GLOBAL ECONOMICS AND POLITICS

Leo Haviland provides clients with original, provocative, cutting-edge fundamental supply/demand and technical research on major financial marketplaces and trends. He also offers independent consulting and risk management advice.

Haviland’s expertise is macro. He focuses on the intertwining of equity, debt, currency, and commodity arenas, including the political players, regulatory approaches, social factors, and rhetoric that affect them. In a changing and dynamic global economy, Haviland’s mission remains constant – to give timely, value-added marketplace insights and foresights.

Leo Haviland has three decades of experience in the Wall Street trading environment. He has worked for Goldman Sachs, Sempra Energy Trading, and other institutions. In his research and sales career in stock, interest rate, foreign exchange, and commodity battlefields, he has dealt with numerous and diverse financial institutions and individuals. Haviland is a graduate of the University of Chicago (Phi Beta Kappa) and the Cornell Law School.


 

Subscribe to Leo Haviland’s BLOG to receive updates and new marketplace essays.

RSS View Leo Haviland's LinkedIn profile View Leo Haviland’s profile





WALL STREET TALKING, YIELD HUNTING, AND RUNNING FOR COVER © Leo Haviland May 14, 2019

“‘Curiouser and curiouser!’ cried Alice (she was so much surprised, that for the moment she quite forgot how to speak good English).” “Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland”, by Lewis Carroll (Chapter II, “The Pool of Tears”)

CONCLUSION: GOLDILOCKS ERA, REVISITED

Historians should wonder if the Federal Reserve Board and its friends in central banking (and assorted comrades parading in some political corridors and media circles) nowadays are aiming to manufacture an updated version of the joyous last stage (ending in 2007) of the magnificent Goldilocks Era.

Lower United States Treasury yields and the sunny prospect of continued benevolent Federal Reserve policy reappeared around end December 2018/early January 2019. The rapid bull climb in the S+P 500 from then until the beginning of May 2019 to some extent reflected hopes of further (adequate) American and global economic expansion.

However, the frantic price rally in several key marketplace benchmarks commencing around end year 2018 also probably reflected an ardent quest for “yield” (“return”) by “investors” and other asset purchasers. In addition to buying the S+P 500, yield hunters searched for sufficient return in territories such as other advanced nation stocks, emerging marketplace stocks, lower-grade United States corporate debt, emerging marketplace sovereign debt securities denominated in US dollars, and the petroleum complex.

Of course cultural history does not necessarily repeat itself, either entirely or even partly. Marketplace phenomena (conditions; variables), including relationships between them and perspectives on them, can and do change, sometimes dramatically. Rhetoric (stories) relating to economic and related playgrounds seek not only to explain viewpoints and situations, but also to guide behavior.

Later stages of economic expansions (so-called cycles) often are distinguished by what many players, including leading and widely-respected economic guardians and policymakers, decide to overlook or minimize.

This ardent quest for yield probably manifested that America is in the waning period of the epic economic expansion that followed the dreadful economic disaster of 2007-09. Even if a recession does not occur in the United States (or in other advanced nations), a noteworthy slowdown in global real GDP growth (including China and other emerging realms) likely is or soon will be underway.

“Economic Growth Fears: Stock and Interest Rate Adventures” (4/2/19) stated in regard to the S+P 500: “The September/October 2018 elevation [2941 (9/21/18)/2940 (10/3/18)] probably will not be broken by much, if at all.” The recent price declines in the S+P 500 (5/1/19 high 2954) and other advanced nation stocks, emerging marketplace stocks, emerging marketplace dollar-denominated sovereign debt, and the petroleum complex probably signal that many dutiful profit hunters (and probably some other investors/owners) have started running for cover (begun to liquidate their long positions).

FOLLOW THE LINK BELOW to download this article as a PDF file.
Wall Street Talking, Yield Hunting, and Running for Cover (5-14-19)

US TAX REFORM: PROPAGANDA AND PROSPECTS © Leo Haviland October 9, 2017

Genevieve Larkin exclaims in the film “Gold Diggers of 1937”: “It’s so hard to be good under the capitalist system!” (Lloyd Bacon, director)

****

CONCLUSION AND OVERVIEW

The most recent American corporate and individual tax “reform” proposal sketched by the President and Republican Congressional leadership is merely a “framework”. These ringleaders and their acolytes proclaim that genuine legislative planning and serious negotiations will create a robust document, a beneficial bill suitable for passage. However, the overall explicit and implicit policy substance (partisan aims) incorporated in the current outline probably will not become law. Even if a few elements of the “reform” scheme manage to pass the House and Senate and become law, at most this will represent modest tinkering with rather than major changes in the current tax code.

****

Why will the corporate and individual tax reform program advocated by the President and others generally fail to be enacted? First, partisan political divisions in America in general and Congress in particular are too severe. Although the Republicans control both Houses of Congress, their Senate majority is slim. Whereas Congressional Democrats for the most part have held ranks since the 2016 election, Republican unity, particularly within the Senate, has been fragile. Not all Republicans adopt the same (or Trump’s policies).

The corporate and individual tax code reflects a diversity of political (cultural) viewpoints. Consequently, perspectives regarding as well as campaigns to transform, modify, or preserve critical aspects of it reflect opinions. Thus competing cultural camps with assorted outlooks and aims engage in heated rhetorical battles to advance their interests. Moreover, these proposed so-called tax reforms represent significant ideological approaches, not merely cosmetic fixes and updates.

In recent years, compromise in Congress in various critical policy matters has appeared with less frequency and generally only grudgingly. If the Senate cannot repeal (or repeal and replace) Obamacare (Affordable Care Act), how will they manage to make substantial alterations in an extremely complex document such as the United States tax code? Donald Trump’s remarkable and shocking Presidential triumph in America’s 11/8/16 election has not been followed by Congressional passage of his legislative agenda (Inauguration Day was 1/20/17). Why will Democrats help President Trump and Republicans win a notable legislative victory on taxation with election 2018 coming into view?

