Monetary policy is in easing mode, thanks to a significant reduction in inflation pressures. Corporate profits are very strong, and the stock market is making new highs. President Trump's second term promises much-needed and game-changing reductions in tax and regulatory burdens. All good. But threatened tariffs and a significant downsizing of the federal government will create headwinds in the near term; the benefits may take awhile to show up, but they will nonetheless be significant.
Chart #1
Chart #1 updates the M2 money supply through October. The explosive growth of M2 relative to its long-term trend was the proximate cause of the Great Inflation of 2021-22. The federal government effectively printed $6 trillion and sent it to the public, where it sat in the form of currency and bank savings and deposit accounts for almost a year—without creating inflation, since the public had neither the willingness nor the ability to spend it. When life began to return to normal in early 2021, the public began spending the money. Soaring consumer demand—fueled by trillions of unwanted money—collided with supply chain disruptions and shuttered facilities to produce a roughly 20-25% increase in the price level.
The Fed was late to react to the inflationary potential of all this extra money, but eventually they did, by raising interest rates beginning in the first half of 2021. As interest rates soared, M2 growth started slowing in 2022 and even declining. Today it is only modestly above its long-term trend. Inflation risks, accordingly, have plunged.
Chart #2
Chart #2 shows my favorite measure of money demand: M2 divided by the level of nominal GDP. It's akin to the percentage of cash and cash equivalents that the average person or firm wishes to hold relative to their annual income. Very few people look at money demand, but I believe it is crucial to understand the interaction between money supply and money demand. As Milton Friedman taught us, inflation happens when the supply of money exceeds the demand for it. That was precisely what happened beginning in 2021; it was a classic case of too much money chasing too few goods.
Initially, money demand soared as $6 trillion in checks hit people's accounts; the public was willing to hold this money, and that explains why inflation didn't take off until much later. But money demand began to decline in 2021 as economic conditions began to normalize. Today, money demand is almost back to pre-Covid levels, and M2 is growing at a relatively slow pace. There is no longer an imbalance between the supply of and demand for money, and to prove that, we have only to know that inflation has slowed down significantly, even though many prices remain higher than most consumers would like.
Chart #3
Chart #3 shows the three components of the Personal Consumption Deflator, and they tell an important story about inflation. As the chart shows, non-durable goods prices have been unchanged since mid-2022, and durable goods prices have fallen since mid-2022. Only service sector prices have risen in the past 28 months, and most of that rise is due to housing and shelter costs, which have likely been overstated by faulty calculation methods (as I've explained in many previous posts).
A true inflation is when all (or mostly all) prices rise. Inflation today is concentrated in the housing market, which has become relatively illiquid due to high mortgage rates and high prices. Illiquid markets are notorious for not reflecting true valuations. By almost every measure, housing prices today—coupled with sky-high mortgage interest rates—are overvalued and terribly unaffordable.
Chart #4
Chart #4 shows the level of the real Federal funds rate (blue) and the slope of the Treasury yield curve (red). These are excellent indicators of how easy or loose monetary policy is. Money is tight when real yields are high and the yield curve slope is negative (inverted); those conditions have preceded nearly every recession in the past 65 years. Today monetary conditions are becoming less tight and the Fed is very likely to continue lowering the funds rate, with another cut expected at the December 18th FOMC meeting.
Chart #5
Chart #5 shows the yield spread between high-yield and investment-grade corporate bonds (otherwise know as the "junk spread"). Credit spreads have rarely been as low as they are today, and this amounts to very positive economic fundamentals: a healthy economic outlook supports healthy corporate profits.
The contrarian in me suggests a different take: if things can't get much better than this, then maybe the market is overly optimistic and we're due for a fall?
Chart #6
As Chart #6 shows, after-tax corporate profits have been soaring relative to nominal GDP for the past 20 years, and they are now at record-high levels. Corporate profits today are running at a $3.1 trillion annual rate; it's no wonder the stock market has been so strong.
Corporate profits are running at a spectacular rate, but so is the federal budget deficit, which has reached $2 trillion in the past 12 months. Corporate profits are adding $3 trillion every year to the pool of investable capital, but the federal government is borrowing about two-thirds of those profits to finance a variety of income redistribution schemes. This is not a prescription for a strong and growing economy. Imagine what might happen if the private sector of the U.S. economy were able to tap into that $2 trillion for more productive purposes! That is why Trump's DOGE is a terrific idea, but it will likely take some time before budget cuts translate into a positive force for the economy.
Chart #7
Chart #7 compares the level of the S&P 500 index to the level of the European Stoxx 600 index. In the past 20 years, the rise in the S&P 500 index has been 2.5 times that of the Stoxx index. On a total return basis, over the past 20 years the S&P 500 has delivered a 650% return vs. a 315% return for the Stoxx index. Meanwhile, the dollar has gained 25% against the euro over the same period.
