Economy

Unlock the White House Watch newsletter for freeYour guide to what the 2024 US election means for Washington and the worldWill the latest iteration of the Trump administration’s supercharged “flood the zone with sh*t” strategy be a global macroeconomic mega-deal — an agreement that outdoes even the famous 1985 Plaza Accord in ambition?That was a deal between the US and its major trading partners struck at the Plaza Hotel (of Home Alone 2: Lost in New York fame) to engineer a dollar devaluation, after Fed chair Paul Volcker’s war on inflation had sent the greenback soaring. It was a notable success, in an era of damp-squib international agreements. Donald Trump (also of Home Alone 2: Lost in New York fame) already demonstrated an affinity for economic history by purchasing the Plaza Hotel in 1988 (the deal ended up in bankruptcy). He really wants a weaker dollar. Conveniently, he also owns the Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida, which might be a profitable good venue for a new accord.Versions of the “Mar-a-Lago Accord” idea have therefore been floating around ever since the first Trump presidency. His victory in November naturally led them to resurface. Alphaville mentioned the possibility in our how-to-devalue-the-dollar guide the day after the 2024 election. The chatter then died down, but has now apparently come back on the news agenda. Most of the basic contours of the supposed plan seem to be derived from this November 2024 paper by Stephen Miran. Miran is currently a senior strategist at Hudson Bay Capital, but he served a stint in the US Treasury during the first Trump administration, and is now Trump’s nominee for chair of the Council of Economic Advisors. And you can’t fault his ambition: The next Trump term presents potential for sweeping change in the international economic system and possible accompanying volatility. It is important for investors to understand the tools that might be employed for such purposes, as well as the means by which government may attempt to avoid unwelcome consequences. This essay attempts to provide a user’s guide: a survey of some tools, their economic and market consequences, and steps that can be taken to mitigate unwanted side effects. Wall Street consensus that an Administration has no means by which to affect the foreign exchange value of the dollar, should it desire to do so, is wrong. Government has many means of doing so, both multilaterally and unilaterally. No matter what approach it takes, however, attention must be paid to steps to minimise volatility. Assistance from trading partners or the Federal Reserve can be helpful in doing so. In any case, because President Trump has shown tariffs are a means by which he can successfully extract negotiating leverage — and revenue — from trading partners, it is quite likely that tariffs are used prior to any currency tools. Because tariffs are USD-positive, it will be important for investors to understand the sequencing of reforms to the international trading system. The dollar is likely to strengthen before it reverses, if it does so. There is a path by which the Trump Administration can reconfigure the global trading and financial systems to America’s benefit, but it is narrow, and will require careful planning, precise execution, and attention to steps to minimise adverse consequences.It is tempting to discount the whole thing, as this is a ~cough~ freewheeling administration with a multitude of hangers-on throwing policy proposals around like confetti. Some aspects — such as forcing countries to swap their Treasuries for century bonds — seem a bit fantastical. It’s essentially a glorified protection racket scheme with some lipstick. Even Miran noted that restructuring the global financial system will require “careful planning, precise execution and attention to steps to minimise adverse consequences”. And, let’s face it, these aren’t qualities that the first or (thus far) second Trump administrations have demonstrated a lot of. Moreover, the world is a radically different place today than it was back when the original Plaza Accord was struck in 1985. Mark Sobel, a former US Treasury grandee, wrote in December that a Mar-a-Lago Accord was “far-fetched and implausible”. However, the chatter can’t be ignored completely. The Trump administration has clearly shown a remarkable willingness to slap tariffs on friends and eject them from its security blanket. China has its own struggles right now. Some countries might therefore be willing to swallow some sort of Mar-a-Lago Accord to avoid the drama. As Stephen Jen of Eurizon SLJ wrote last month:We agree that the conditions are not ripe now for a Mar-a-Lago Accord, but the circumstances could change in 2-3 quarters’ time. Also, our sense is that Beijing’s aversion to participating in such a co-ordinated effort to drive down the dollar may not be as strong as before, especially when threatened with punitive tariffs.  John Connally — US Treasury Secretary in 1971 — famously said, ‘The dollar is our currency, but it is your problem.’ While this quote is still valid, the Plaza Accord in 1985 was an episode where other stakeholders participated to right a wrong in the dollar’s value. The interventions in 2000 to purchase euros was a similar agreement, which also addressed a stark imbalance in currency markets.  Given how mispriced the dollar is now, we believe the probability of a Mar-a-Lago Accord will rise in the coming quarters. More

Stay informed with free updatesSimply sign up to the More

Friedrich Merz, the Christian Democratic Union’s candidate for chancellor, has not shied away from blasting Olaf Scholz’s economic policies and linking them to the lackluster state of Europe’s biggest economy.
But experts say a Merz-led government may also not give the German economy the boost it needs.
The German economy contracted in both 2023 and 2024.

