Tag: Politics

Separating Fact and Fiction in Investing

Is America’s economy failing? Has Trump undone the American economic empire? Do ports sit empty? Are people being laid off? Have world leaders conspired to control America’s debt?

These are just some of the headlines and subjects floating around the internet. Depending on who you are and where your political allegiances lay, the answers will be self-evident. Trump is either a an economic genius and unparalleled negotiator, or he is a clumsy and indifferent conman masquerading as successful businessman and politician.

For investors this presents a real challenge. These questions aren’t just thought experiments. Depending on the answers they may significantly impact where one chooses to invest, and the more polemical the question the farther we may get from a useful answer, regardless of politics. If our goal is to ask questions to reveal truth, we may find ourselves confused as to why markets have surged back from their lows (as of May 12th the major US indices have almost recovered from their tumble at the beginning of April) even while business reporting warns of a potential for a worsening economy.

One way to make better sense of what’s happening is to put ourselves in the shoes of Donald Trump’s administrative allies. Imagine what someone who believes in what Donald Trump is doing would say about his economic plans. Its not as though they haven’t heard economists and businesses express doubt and worry about the actions of his administration. So how would they defend them?

In my imagining I believe they would argue something like the following:

                The United States is enormously rich but wastes money on cheap goods from China, and while some of these goods don’t need to be made here, America has lost enough manufacturing jobs that its worthwhile experimenting with tariffs to bring jobs back. Over the past 45 years we’ve seen countless evidence that playing by the rules of globalization reduces the ability of governments to help their most vulnerable citizens, and money has become too fluid and too willing to cross borders at the expense of their domestic homes. Regardless of what people fear, America remains the richest country in the world, with the largest consumer base, and that combined with the existing strength of the US economy will be enough to bring industry back to the US in some capacity while tariffs on junk from other countries will help pay for renewed and permanent tax cuts. Market volatility will be temporary while the economy realigns itself, but the combination of lower taxes and existing economic strength will ultimately help lift the markets even higher.

You don’t have to believe in such a claim, or even pretend this was what Donald Trump campaigned on. What I’m putting forth is a set of ideas (picked up through numerous interviews and speeches) that I believe his administration finds largely defensible and recognizable, and would be a better frame of reference for understanding their actions. Let’s start with the recent indication that GDP is contracting. In traditional economic terms, two quarters of back-to-back GDP contractions constitute a recession. We’ve had more than a few of those over the past decade, but few people would say that we’ve had recessions. The reason for this might be best expressed by Jason Furman; an American economist, professor at Harvard, and former deputy director of the US National Economic Council, in a recent editorial in the Financial Times. Outlining the importance of “Core GDP” vs “GDP”, he points out that Core GDP (actually known as Real Final Sales to Private Domestic Purchasers) better reflects consumer spending and private investment while the traditional GDP includes net exports, inventories, and government spending, all things in flux because of Trump’s new administration. So, while the GDP contracted in Q1 of this year, the Core GDP was up in the first three months.

What about rumours of empty ports and empty shelves? Reportedly Trump was shaken following meetings with the heads of three major retailers about shelves being empty if the tariff’s remain at 145% on China. Trump seems to have vacillated a number of times about the size and implementation of the tariffs, but as of today they remain intact. Asked about higher prices and fewer options Trump seemed dismissive of concerns over the Chinese trade war declaring “maybe the children will have two dolls instead of thirty dolls, and maybe those dolls will cost a couple of bucks more.”

Is Trump being dismissive? Yes, but he’s also not worried that shelves will be empty. Though shipping and imports are down as we head into May for cargo coming from China, far from alarmist rumours that docks are sitting empty there is still plenty of ocean-going traffic coming from China.

 Does this mean that there won’t be furloughed dock workers or empty shelves? According to the Port of Los Angeles there has been a 35% drop week over week of expected cargo, and a 14% decline from the previous year. That very well may lead to reduced working hours and fewer options in stores, but the discrepancy between what’s being shared online and what is likely to actually happen is probably enough to gird the loins for Trump’s team to continue their policies.

What about layoffs? Fears about unemployment remain high, but as the most recent jobs report shows hiring remains robust and the unemployment rate, already very low, remains unchanged.

