Indeed, the benefits of liberalisation of the capital account are largest for economies with a high degree of financial and institutional development. In the absence of deep markets, inflows of hot money can lead to the creation of asset bubbles. The lack of regulators may induce foreign institutions to take excessive risks. When outside investors withdraw their investments, the sudden reversal can result in a crisis.

实际上，资本账户放开的最大受益者，是那些金融和机构发展水平较高的经济体。如果市场容量不大，热钱流入可能会催生资产泡沫。如果监管缺位，可能会诱使外国机构采取过度冒险的行为。当外国投资者撤出他们的投资时，资本流动的突然反转可能会引发一场危机。

If there are good reasons to adopt capital controls, emerging economies should not treat them as a panacea. As the IMF rightly argues, the first line of defence against financial instability should always be more conventional macroeconomic tools. When an emerging market is facing a precipitate inflow of hot money, cutting the interest rate and tightening fiscal policy can be more effective than direct controls.

即使实施资本管制的理由很充分，新兴经济体也不应把它们当成万灵药。IMF正确地指出，预防金融不稳定的第一道防线始终应当是更为传统的宏观经济工具。当新兴市场经济体面临热钱迅猛流入时，降息和收紧财政政策可能比直接资本管制更有效。

【FT社评：IMF的有益反思】相关文章：

★ 漫画图说：我的新年计划（双语）

★ 希腊神话：The Olympin Gods 奥林比斯山神（中英对照）

★ 双语阅读：两代人的美

★ FT社评：安倍应该先解决经济问题

★ FT社评：亚洲和平繁荣需中日美三方努力

★ 埃及反对派联合反对总统穆尔西扩权

★ 美国枪支管制的最大障碍是选民

★ 双语阅读：不当办公室里的“困兽”

★ FT社评：意大利需要蒙蒂

★ 蒙古国大举进入国际资本市场