Slow M2 means low CPI

Long-time readers of this blog know that I have been one of only a handful of observers who have linked rapid M2 growth (i.e., money printing) to the big inflation problem that hit the US economy beginning in the first part of 2021. The source of the M2 growth was the government's decision to send out some $6 trillion of checks to the public to compensate for Covid shutdowns and their damaging effects on the economy. At first, most of this money sat idle in consumers' checking and savings accounts as a hedge against great uncertainty and also because consumers had little ability and little willingness to spend it. This amounted to an enormous increase in the demand for money which effectively neutralized the enormous increase in the supply of money. But as life began to return to normal in early 2021, the demand for money declined, and the money was released (monetized) into the economy. Unwanted money fueled a dramatic increase in the price level (otherwise known as inflation). 

Fortunately, this problem began fading away more than two years ago, and it continues to do so. Money supply and money demand have returned to more normal levels, and inflation (abstracting from the government's flawed measure of shelter costs) has been 2% or less the for the past year or so. 

Regardless, it is still vitally important to monitor money supply and demand. So far, nothing out of the ordinary seems to be happening, and that implies no unpleasant inflation surprises for the foreseeable future. The following charts include M2 as of the end of September, and my estimate for Q3/24 GDP. 

Chart #1

Chart #1 shows how the surge in the federal deficit was mirrored by an increase in M2 growth. The link between the two dissolved in the latter half of 2022, with the result that ongoing deficits, though still quite large, are no longer being monetized.

Chart #2

Chart #2 tracks the level of the M2 money supply (currency, retail savings and checking accounts, CDs, and retail money market funds). From 1995 through late 2019 M2 grew at a fairly steady rate of 6% per year, and inflation was relatively low and stable. M2 then surged beginning in April '20 and peaked in early '22. M2 now is only about $1.6 trillion above its 6% trend growth line, and is growing at a modest 3-4% annual rate. 

Chart #3

As Milton Friedman taught us, inflation happens when the supply of money exceeds the demand for it. The Fed publishes the M2 measure of money supply once a month. But nowhere will you find a measure of money demand, except here. My measure of money demand is driven by dividing M2 by nominal GDP, which is shown in Chart #3. The best way to understand this is to think of it as the amount of cash and cash equivalents the average person wants to hold relative to his or her annual income. As the chart shows, money demand tends to rise during recessions, and to decline during periods of growth and stability—with the exception of the 2009-2019 period, when it steadily rose. 

Money demand soared in the wake of Covid shutdowns, then began to fall as Covid fears faded and the economy revived. It is now only modestly higher than in the pre-Covid period. Money supply and money demand, I would argue, are now back in balance, and that explains why inflation has declined and is likely to remain low.

Chart #4

Chart #4 shows M2 growth (blue line) and the year over year change in the CPI (red line, shifted one year to the left). From this perspective, inflation picked up about one year after M2 surged, and it began to decline a year or so after M2 growth peaked. The red asterisk marks the change in CPI ex-shelter costs, which is, I think, the appropriate measure to watch. The chart further suggests that inflation has fallen pretty much as you would expect, given the decline in M2 growth, and it is likely to remain muted for the foreseeable future. 

The enormous net worth of the US private sector

This post extends a series of similar posts I've made over the past 15 years. It highlights the net worth of the U.S. private sector: the net value of assets and liabilities of individuals and non-profit organizations.  As of June '24, the total net worth of the U.S. private sector was $164 trillion, and the net worth of the average person living in the U.S. was almost half a million dollars. 

Does the proliferation of billionaires distort the picture? Not much. According to Forbes, at last count the U.S. had 2,800 billionaires, whose net worth totaled in the range of $17-20 trillion. The net worth of the Forbes Top 400 billionaires totaled $5.4 trillion. If we exclude all billionaires from the total, the net worth of the average American would be about $425K, which is still pretty impressive.

Chart #1

As Chart #1 shows, private sector net worth has increased by 167% over the past 20 years, and now stands at $164 trillion. The biggest gains have come from financial assets (stocks, bonds, and savings accounts), which have increased 149%. Real estate assets have increased 144%, while liabilities have increased a mere 44%. The federal government is heavily indebted, but not so the private sector! 

Chart #2

Chart #2 shows the real, inflation-adjusted value of private sector net worth. Net worth peaked at 166.7 trillion in December '21, and has since declined to $164 trillion. The rather spectacular gains of the stock market and housing in recent years have been diluted by inflation. Still, real net worth is still on a rising path, averaging gains of about 3.6% per year.

Chart #3

Chart #3 divides real net worth in Chart #2 by the U.S. population (about 342 million). Real per capital net worth peaked at $509,500 in 12/21, and fell to $481,000 through June of this year, due to the effects of inflation and an increasing population. Still, it has risen on average by about 2.4% per year. If this continues, by 2054 the average American will be worth $1 million in today's dollars. 

