Governments establish price ceilings to protect consumers from runaway inflation. This is why President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. issued Executive Order No. 39 to address the current surge of retail prices of rice, driven by alleged market manipulation by hoarders and cartels, compounded by global inflation.
Under EO 39, the mandated price ceiling for regular milled rice is set at P41 per kilogram, while well-milled rice is pegged at P45 per kilogram.
Generally, when a price ceiling is set, producers are unwilling to sell at lower prices while consumers demand cheaper items. This imbalance results in a deadweight loss, representing a societal cost caused by market inefficiency when supply and demand are out of equilibrium.
For the price-control measure to be effective, price caps must be set below the equilibrium point, or the price where buyers and sellers agreed. However, it must be at a level where it alters the behavior of market manipulators, without stifling investment or causing small and medium enterprises to go out of business. Setting price ceilings too far below the equilibrium point can significantly harm producers.
In the illustration, assuming the equilibrium price is P55 per kilogram, if the mandated price ceiling for well-milled rice is set at P45 per kilogram, consumers can enjoy a savings of P10 for each kilo of rice they purchase. This can provide much-needed financial relief for households, especially those facing economic challenges.
In this scenario, producers can enhance profits only by reducing costs, which, in turn, may drive improvements in productive efficiency. However, cost reduction may involve laying off workers in order to cut expenses and boost profits. This represents the unfortunate long-term trade-off of price-ceiling measures.
In the long run, this measure may result in some disadvantages, such as supply shortages and reduced production quality, as rice producers need to find ways to offset the price controls that effectively limit their profitability.
On one hand, price controls may provide short-term relief to consumers struggling with inflation. On the other hand, they pose a risk to the stability and growth of the rice sector.
Based on the foregoing, implementing EO 39 poses a significant challenge for the government's economic managers. Balancing the interests of market players and exploring various economic factors is essential in maintaining stability in the industry and ensuring the well-being of the populace.