Complete document available on OLIS in its original format This document and any map included herein are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area.

This report explores the relationship between services trade policies and markups at the firm level, taken as a measure of competitive pressure. Restrictive regulations are found to enable firms to charge higher markups in a majority of services sectors, suggesting ample scope for pro-competitive gains from trade liberalisation. Barriers to establishment consistently enable incumbent firms shielded from competition to raise their prices, while a lack of regulatory transparency and complex administrative procedures tend to add to all firms' operating expenses. A "tax equivalent" of trade-restrictive regulations is then inferred from the abnormal price-cost margin of domestic firms in each service sector. These estimates indicate the magnitude of the welfare costs of regulatory trade restrictions across sectors and countries. The sectors with the highest average tax equivalents of STRI indices are broadcasting, construction, storage, and air and maritime transport, while those with the lowest averages are road transport, architecture and cargo-handling. There is however considerable variation between countries in all sectors.

The differential between the interest rate paid to service government debt and the growth rate of the economy is a key concept in assessing fiscal sustainability. Among OECD economies, this differential was unusually low for much of the last decade compared with the 1980s and the first half of the 1990s. This article investigates the reasons behind this profile using panel estimation on selected OECD economies as means of providing some guidance as to its future development. The results suggest that the fall is partly explained by lower inflation volatility associated with the adoption of monetary policy regimes credibly targeting low inflation, which might be expected to continue. However, the low differential is also partly explained by factors which are likely to be reversed in the future, including very low policy rates, the "global savings glut" and the effect which the European Monetary Union had in reducing long-term interest differentials in the pre-crisis period. The differential is also likely to rise in the future because the number of countries which have debt-to-GDP ratios above a threshold at which there appears to be an effect on sovereign risk premia has risen sharply. Moreover, debt is projected to increasingly rise above this threshold in most of these countries.

This paper is published under the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD. The opinions expressed and the arguments employed herein do not necessarily reflect the official views of OECD countries. The publication of this document has been authorised by Ken Ash, Director of the Trade and Agriculture Directorate This document and any map included herein are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area. This document has been declassified on the responsibility of the Working Party of the Trade Committee under the OECD reference number TAD/TC/WP(2016)19/FINAL.

No abstract