Icon: enlarge
Bars in Berlin-Friedrichshain: "The economic recovery does not depend on whether I can order two more beers at 11 p.m."
Photo: Christophe Gateau / DPA
SPIEGEL:
Mr. Fuest, it had just become clear that the economy got through the first nine months of 2020 better than feared.
Now the second corona wave is coming with new restrictions.
Did we rejoice too soon?
Clemens Fuest:
I don't think the economic recovery we're seeing is real.
On the other hand, it was always clear that there could be setbacks.
The number of infections was expected to increase in the fall and that is exactly what we are watching now.
SPIEGEL:
The majority of the federal states decided this week to ban visitors from German corona hotspots.
How will that affect the economy?
Fuest:
Every restriction puts a strain on the economy, that's clear.
But it must be emphasized: there can be no economic recovery if the pandemic is not under control.
There is no conflict between health and economic issues.
What we need to talk about, however, is the nature of the restrictions.
SPIEGEL:
What kind of restrictions do you advocate?
Fuest:
We need restrictions that make things possible.
The mask requirement, for example, enables social interaction that would otherwise fall victim to health protection.
With a mask and distance rules, for example, children can go to school and customers can shop freely, otherwise that would not be possible.
SPIEGEL: In
some countries, mere mask and distance are no longer enough.
In parts of Spain, for example, the situation is dramatic.
Fuest:
Right, and we absolutely have to avoid getting into a situation with 20,000 or more new infections a day.
That would be tragic for the people affected, it would certainly overload the health system and it would definitely lead to a major economic setback.
SPIEGEL:
Are bans on accommodation, curfew hours and alcohol bans, as they now partially apply, the means of choice?
Fuest:
I do not presume to judge the medical effects.
The economic recovery in Germany will not depend on whether I can order two more beers at 11 p.m., so it can be one way.
I think it's fundamentally right to be very targeted in this case: It is plausible that the virus spreads easily in pubs, especially when many guests are under the influence of alcohol and do not think about the protective measures.
SPIEGEL:
What else could be done without causing as much damage as a comprehensive lockdown?
Fuest:
From my point of view, you could test a lot more.
I am being talked too much about costs at the moment.
Of course, many tests cost a lot of money, but it is much more expensive if you close shops or schools on suspicion and send people into quarantine for a long time.
The money for tests is a good investment to enable social and economic activity - much like with masks.
SPIEGEL:
You are calling for targeted measures, but many complain about the patchwork of regulations and bans that arises because every federal state has a different strategy.
Fuest:
We should say goodbye in Germany to the idea that we always have to regulate everything uniformly.
This arises from an understandable desire for simplicity.
But this crisis is not easy and there is too much at stake for that.
Imagine if schools were closed all over the republic just because the number of cases skyrocketed in a single federal state.
Nobody would understand that, and rightly so.
SPIEGEL:
Are politicians currently doing enough to keep the economy going despite Corona measures?
"We should say goodbye in Germany to the idea that we always have to regulate everything uniformly"
Fuest:
The government has done a lot right, but there are still options.
The instrument of extended loss carry-back should have been used more, thanks to which companies can offset their current losses against profits from previous years when taxing.
These are not tax cuts that cost the state a lot of money.
Rather, it gives companies the opportunity to better distribute their burdens and thus secure liquidity.
SPIEGEL:
There are such rules for the corona crisis.
Fuest:
A little has been done here, but not nearly enough.
The tax authorities get around 90 percent of the money that they initially earns less.
These are aids that are cheap and have a targeted effect.
After all, they only benefit companies that actually made money before the crisis and are currently making losses.
SPIEGEL:
The tax authorities are already foregoing a lot of money with the temporary VAT cut.
Fuest:
Yes, around 20 billion euros.
In a sense, the measure is the complete opposite: it is expensive and does not work at all precisely.
Companies that are doing well anyway, such as online mail order companies, also benefit.
The VAT reduction should in no case be extended beyond the turn of the year.
If further help is needed, it is better to expand the loss carry-back.
SPIEGEL:
After all, the VAT cut will boost consumption.
display
Title: How we save our economy: The way out of the Corona crisis
Publisher: Aufbau Verlag
Number of pages: 277
Author: Fuest, Clemens
Buy for € 18.00
Price query time
09.10.2020 06.39 a.m.
No guarantee
Icon: Info
Order at AmazonIcon: amazon
Order from ThaliaIcon: thalia
Product reviews are purely editorial and independent.
Via the so-called affiliate links above, we usually receive a commission from the dealer when making a purchase.
More information here
Fuest:
Maybe, but that's not where our biggest problems lie.
Last but not least, consumption is supported by short-time work benefits.
Where there is a lack of consumption, it is not because of the money, but because of health concerns.
For example, many people would like to spend money on football tickets, but the games cannot be attended as they used to be.
If you really want to do something for consumption at short notice, a one-off payment for Hartz IV recipients would make sense.
SPIEGEL:
How long can you still operate with the instrument of short-time work?
Fuest:
The short-time working regulations are a blessing in times of crisis, otherwise there would be a lot of workers on the street today - which companies then lack in the upswing.
But there is a problem when short-time work is granted for too long: you pay people for doing nothing, even if that is not their voluntary decision.
Under other circumstances, for example, many who are currently not needed in simple jobs in the hospitality industry might work in the health sector, where the need is great.
But they don't do that with short-time work benefits.
I therefore consider it a mistake that the short-time work allowance was extended.
SPIEGEL:
Would you dare to make a prognosis: What should we expect if schools, factories and shops have to close again this autumn or winter?
Fuest:
Provided that we take decisive action now, I don't think there will be another recession - also because I think that you can achieve a lot with targeted measures and don't have to shut everything down.
But the upswing would be slowed down significantly.
Icon: The mirror