Federal spending is the problem, not taxes

Given the upcoming elections and all the "disinformation" floating around,  it's worthwhile clarifying some of the facts behind fiscal policy. 

As the following charts show, our biggest problem is too much spending, much more so than any shortfall of tax revenues. 

Chart #1

Every taxpayer should frame Chart #1 and put it somewhere prominent. This shows the staggering increase in both federal spending and federal tax revenues in recent decades. 

Chart #2

Chart #2 shows the major components of federal revenues, all of which—with the exception of the estate and gift tax—have surged in recent decades. Individual income tax receipts have almost quintupled since 1990! And by the way, eliminating the "death tax" would amount to a rounding error in the federal budget, since it collects only 0.6% of total federal revenues. Think of how much more efficient our economy would be if millionaires and billionaires stopped spending big bucks on tax attorneys in order to escape this onerous tax. The negative impact of this tax on the economy is an order of magnitude larger than the revenues it manages to generate. 

Chart #3

Chart #3 shows federal spending and revenues as a percent of GDP. Note that spending has averaged a bit less than 20% of GDP since WWII, while today it is about 23% of GDP. Bringing it down is going to be difficult, since interest payments on federal debt now add up to more than $1 trillion per year (3.8% of GDP currently) and are rising (see Chart #4). Meanwhile, revenues have averaged about 17.5% of GDP over the same period, and are currently a bit less than 17%. 

Note also that revenues have been a fairly constant share of GDP over the past 50 years, while income tax rates have been all over the map. Trump's 2018 tax cuts occurred at a time when revenues were about 16% of GDP, and since then they have surged both in real and nominal terms. Cutting tax rates does not necessarily add up to lost revenues. On the contrary, setting tax rates at lower and more reasonable levels can end up boosting tax revenues by stimulating investment and boosting the economy's productivity.

Chart #4

Today's edition of Steve Moore's Hotline (see bullet point #2) makes an important point which should be added to this discussion. "... even if you taxed every penny of income earned by millionaires, it wouldn't be enough to close the deficit." That refers to the current deficit, not the total debt owed to the public, which is closing in on $30 trillion. 

Steven Hayward, one of the contributors to the excellent Powerline blog, notes that it is NOT true that "the rich enjoy lower tax rates than the middle class." In fact, "The rich already pay higher federal tax rates. Those with higher income pay a larger share of the tax burden than their share of national incomes.”

UPDATE (10/23/24): Chart #5 below provides proof for my assertion above ("Cutting tax rates does not necessarily add up to lost revenues.)

Chart #5

A close look at Inflation and interest rates

Headline inflation numbers are a bit higher than the Fed's target, but that's entirely due to the way shelter costs are estimated. On balance, it's clear that the Fed has brought inflation back down to acceptable levels. 

Relative to ex-shelter inflation, interest rates remain quite high, especially mortgage rates. The Fed has plenty of latitude to lower short-term interest rates, and I expect another cut in November.

Chart #1

Chart #1 looks at the headline measure of the CPI as well as the ex-energy version, both measured over a rolling 6-mo. annualized basis. Note how much less volatile inflation is when you subtract energy prices. These two measures currently are straddling the Fed's 2% target. Notably, the total (headline) CPI is up at only a 1.6% annualized rate in the past six months.

Chart #2

Chart #2 compares the total CPI to the CPI less shelter version, both on a 6-mo. annualized basis. Here we see that both measures currently are below the Fed's 2% target. Notably, the ex-shelter version is only up at a 0.1% annualized rate! If it weren't for the BLS's faulty measurement of shelter costs, which greatly overstates housing inflation, inflation would be essentially ZERO. 

As I've noted many times in the past year or so, shelter cost inflation has been high and declining slowly (more slowly than I expected). It should continue to decline over the next several months, and that will cause the current gap between total inflation and ex-shelter inflation to narrow.

Chart #3

Chart #3 compares the same two measures as Chart #2, but on a year over year basis. The ex-shelter version of the CPI has been less than 2% in 14 out of the past 17 months, and it currently stands at a mere 1.1%. 

Chart #4

Chart #4 compares the 5-yr Treasury yield to the year over year change in ex-energy inflation. I like to use this version of inflation, because as noted in #1 above, energy is far more volatile than any other component of the CPI. Here we see that interest rates tend to move with inflation, but with a noticeable lag. And with ex-shelter inflation now at 1.1% (note the blue asterisk at the bottom right-hand corner of the chart), there is plenty of room for Treasury yields to decline.

Chart #5

Chart #5 shows the level of real and nominal 5-yr Treasury yields, plus the difference between the two, which is the market's implied inflation forecast for the next 5 years. Inflation expectations currently are about 2.2%, which should please the Fed. Here again we see that there is plenty of room for interest rates to move lower.

As an aside, I note that swap and credit spreads are trading at relatively low levels, which is a sign of abundant liquidity conditions and a healthy outlook for corporate profits. Economic conditions in general are healthy, but I continue to worry about the housing and property markets, which are burdened by very high interest rates and high prices. 