Is it any wonder that the U.S. has been able to finance absurdly high federal budget deficits? The U.S. economy has become a magnet for the world's capital.
Given our huge advantage in so many areas, do Trump's threatened tariffs really pose a significant threat to the health of the U.S. economy? More likely, as we have recently seen with Mexico, the mere threat of tariffs is enough to convince Mexico to halt immigrant caravans bound for the U.S. border.
Tariffs can't cause inflation. Only monetary imbalances do. Without a relaxation of monetary policy, Trump's promised tariff hikes won't be inflationary. But tariffs will act as a headwind to growth, since they are effectively a tax on consumption.
21 comments:
RE: Chart 5 - spreads never stay this low for any length of time. With the S&P trading at 2 standard deviations over its mean, I would agree that this chart is flashing caution.
From an Austrian point of view you are correct that tariffs alone wont create inflaiton but they will create what people will perceive as inflation. i.e relative prices will change, so they will notice higher prices for items substituted for imports and blame (or thank if you're the supplier) Trump.
Prices didn’t change materially last time Trump imposed tariffs, why would they this time? Companies will move products to other counties to avoid the tariffs. That’s why Trump does it. To inflict pain for leverage in the negotiation. It works.
Thank you Scott. A question regarding "Tariffs can't cause inflation." It is understood why on the net it won't cause inflation, but it can cause price inflation in specific sectors, can it not (which is then balanced by other sectors)? For most people in the USA not all sectors are equal. Yes, supply might increase and balance out but for specific products it can take years or decades.
• S&P profits are in the 95% percentile of GDP over the last 75 years distribution.
• The risk premium of stocks over risk-free treasuries in negative. Only in 2000 was it more negative.
• Despite a record high market, private equity exits are the lowest in ten years.
• The earnings yield of the S&P is below 3.5% with the ten-year yield at 4.21%
• Buy-side positioning of S&P e-mini futures is at all-time highs
• Going back to 1950, US household allocation to stocks is at record highs of 42%
• Conference Board consumer confidence expectations of higher stock prices in 12 months stands at 57%, the highest since 1987.
Can it get much better?
Sounds like it’s time to sell, Clay.
Looking at chart #1, can I assume because the money supply has stopped approaching its long term growth line, that inflation might also stop its moderation from earlier high levels...?
Roy, re tariffs and inflation. Here's a simplistic analogy that might help you understand why tariffs are not inflationary, even though—obviously—they do cause the prices of some goods to increase. Think of monetary policy as akin to national income; when monetary policy is anti-inflationary, then the amount of money available to spend in the economy is fixed, just as a household has a certain budget it has to live within. If the price of some goods rises, then the nation or the household is forced to spend less on other things. In the end, there is no change in the average price level. Easy money, in contrast, means that there is no budget and no limit to how much we can spend. So higher prices on some goods can "trigger" higher prices on others, until pretty much all prices rise.
Clay: you make good points which compliment the caution I expressed after Chart #5. From a macro point of view, it's not hard to conclude that things are about as good as they have ever been, so it follows that the market is very vulnerable to anything going wrong. The market is priced to a lot of good news, and if Trump is successful with his policies, there should indeed be a lot of good news in the future. But if he should stumble, then the downside risk will come back with a vengeance. On the other hand, the economy is still laboring under the weight of a multitude of bad things (deficits, taxes, waste, inefficiencies, green energy boondoggles, Deep State bureaucracies, etc.), and getting rid of those problems will take time and a lot of effort. I'm reluctant to call a market top, but at the same time I think exercising some caution is warranted.
Am I the only one who finds Chart #4 worrisome?!
Clearly, the government can and will conjure many more trillions of dollars to save the US from itself -- life is good!
Grechster, I also find #4 very problematic.
Thanks, Scott. I really appreciate your blog posts.
Ceteris paribus tariffs can cause a one-time increase in the general level of prices - the reactions to tariffs are likely to result in somewhat less efficient production and so constitute a supply-side shock (i.e. fewer goods with the same amount of money chasing them).
Brent, they didn’t before, so why should we expect them to now?
Scott, the spreads never remain this tight for long. They don’t just bump along here based on your chart.
@RJ - the previously set tariffs were less impactful (smaller and less wide-ranging) than those now mooted so the "somewhat less efficient" was even smaller. Further, "ceteris paribus" never truly holds.
Tariffs don’t translate into inflation (no change in money supply). Trump uses them for negotiations. Biden not only held those Trump implemented, he doubled down and implemented more all while inflation came down. Inflation was caused by the increase in the money supply, not by tariffs.
I believe that Chart #4 would be scary if the Fed were still following a scarce reserves policy.
I'm sure Scott is happy about the most recent data about Rent an Owners Equivalent Rent.
Producer Price Index- rising all this year.
The report today showed more inflation than expected. This index is my favorite, and usually leads consumer prices. PCE and CPI are looking stuck between 2.5% and 3% for several months.
Post a Comment