Production at the VW plant in Emden.
Sina Schuldt | Picture Alliance | Getty Images

The struggling German economy has been a major talking point among critics of Chancellor Olaf Scholz’ government during the latest election campaign — but analysts warn a new leadership might not turn these tides.
As voters prepare to head to the polls, it is now all but certain that Germany will soon have a new chancellor. The Christian Democratic Union’s Friedrich Merz is the firm favorite.

Merz has not shied away from blasting Scholz’s economic policies and from linking them to the lackluster state of Europe’s largest economy. He argues that a government under his leadership would give the economy the boost it needs.
Experts speaking to CNBC were less sure.
“There is a high risk that Germany will get a refurbished economic model after the elections, but not a brand new model that makes the competition jealous,” Carsten Brzeski, global head of macro at ING, told CNBC.

The CDU/CSU economic agenda

The CDU, which on a federal level ties up with regional sister party the Christian Social Union, is running on a “typical economic conservative program,” Brzeski said.
It includes income and corporate tax cuts, fewer subsidies and less bureaucracy, changes to social benefits, deregulation, support for innovation, start-ups and artificial intelligence and boosting investment among other policies, according to CDU/CSU campaigners.

“The weak parts of the positions are that the CDU/CSU is not very precise on how it wants to increase investments in infrastructure, digitalization and education. The intention is there, but the details are not,” Brzeski said, noting that the union appears to be aiming to revive Germany’s economic model without fully overhauling it.
“It is still a reform program which pretends that change can happen without pain,” he said.

Geraldine Dany-Knedlik, head of forecasting at research institute DIW Berlin, noted that the CDU is also looking to reach gross domestic product growth of around 2% again through its fiscal and economic program called “Agenda 2030.”
But reaching such levels of economic expansion in Germany “seems unrealistic,” not just temporarily, but also in the long run, she told CNBC.
Germany’s GDP declined in both 2023 and 2024. Recent quarterly growth readings have also been teetering on the verge of a technical recession, which has so far been narrowly avoided. The German economy shrank by 0.2% in the fourth quarter, compared with the previous three-month stretch, according to the latest reading.
Europe’s largest economy faces pressure in key industries like the auto sector, issues with infrastructure like the country’s rail network and a housebuilding crisis.
Dany-Knedlik also flagged the so-called debt brake, a long-standing fiscal rule that is enshrined in Germany’s constitution, which limits the size of the structural budget deficit and how much debt the government can take on.
Whether or not the clause should be overhauled has been a big part of the fiscal debate ahead of the election. While the CDU ideally does not want to change the debt brake, Merz has said that he may be open to some reform.
“To increase growth prospects substantially without increasing debt also seems rather unlikely,” DIW’s Dany-Knedlik said, adding that, if public investments were to rise within the limits of the debt brake, significant tax increases would be unavoidable.
“Taking into account that a 2 Percent growth target is to be reached within a 4 year legislation period, the Agenda 2030 in combination with conservatives attitude towards the debt break to me reads more of a wish list than a straight forward economic growth program,” she said.

Franziska Palmas, senior Europe economist at Capital Economics, sees some benefits to the plans of the CDU-CSU union, saying they would likely “be positive” for the economy, but warning that the resulting boost would be small.
“Tax cuts would support consumer spending and private investment, but weak sentiment means consumers may save a significant share of their additional after-tax income and firms may be reluctant to invest,” she told CNBC.  
Palmas nevertheless pointed out that not everyone would come away a winner from the new policies. Income tax cuts would benefit middle- and higher-income households more than those with a lower income, who would also be affected by potential reductions of social benefits.

Coalition talks ahead

Following the Sunday election, the CDU/CSU will almost certainly be left to find a coalition partner to form a majority government, with the Social Democratic Party or the Green party emerging as the likeliest candidates.

