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.”

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.