I assessed what the macro data tells us about the Tax Cut & Jobs Act for @AEIdeas. My bottom line: "not much". Since passage GDP growth has slowed slightly as slowing consumption & investment growth only partly offset by faster govt spending. #TCJANowWhataei.org/publication/no…
The second sense in which the data tell us "not much" is that is the difficulty of extracting the signal (the effect of the tax cut) from the noise (the effect of the Fed, global economy, trade war, oil prices, fiscal stimulus, etc. etc. etc.)
A lot of sector-specific stories are important. This table tells some of them: (i) oil-related investment growth slowed dramatically as oil prices stopped their rapid rise; (2) software and R&D growth increased for reasons unrelated to the TCJA; and (3) everything else slowed.
At least three macro stories are also important but go in different directions: fiscal stimulus boosted the economy while the trade wars and interest rate increases went in the opposite direction.
Sorting all of this out the main conclusion is that the second sense of "not much" (hard to extract the signal from the noise) reinforces the first sense of "not much" (if the tax cut was so important relative to everything else we would see the signal much more clearly).
The best hope for a better understanding of the causal impact of the TCJA will be microeconomic research that looks at how similar firms are affected differently by the law and tracking their differential responses.
Ultimately, however, the most important issue is what to do going forward. I believe we can have a more efficient business tax system while raising more revenue than the current system. I couldn't explain it in 280 characters so you'll have to read the image.
I really appreciate @aparnamath and @erinmelly2 inviting me to write this--and recommend you stay tuned for the all star cast they have doing upcoming blogs on the TCJA drawing on a diverse set of expertise and perspectives. aei.org/tag/trumps-tax…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Core PCE inflation came in a little above the already high expectations in Feb. The pattern is the opposite of what you want to see--the shorter the window the higher the annualized rate (and still high at 12 months):
Here are the full set of numbers. They were uniformly ugly in February.
If you're looking for some slivers of reassurance, market-based core (which excludes imputed items like portfolio fees) was only up 2.4% over the last 12 months. And "only" 3.0% annualized over the last three, less than the regular core.
Income taxes are distort trade by reducing purchases of imports. At least they do so as much as VATs do. Which is to say not any more than they reduce purchases of domestic goods.
A hopefully irrelevant thread.
A simple toy example.
Consider a person in Spain with 100€ in income that they use to buy oranges. Absent taxes oranges cost 1€. They must spend all their income this year.
In this case they could buy 100 total oranges--imported plus Spanish.
Now assume there's a 25% VAT.
VAT raises the cost of imported oranges to 1.25€, this is the way it is supposed to be like a tariff.
Of course, also raises the cost of Spanish oranges to 1.25€. This is not a tariff & is trade neutral.
This was as expected, consistent with a very gradual slowing, and ~2.5% underlying inflation.
Here are the full set of numbers.
On the favorable side of the ledger, market-based core inflation--which is a better predictor of future inflation than regular core--has been somewhat lower. This excludes things like implied price of portfolio management fees.
COVID ripped apart economies around the world. Amazingly most rich countries snapped back almost completely very quickly. By the end of 2021, 12 of 27 advanced OECD economies had unemployment rates below pre-COVID forecasts. The US did not. In fact, it was the fourth worst.
A 🧵
This🧵looks at unemp rates cross countries. I'll do another w/ GDP growth across countries which tells a similar story.
But unemp rates preferable because a cleaner answer speed/fullness of RECOVERIES. Growth differences can be more structural (e.g., productivity & demography).
My aim in this and the thread that I'll post later is to be much more systematic than @Noahpinion was in his response to my @ForeignAffairs piece. He had some good arguments there but his international macro comparisons were, at best, unsystematic. noahpinion.blog/p/anti-anti-ne…