Chart #6

Chart #7 shows the level of 30-yr fixed mortgage rates and the 10-yr Treasury yield, plus the spread between the two. Mortgage spreads currently are quite wide (about 225 bps), compared to where they trade in normal conditions (about 150 bps). This wider-than-normal spread is largely driven by investor's reluctance to buy mortgages when the risk of refinancings is high. People realize that interest rates are high relative to inflation, and they understand also that lower interest rates would spark a wave of refinancings of mortgages that have closed in the past two years. In other words, the perceived downside risk of mortgage bonds is uncomfortably high, and that is depressing the prices of mortgage bonds. If anything this means that while lower mortgage rates are likely in the offing, rates are likely to come down slowly. That will keep downward pressure on housing prices in the interim.  

This wasn't a monster employment number

This morning the market was apparently surprised by a stronger-than-expected jobs number. Private payrolls rose by 223K in September, vs. an expected gain of 125K. Some called it a "monster" number. From my perspective, however, nothing changed at all. Private sector jobs are growing by about 1.3 to 1.4% per year, as they have been for the past several months. This is moderate growth, probably enough to deliver overall economic growth of 2% per year or so. A nothing-burger.

Chart #1

Chart #1 shows the year over year change in private sector jobs, the only ones that really count. The big story, really, is the huge deceleration in growth over the past few years, followed by relatively moderate and steady growth in recent months. Even if we looked at jobs growth over a 6-month period, the story would be the same. Jobs numbers are very volatile on a monthly basis, so you have to look at growth over a multiple-month basis. And when you do that you see that nothing much has changed of late. 

There is nothing in today's report that should influence the Fed to change course. Inflation is yesterday's problem, and jobs growth is moderate. Lower interest rates are appropriate.

Looking pretty good: M2, GDP and corporate profits

I'm certainly not an apologist for the Biden administration, but as the charts below show, the economy on balance has done pretty well in the past several years. The monetary source of the Big Inflation of 2021-2022 has been largely extinguished, real economic growth has exceeded expectations, and corporate profits have been fairly spectacular. 

Chart #1

Recent revisions to the GDP statistics showed the economy posting better than 2.3% annual growth over the past several years (see Chart #1). Of course, this is still far less than it might have been had the economy tracked the 3.1% annual growth path that began in 1966 and continued through 2007. But, considering that many observers were predicting a recession in 2023, economic growth has been surprisingly strong. My own forecast of growth in recent years called for growth slightly in excess of 2% per year, and I am pleasantly surprised to have been too cautious, albeit much more optimistic than most. 

Chart #2

Chart #2 shows the level of the M2 money supply. The huge bulge in M2 tracks the massive government stimulus payments in 2020 and 2021 that were essentially financed by money printing. With a delay of about a year, some $6 trillion of monetary "stimulus" subsequently turned into raging inflation in 2021 and 2022. The Fed was unfortunately slow to react, but by late 2022 they had raised rates by enough to neutralize excess M2 and thus slow inflation. 

Chart #3

Chart #3 is key to understanding the interaction between excess money and inflation. A $6 trillion surge in deficit-financed government spending was not initially inflationary, because the demand for money (which is proxied by the ratio of M2 to nominal GDP in in the chart) surged. That was the logical result of handing tons of cash to a public that had little desire and even less ability to spend it during the lock-down phase of the Covid disaster. But life began to return to normal in early 2021, and the public started to spend the money (i.e., money demand fell). The problem, of course, is that extra spending collided with supply-chain shortages and rising prices were the result. Money demand has almost returned to its pre-Covid levels now, the economy has resumed a more normal growth path, and inflation has become a non-issue for at least the past year. 

Chart #4

Chart #4 compares the level of corporate profits (after-tax, and ex Fed profits) with nominal GDP. 

Chart #5

As Chart #5 shows, profits are at all-time record levels compared to the size of the economy, and they began their current surge (briefly interrupted by Covid) in 2019, following Trump's 2018 reduction in the tax rate on corporate profits from 28% to 21%. Since the end of 2018, corporate profits (after-tax and adjusted for continuing operations and ex-Fed profits) have risen 58%, while nominal GDP rose 39%. Despite the sizable cut in tax rates, corporate tax payments to Treasury rose from a low of $189 billion in the 12 months ending Jan. '19, to $516 billion in the 12 months ending August '24—a whopping increase of 173%! And, not surprisingly, the S&P 500 is up 130% since 2018. 

Art Laffer, take a bow!

While it's great to see evidence that what's good for corporations is also good for the economy, there's a cautionary message here. If, as they have repeatedly promised, a Harris-Walz administration allows the Trump tax cuts to reverse as scheduled at the end of next year, this could pose a significant threat to the economy and, by extension, the stock market. 

Please excuse the absence of posts this past month. I haven't had much to say, and I needed a break. Plus, we had a delightful trip to Greece.