Finance Focus
Keith Wade Chief Economist
Schroders
James Bilson Economist
Schroders
US teetering on the FISCAL CLIFF USA
Alongside the Eurozone sovereign debt crisis and a potential Chinese hard landing, the big issue currently on investors’ lips surrounds the scale, and impact, of the US “fiscal cliff”.
T
he US will reach its fiscal cliff on January 1st, 2013 – this is the point when fiscal tightening comes into force as a result of the expiration of
several pieces of existing legislation. For example, the Bush tax cuts and automatic spending cuts (“sequestrations”), which were imposed previously as a result of the failure of last year’s super-committee to reach a satisfactory conclusion on the US’s deficit reduction.
Unless changes to current law are enacted, fiscal tightening worth around $610bn (4% of nominal GDP) will occur in early January. Of this, around $150bn will come from spending, including both defence and entitlement, with the remainder coming from revenue. Within this, the single most significant aspect of tightening will come from the lapsing of the Bush tax cuts, worth around $220bn. Failure to find a resolution, leading to hitting the full cliff, would almost certainly be enough to drive the US economy back into recession.
The results of the election maintained the status quo, with President Obama retaining the White House, Democrats holding the Senate and the Republicans the House of Representatives. The key swing states, such as Ohio, Nevada, Colorado, Iowa, Wisconsin, Virginia and likely (at time of writing) Florida were all carried by Obama; generally
more comfortably than opinion polls had predicted. Unlike the 2010 mid-term elections, where Democrats lost the House and the “tea party” movement became an influential wing of the Republican movement, the 2012 elections do not appear to have favoured the more conservative branch of the Republican Party. Instead, the results of November 6th suggest a rejection of the more extreme elements of the political right and a mandate for moderate positions and sensible discussion by policymakers on both sides.
Congress now reconvenes on 13th November to attempt to thrash out a deal on the fiscal cliff, just six weeks before it is due to hit. The situation is further complicated by the disruption caused by the holiday season, with both Thanksgiving (22nd November) and Christmas falling in this window. Though the current congress is one of the least productive in history, due to the ideological chasm separating the two parties, with electioneering out of the way we expect progress to be made to avert hitting the entire cliff.
Neither party has a clear mandate to avoid compromise and fail to find a resolution before January 1st, and importantly neither do they have much incentive. Not only would the economy likely be plunged back into recession, reflecting ill on both sides, but the
scale of automatic consolidation would be anathema to both parties, with respect to defence spending and tax increases for Republicans and entitlement spending for Democrats. We thus believe a compromise can be found which is more favourable for both parties than the alternative of hitting the cliff.
Although we expect common sense to prevail and a resolution to be found, uncertainty surrounding the size, and composition, of US fiscal consolidation could dampen investor appetite for risk assets, particularly equities, and create volatility as we head towards the end of 2012. With little indication so far of how any resolution would look, it would come as quite a surprise if businesses were not delaying investment and hiring decisions, and households their discretionary spending decisions, until the resultant impact on tax codes and order books are known. Furthermore, any changes to the relative balance of income and capital gains taxes could have profound implications for portfolio construction and investment philosophies. Though we don’t expect it, if we see political chicanery reminiscent of the August 2011 debt-ceiling debacle, both ratings agencies and investors will question the ability of US politicians to make difficult choices, with negative implications for both the equity and bond markets.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134