The parties will need to broker a coalition agreement outlining their joint goals, including on the economy — which could prove to be a difficult undertaking, Capital Economics’ Palmas said.
“The CDU and the SPD and Greens have significantly different economic policy positions,” she said, pointing to discrepancies over taxes and regulation. While the CDU/CSU want to reduce both items, the SPD and Greens seek to raise taxes and oppose deregulation in at least some areas, Palmas explained.
The group is nevertheless likely to hold the power in any potential negotiations as it will likely have their choice between partnering with the SPD or Greens.
“Accordingly, we suspect that the coalition agreement will include most of the CDU’s main economic proposals,” she said. More

The Federal Reserve’s independence from the White House has long been enshrined in the law. But an executive order that President Trump signed this week seeking to extend his administration’s reach over independent agencies is prompting concerns about how much further he will go to challenge that separation.Mr. Trump’s directive took aim at regulatory agencies that had typically operated with limited political interference as authorized by Congress.The order partly shielded the Fed by exempting the central bank’s decisions on interest rates. Those are voted on at every meeting by seven presidentially appointed members of the Board of Governors, who typically serve 14-year terms, as well as a rotating set of five presidents from the regional reserve banks.But the order sought to exert authority over how the Fed oversees Wall Street, decisions that are ratified with majority support by the board.The order was the president’s latest attempt to centralize the executive branch’s power over the government. It requires independent organizations to submit proposed rule changes to the White House for review and gives the Office of Management and Budget oversight of how these institutions spend funds and set priorities. It also asserts that the president’s and the Justice Department’s interpretations of the law are binding and that alternative interpretations require authorization.The expansive nature of the order has raised questions about whether Mr. Trump’s decree is legally applicable to an institution like the Fed. It has also fueled speculation that the president — who has a history of trying to influence the central bank’s decision on interest rates — may eventually turn his scrutiny to monetary policy decisions.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

Tech start-ups typically raised huge sums to hire armies of workers and grow fast. Now artificial intelligence tools are making workers more productive and spurring tales of “tiny team” success.Almost every day, Grant Lee, a Silicon Valley entrepreneur, hears from investors who try to persuade him to take their money. Some have even sent him and his co-founders personalized gift baskets.Mr. Lee, 41, would normally be flattered. In the past, a fast-growing start-up like Gamma, the artificial intelligence start-up he helped establish in 2020, would have constantly looked out for more funding.But like many young start-ups in Silicon Valley today, Gamma is pursuing a different strategy. It is using artificial intelligence tools to increase its employees’ productivity in everything from customer service and marketing to coding and customer research.That means Gamma, which makes software that lets people create presentations and websites, has no need for more cash, Mr. Lee said. His company has hired only 28 people to get “tens of millions” in annual recurring revenue and nearly 50 million users. Gamma is also profitable.“If we were from the generation before, we would easily be at 200 employees,” Mr. Lee said. “We get a chance to rethink that, basically rewrite the playbook.”The old Silicon Valley model dictated that start-ups should raise a huge sum of money from venture capital investors and spend it hiring an army of employees to scale up fast. Profits would come much later. Until then, head count and fund-raising were badges of honor among founders, who philosophized that bigger was better.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

With the Trump administration reversing support for low-carbon power, the business case for making wind, solar and electric vehicle parts gets weaker.American manufacturing has been in the doldrums for years, battered by high borrowing costs and a strong dollar, which makes exports less competitive. But there has been a bright spot: billions of dollars flowing into factory construction, signifying that a potential rebound in production and employment is around the corner.The flood of investment has been driven by two major categories of subsidies provided under the Biden administration. One offered incentives for the construction of several enormous semiconductor plants set to begin operation in the coming years. The other supercharged the production of equipment needed for renewable energy deployment.This second category is in jeopardy as the Trump administration and the Republican-led Congress seek to roll back support for low-carbon energy, including battery-powered vehicles, wind power and solar fields.One option to raise money to offset the cost of their desired tax cuts is truncating credits for renewable power generation.“If it ends up that the timeline for these credits is shortened, then the incentives to develop an onshore manufacturing facility obviously go down,” said Jeffrey Davis, a lawyer with White & Case who specializes in renewable energy incentives. “If you’re looking at the prospect of sales and revenue over a three-year period instead of an eight-year period, the manufacturing facility may not pencil out.”The Biden administration’s strategy relied on a push and a pull. First, push the supply of clean energy products through tax breaks, loans and direct grants to manufacturers. Equally important was pulling demand along: rebates for buying electric cars, tax credits for producing renewable power, and subsidies for states and individuals to install solar arrays. Companies contemplating manufacturing investments took both sides into account when planning where to build or expand a plant.Investment in Factories Has Been BoomingAmerica isn’t yet making more stuff, but it’s building more buildings to make more stuff — largely because of subsidies for clean energy and semiconductors.