In the United States, even though labels are not definitive and groups can overlap, look further at and beyond the “political” sphere. America of course has never been entirely homogeneous or unified. The widely-shared American Dream has been expressed and implemented in various ways. Yet America’s disagreements and debates currently are wide-ranging. The lines between and within camps are not always clear; moreover, individuals may be loyal (belong) to various (and often competing) categories.

In any case, the long list of America’s noteworthy splits and fractures makes it especially changing to enact wide-ranging changes in the core taxation (and spending, including entitlements) policy arena. There are liberals (progressives), conservatives (traditionalists), centrists (moderates), and independents. Populists (both left and right wing) confront the establishment (elites). Globalists contend with nationalists.

America, as a house divided, has rich versus poor, haves versus have-nots. Highlight the nation’s substantial economic inequality. Is America nowadays a Gilded Age era? Are economic and social mobility increasing?

Consider divisions relating to race (ethnicity), gender/sexuality, religion, age, geographic region, and urban/rural. Fierce quarrels rage not only over tax and spending policies, but also over health care. Heated fights occur on trade and tariff issues, economic regulation (how much is appropriate), abortion rights, immigration, gun ownership, and environmental fields such as climate change.

****

Moreover, President Trump probably will be unable to lead the contending camps inside and outside Congress toward a realization of his tax “reform” plan. Some circles fervently admire Trump. His “Make America Great Again!” and “America First” slogans and many of his policy pronouncements obviously appeal to large numbers of Americans. Yet he nowadays lacks sufficient influence over Congress as a whole, including parts of the Republican caucus. And among the nation in general, his popularity is quite low. Many observers see him as erratic in his outlook and imprudent and insensitive in his opinions and actions.

Moreover, Donald Trump lacks government insider experience. Rhetoric and behavior (and talents) suitable for running a successful family-owned business, a reality television show, or even a successful Presidential campaign are not necessarily appropriate (adequate; likely to succeed) in regard to leading a country well or inspiring Congress to adopt his policy agenda.

Although Trump won in the Electoral College, he decisively lost the popular vote tally. The popular vote outcome obviously reflects America’s sharp political divisions. Also, the Russian President “directed a vast cyberattack aimed at denying Hillary Clinton the presidency and installing Donald J. Trump in the Oval Office, the nation’s top intelligence agencies said in an extraordinary report” (NYTimes, 1/7/17, ppA1, 11). Trump’s popular vote defeat and reports on Russian political interference undermine Trump’s political “legitimacy” (faith in it) and thus his ability to lead effectively.

The President’s continued unwillingness to release his own tax returns makes it challenging for some to agree with his reform package. Might he or his family benefit from the proposed framework?

****

Over three decades have passed since the last notable US tax reform (Tax Reform Act of 1986). Even though many gurus complain about parts of the current personal and corporate tax system, there does not appear to be a widespread consensus as to how to dramatically overhaul it.

Keep in mind that the individual and corporate tax codes are not merely long and complicated. It is a rhetorical structure reflecting a large and complicated society. Its lengthy enshrined provisions and interpretations of them therefore frequently represent competing visions and values. America’s current tax laws took a long time to reach their current structure. The US from the vantage points of both individuals and corporations of course is a diverse and complex country; this parallels the complexity of the global economy, with which the nation is enmeshed. Some “special interests” will fight vigorously for the proposed “reform” (or parts of it), but other crews will lobby heatedly against all or many of its provisions. These considerations also make it very difficult, and particularly unlikely in the current domestic American political environment, for substantial tax changes (“reform” of whatever fashion) to occur.

****

FOLLOW THE LINK BELOW to download this article as a PDF file.
US Tax Reform- Propaganda and Prospects (10-9-17)

SWEET TALKING, SLICK BANKING: FEDERAL RESERVE POLICY © Leo Haviland, February 14, 2012

In love and commerce, taking implies giving. On Valentine’s Day and throughout the year, undoubtedly the prudent Federal Reserve remembers the benefits of having and needs of both debtors and creditors. This regulatory chaperone surely would declare that they passionately strive to perform their very best (do what’s most reasonable according to their interpretation of their regulatory duties) for all parties concerned. Besides, they must balance competing interests. Besides again, the Fed has a long run horizon. The Fed’s recent policies nevertheless imply not only an ethics of inflation, but also manifest somewhat greater affection for debtors than creditors.

Japan’s general government gross debt as a percent of its GDP is gigantic, at 241.0 percent for 2012 (IMF, Fiscal Monitor Update, Table 1, 1/24/12). This dwarfs America’s 107.6pc and the Euro area’s 91.1pc. Japan’s general government debt has been huge for several years. How does it keep financing this massive total? And if Japan can keep doing it, doesn’t America really have a lot of room to go (and time to wait)?

Japan may have more domestic savings than America, or be more of a nation of savers from an overall cultural perspective. Japan has run a current account surplus for quite some time, in direct contrast to the bulging United States current account deficit. (See the September 2011 World Economic Outlook, Statistical Appendix, Table A10.)

However, Japan’s ability to accumulate and finance its big general government deficit also may be due to its more favorable treatment of creditors. And despite low interest rates! Creditors of the Japanese government have earned, and have earned for quite some time, a net positive return due to deflation alongside low government interest rates.

So how long will the Fed and US Treasury get away with offering negative (or very low) real returns on US government debt?

FOLLOW THE LINK BELOW to download this market essay as a PDF file.
Sweet Talking, Slick Banking- Federal Reserve Policy (2-14-12)