This discrepancy between a popular public impression and the on-the-ground economic reality gives room to Trump’s administration to continue ahead with ideas that remain controversial, as well as opening up investors to making mistakes in their allocations. For the time being, Trump does have a reservoir of economic and political strength to call on. He may be using that reserve up, but may also have guessed with some accuracy that the global economy will keep doing business with America regardless of whatever feathers he ruffles.

But markets may also not be calculating the longer-term direction correctly, mispricing assets and remaining too optimistic. Since Trump’s re-election markets have been shown to be placated by the promise of deferred tariffs, as though deferring them is really the prelude of getting rid of them. Trump doesn’t help this by going back and forth on their implementation, but listening to his words, and following his actions, I feel that it would be a mistake to assume that the tariffs will ultimately be rescinded.

This past week changes to the auto-tariffs were announced, reducing some of the duplication of tariffs on steel and aluminum, but also laid out reimbursements and tariff relief for parts manufacturers need to import. These changes also make clear the groundwork for a longer and more durable tariff regime. Trump himself has been quick to correct any reporting that suggests that he’s backtracking or creating exemptions for specific products, and that some products may end up with different tariff treatment, but will still be subject to tariffs.

This seems best exemplified by the announcement of the US-UK trade deal. Called “a starting point” by the British ambassador, the Trump administration has said the deal is “maxed out”, leaving in place a 10% tariff on British imports, with a reduced tariff on British cars, steel, and aluminum (the deal effectively lowers car and steel duties to the flat 10% rates, down from 27.5%).

Whether deals such as these are anything for the market to get excited about is a question that will be answered with time, like all the unanswered questions that have been introduced this year. What investors must work on is remaining clear eyed about what is happening, and resist submitting to their own partisan preferences. Trump may yet undermine the US economy, and trade deals may turn out to simply be acknowledgements of existing tariff rates, or perhaps the opposite may happen. But recognizing that reality is more mixed and that we do not yet have a clear picture about the future will promote more time tested strategies for sensible investing.

Aligned Capital Partners Inc. (“ACPI”) is a full-service investment dealer and a member of the Canadian Investor Protection Fund (“CIPF”) and the Canadian Investment Regulatory Organization (“CIRO”).  Investment services are provided through Walker Wealth Management, an approved trade name of ACPI.  Only investment-related products and services are offered through ACPI/Walker Wealth Management and covered by the CIPF. Financial planning services are provided through Walker Wealth Management. Walker Wealth Management is an independent company separate and distinct from ACPI/Walker Wealth Management.

by The Walker Report of Walker Wealth Management and Aligned Capital Partners Inc

Seriously and Literally

In 2016, Donald Trump supporters said that you should take him seriously, but not literally. His first press secretary, Anthony Scaramucci said “don’t take him literally, take him symbolically.” This defense of Trump was meant to highlight that while he may have said incredibly controversial things, much of that was just talk, and it was his message behind the words that you should really pay attention to.

But Trump himself has contradicted this view more than once, frequently saying “I don’t kid” when challenged on policy (the exact comment came about in 2020 over coronavirus testing). In other words, Trump has let people know that you shouldn’t be surprised when he does do things that seemed initially outrageous. For the wider world this has meant that you should take Trump at his word, and that even if some of his rhetoric is just that, rhetoric, you would be foolish to ignore the substance of his messages.

Since his re-election Trump’s focus has been squarely on tariffs, promising them on China (a further 10%), on BRIC nations (100%) and Canada and Mexico (25% each). He’s suggested that some of the tariffs can be avoided for Canada and Mexico over better border controls on drugs and illegal immigrants, but whether this is true is unknown. Political commentators like David Frum have pointed out that Trump’s views on trade have been consistent since his first considered run for the presidency in 1987, that he is hostile to trade and sees it as a zero-sum game.

A close-up of a piece of paper Description automatically generatedIn 2025 world leaders and policy shapers believe Trump should be taken both seriously and literally. While the current political situation in Canada has been turbulent, the view of the government and provinces is almost unanimous (Quebec and Alberta remain the perennial opponents to joining the band wagon). Doug Ford took the initiative to announce that Ontario could stop energy exports to the US in the event of a trade fight, a position seconded by BC’s premier David Eby.