Figures for each quarter are shown at a seasonally adjusted annual rate, in chained 2017 dollars.Source: Bureau of Economic AnalysisBy The New York TimesWe 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

U.S. President Donald Trump revealed on Wednesday that he’s considering sending 20% of the money saved by the Department of Government Efficiency advisory group to Americans.
“There’s even under consideration a new concept where we give 20% of the DOGE savings to American citizens and 20% goes to paying down debt,” Trump said during his remarks at the FII Priority Summit in Miami Beach, Fla.

His remarks came after Elon Musk said in a post on X Tuesday that he “Will check with the President” on a proposal to send U.S. households tax refund checks funded by savings created by DOGE’s cost-cutting campaign.
That was in response to a separate post from James Fishback, CEO of the Azoria investment firm, suggesting that Trump has the opportunity to issue a so-called DOGE Dividend.
Musk has said that his goal is to cut federal spending by $2 trillion, out of a $6.75 trillion annual budget in the latest fiscal year ended last Sept. 30. If that were met, Fishback suggests taking 20% of that, or $400 billion, and distributing it to taxpayers. That would amount to approximately $5,000 per household, he said.
“When a breach of this magnitude happens in the private sector, the counterparty, at minimum, refunds the customer since they failed to deliver what was promised,” Fishback wrote in his proposal. “It’s high time for the federal government to do the same, and refund money back to taxpayers given what DOGE has uncovered.”
Government stimulus checks mailed to millions of taxpayers in 2020 during the Covid pandemic bore Trump’s signature, the first time a president’s name appeared on any IRS payments, The Associated Press reported at the time.

According to DOGE, it has saved an estimated $55 billion through its efforts. However, recent reports suggest that the actual figure is likely far below that.
Earlier Wednesday, Bloomberg reported that the DOGE website only accounts for $16.6 billion of the $55 billion it claims to have saved. Additionally, The New York Times said on Tuesday that DOGE mistakenly cited an $8 billion saving on a federal contract that was actually for $8 million instead.
Meanwhile, many of DOGE’s efforts have been met with court challenges. But a federal judge on Tuesday denied a request to stop DOGE from accessing federal agencies’ computer systems or directing government worker firings while litigation is ongoing.

Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO More

Asked for her views on pro-labor legislation she backed as a House Republican, Lori Chavez-DeRemer said she would simply serve the president’s agenda.President Trump’s pick as labor secretary faced pointed questions from both parties at her Senate confirmation hearing on Wednesday over her past support for pro-union legislation, an issue that could complicate her nomination.The nominee, Lori Chavez-DeRemer, a former Republican congresswoman, was pressed repeatedly about her stand on the Protecting the Right to Organize Act, known as the PRO Act — a sweeping labor bill that sought to strengthen collective bargaining rights. She was a co-sponsor of the measure, a top Democratic priority that has yet to win passage, and one of few Republicans to back it.Asked if she continued to support it, Ms. Chavez-DeRemer demurred, saying she was no longer in Congress and would support Mr. Trump’s agenda.“I do not believe that the secretary of labor should write the laws,” she told the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, which conducted the hearing. “It will be up to the Congress to write those laws and to work together. What I believe is that the American worker deserves to be paid attention to.”But in response to questions from Rand Paul of Kentucky, one of several Republican senators who have expressed opposition to her confirmation, she said she no longer backed a portion of the legislation that Mr. Paul said undermined “right to work” states, where unionization efforts face stiff legal and political barriers.The unusual nature of Ms. Chavez-DeRemer’s nomination was apparent in the makeup of the audience in the committee room, which was packed with members of the Teamsters union, identifiable by their logo-emblazoned fleeces and jackets. The nominee played up her personal connection to the union on Wednesday, saying in her opening statement, “My journey is rooted in the values instilled by my father, a proud Teamster who worked tirelessly for over 30 years.”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