Economy

More stories

  • 138 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    How Kamala Harris’s Economic Plan Has Been Shaped by Business Leaders

    by

    The vice president has repeatedly incorporated suggestions from business executives into her economic agenda.When two of Vice President Kamala Harris’s closest advisers arrived in New York last month, they were seeking advice. The Democratic nominee was preparing to give her most far-reaching economic speech, and Tony West, Ms. Harris’s brother-in-law, and Brian Nelson, a longtime confidant, wanted to know how the city’s powerful financiers thought she should approach it.Over two days, the pair held meetings across Wall Street, including at the offices of Lazard, an investment bank, and the elite law firm Paul, Weiss. Among the ideas the attendees pitched was to provide more lucrative tax breaks for companies that allowed their workers to become part owners, according to two people at the meetings. The campaign had already been discussing such an idea with an executive at KKR, the private equity firm.A few days later, Ms. Harris endorsed the idea during her speech in Pittsburgh. “We will reform our tax laws to make it easier for businesses to let workers share in their company’s success,” she said.The line, while just a piece of a much broader speech, was emblematic of Ms. Harris’s approach to economic policy since she took the helm of the Democratic Party in July. As part of a bid to cut into former President Donald J. Trump’s polling lead on the economy, her campaign has carefully courted business leaders, organizing a steady stream of meetings and calls in which corporate executives and donors offer their thoughts on tax policy, financial regulation and other issues.The private feedback has, in sometimes subtle ways, shaped Ms. Harris’s economic agenda over the course of her accelerated campaign. At several points, she has sprinkled language into broader speeches that business executives say reflects their views. And, in at least one instance, Ms. Harris made a specific policy commitment — to pare back a tax increase on capital gains — after extended talks with her corporate allies.This article is based on interviews with more than two dozen campaign officials, policy experts, donors, lobbyists and business leaders.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 63 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    Where interest rates are heading

    by

    Unlock the Editor’s Digest for freeRoula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.The writer is former vice-chair of the Federal Reserve and global economic adviser at PimcoWith the first Federal Reserve rate cut now behind us, the conversation has shifted from “when” the central bank will start cutting rates to “where” rates are heading. This transition is not just a matter of semantics. The level at which interest rates eventually settle matters to the entire economy. However, the discussion often too narrowly focuses on the neutral real Fed policy rate, known as R-star. This is the interest rate that neither stimulates nor restrains economic growth. Think of it as the Goldilocks zone for interest rates — not too hot, not too cold — just perfect to maintain price stability and maximum employment once the economy has arrived there. While R-star is crucial for understanding how monetary policy will evolve in the coming years, estimates of it are imprecise. It is unobserved, varies over time and is driven by a myriad of forces both domestic and global.Let’s take a look at what happened in 2018, when inflation was on target at 2 per cent and the economy was humming along at full employment. That year, the Fed raised the federal funds policy rate to 2.5 per cent. This translated to a real rate of 0.5 per cent, marking what many considered a “new neutral” for monetary policy. In contrast, before the global financial crisis, the real policy rate averaged around 2 per cent, with the nominal funds rate hovering near 4 per cent. Fast forward to today and the Fed’s dot plot, a visual representation of policymakers’ interest rate projections, suggests a target for the funds rate of about 3 per cent once inflation stabilises at 2 per cent and the labour market is fully employed.Some content could not load. Check your internet connection or browser settings.I concur with the view that the neutral policy rate will have likely increased from its pre-pandemic 0.5 per cent, but I think this increase will be modest. Others argue that neutral real rates may need to be significantly higher than the approximately 1 per cent projected by the Fed and currently reflected in financial markets. They cite a reversal of the factors that kept interest rates low before the pandemic and a concerning fiscal outlook for the US with rising deficits and debt. The US could also be on the brink of an AI-driven productivity boom, which might increase the demand for loans from US companies.But which real neutral rates? There is, of course, an entire yield curve along which the Treasury and private sector borrowers issue, and historically that yield curve has a positive slope — rates increase over time to compensate investors for the risk of holding the debt longer. This is the so-called term premium.Inversions — such as we’ve seen in the US curve until recently — are rare and are not the new normal. The US yield curve, relative to the “front end” rate set by the Fed, will adjust in the years ahead by steepening relative to the pre-pandemic experience to bring the demand for US fixed income into balance with the gusher of supply. This is because bond investors will need to earn a higher term premium to absorb the debt offerings that will continue to flood the market. As with R-star itself, the term premium is unobserved and must be inferred from noisy macro and market data. There are two ways to do this. The first is to use surveys of market participants to estimate the expected average federal funds fed policy rate over the next 10 years and to compare that estimate with the observed yield on a 10-year Treasury. In the most recent survey available, the implied term premium using this approach is estimated to be 0.85 percentage points.The second way to estimate the term premium is to use a statistical model of the yield curve, and this method delivers a current estimate of about zero. I myself prefer the approach that relies on surveys of market participants, and the belief that the term premium at present is positive and will probably increase from here.  Given the vast and growing supply of bonds markets must absorb in coming years, rates will probably be higher than they were in the years before the pandemic. But I believe most of the required adjustment will occur through the slope of the yield curve and not so much from a much higher destination for the fed funds rate itself.If the view is correct, it augurs well for fixed income investors. They will be rewarded for bearing interest rate risk in good times and will also benefit from the hedging value of bonds in their portfolio when the economy weakens. Rates will then have more room to fall and thus for bond prices to rise.     More

  • 50 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    Business takes centre stage

    by

    Save over 65%$99 for your first yearFT newspaper delivered Monday-Saturday, plus FT Digital Edition delivered to your device Monday-Saturday.What’s included Weekday Print EditionFT WeekendFT Digital EditionGlobal news & analysisExpert opinionSpecial featuresExclusive FT analysis More

  • 150 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    German SPD lays out campaign for industry growth, job protection, tax breaks

    by

    “Investors in Germany will be getting tax breaks,” said the strategy paper, a copy of which was obtained by Reuters.The paper laid out proposals to change course against a damaging recession, as Germany struggles with rising unemployment, high energy costs and competition from China and the United States in export markets.The presidium of the left-wing party that in 2021 forged a three-way coalition with the Greens and pro-business Free Democrats approved the proposals, which also envisage giving income tax breaks to 95% of taxpayers, on Saturday.It also says minimum wages should be gradually raised to 15 euros from 12.41 euros. There were no financial details of how these plans would be funded.The Bild am Sonntag (BamS) Sunday paper was first to report the plans.All parties are preparing for the elections scheduled for September 2025, though the vote could be held earlier if the coalition were to break up in coming months over a raft of problems.The SPD plans include purchase bonuses for locally-made electric vehicles which have seen sluggish sales and face stiff competition from cheaper Chinese-made imports. The party reiterated calls for a revision of a debt brake to roll back decades of underinvestment in crucial infrastructure and proposes helping manufacturers save on electricity grid fees as part of a package of more competitive industry power prices.Economy Minister Robert Habeck of the Green Party supports the grid fee move.The SPD board is due to approve the strategy at a meeting on Sunday afternoon. More