But in the United States the threat of aggressive and expanding tariffs have also been taken literally, notably by Jerome Powell of the Federal Reserve. On December 18th, in a move that shook markets, Jerome Powell did announce a final rate cut for 2024, but stressed that future cuts were heavily dependent on inflation, which will likely rise if Trump enacts his regime of trading tariffs. Markets were quick to react, and though 2024 will be remembered as a pretty good year for investors, the speed and size of the market sell-off was newsworthy, being the largest since August.

The next morning and markets began on a relatively positive note, continuing a trend of brief panics followed by long yawns as markets simply resume their upward momentum. Little seems to have dissuaded the bull market since 2022 and with the US economy still showing itself to be very strong there’s every chance that the brief panic on December 18th was just that, a moment of panic at the end of 2024. But Trump, like the rest of us, doesn’t live in longer and slower news cycles. Instead market panics live on in social media, and run the risk of coalescing into counter narratives that Trump might hurt the economy more than help it (its notable that the economy has been very strong under Biden, but that didn’t change the perception that Trump had been the better economic steward).

In 2018 Jerome Powell began raising rates to blunt the sharper edges of a hot economy and return interest rates to somewhere near a historic norm. Since 2008 rates had remained at emergency low levels, and there was a genuine concern that markets were becoming addicted to cheap cash. In October of that year Jerome Powell made clear that rate hikes would continue until the Fed felt they’d reached a neutral rate, news not well received by the stock market. From October to the end of the year the S&P 500 lost 18% by December 24th, before rebounding slightly by the New Year. Markets had posted decent returns to the end of September, but wiped out those gains and finished the year -6.24% . During the last months of the year Trump made repeated efforts to pressure Powell to halt or cut rates, often publicly over Twitter.

My opinion is that Trump likes the ambiguity surrounding his pronouncements. Whether he actually intends to implement all the tariffs he’s discussed, whether they are bargaining positions, or whether he can be talked out of them is a grey area that offers him a position of strength. Politicians may be particularly vulnerable to his vagaries since they often wish to protect the status quo while Trump feels free to be a disruptor. But that grey area only works as a negotiating tactic so long as people believe that deals can be reached. If nations come to believe that Trump is serious and literal about tariffs and don’t believe they can be avoided, you are only left with a trade war. Similarly if you are in charge of the Federal Reserve and believe that Trump will do what he says, then you have every reason to pursue positions that curb inflation.

Following Trump’s election Jerome Powell was asked whether he would resign as the Federal Reserve chair, and was clear in his response; he will not, he is not required to leave, and cannot be compelled to. Trump already has a difficult and publicly hostile history with Powell, and its easy to imagine that if Powell is taking Trump seriously, he will move into direct conflict with Trump because of his policies, not in spite of them. Similarly conflict may be around the corner on diplomatic issues for the exact same reason. If Mexico feels it can’t avoid a trade fight with the US, you can assume that Mexico might be less interested in working to curb migrants at the US border. In Canada the same might be true, negotiating with someone who has no intent to make a deal (or honor the one already made) is not likely to build support for concessions.

Today Trump will take office following his inauguration, and he’s expected to sign a number of executive orders kicking off his next term. He has posed as a disruptor, and has nominated a number of other unusual thinkers and people opposed to the status quo to make up his cabinet. Whether they all take those roles and can do what they say they plan too is yet to be seen, but on December 18th we may have gotten some insight into what that future might look like, a future where Donald Trump is taken at his word, both seriously and literally.  

Aligned Capital Partners Inc. (“ACPI”) is a full-service investment dealer and a member of the Canadian Investor Protection Fund (“CIPF”) and the Canadian Investment Regulatory Organization (“CIRO”).  Investment services are provided through Walker Welath Management, an approved trade name of ACPI.  Only investment-related products and services are offered through ACPI/Walker Wealth Management and covered by the CIPF. Financial planning services are provided through Walker Wealth Management. Walker Wealth Management is an independent company seperate and distinct from ACPI/Walker Wealth Management.

by The Walker Report of Walker Wealth Management and Aligned Capital Partners Inc