint: you can make foreign investments unattractive via extra taxes, reporting requirements, PFIC-style rules, etc. Critics reply that this is capital control in disguise and politically unrealistic for a 27‑member EU.
  • A side debate disputes whether trade imbalances “exist” in any meaningful way under floating exchange rates; one commenter calls them an accounting artifact, which others challenge.
  • Some stress that selling US assets at scale is nontrivial: liquidity limits, what to buy instead, and riskier destinations (commodities, emerging markets, gold) are brought up as problematic.

Politics, Trump, and US risk

  • Several see Macron’s line as a PR response to Trump’s bullying style, even mimicking his exaggerated rhetoric.
  • There’s extensive discussion of US deficits, rising federal debt, dollar devaluation vs euro, and whether this undermines US assets.
  • Examples of Swedish, Danish, Indian, and Chinese reductions in US treasuries are cited; others argue those moves are small, trend‑driven, or market‑rational rather than purely political.
  • Some Europeans say they’re divesting from the US on political or rule‑of‑law grounds; others see that as overreacting or mixing ideology with portfolio decisions.

EU structural weaknesses

  • Several argue that the core problem is not where savings go, but Europe’s lack of profitable investment opportunities and slow growth policies.
  • EU’s difficulty in ratifying the Mercosur trade deal is used as evidence the bloc struggles to do “bold” things, including capital-market reform.
  • Concerns about agricultural resilience and standards (chemicals, hormones, traceability) drive skepticism of trade deals, which in turn hurt EU’s credibility as a partner and risk strategic isolation.

Savings, pensions, and investment culture

  • Commenters highlight the EU’s much higher measured household savings rate vs the US, but note definitional issues (do pensions and market investments count as “savings”?).
  • In much of Europe, people save more in bank deposits and mandatory pensions; in the US, more household wealth sits in markets (401(k)s, equities, etc.).
  • Some think redirecting pension savings into EU stocks might raise valuations and innovation; others warn of political backlash if people are forced into “shitty EU stocks” and note that underfunded public pensions won’t be fixed by relabeling where they invest.

Feasibility and impact

  • Multiple questions remain unanswered in the thread:
    • What concrete EU‑level instrument would move €300B/year?
    • What authority a single national leader has over ECB, other member states, and private capital?
    • Whether any significant change is politically achievable given diverging interests (e.g., FDI‑dependent states).
  • Some point out that if Europeans sell US assets and prices fall, American retirees could buy them cheaper; Europe might lose upside more than the US.