Market Update: Public Sector Stimulus — The
Transcription
Market Update: Public Sector Stimulus — The
December 24, 2014 Market Update Public Sector Stimulus — The 2015 Growth Surprise? Joe Tanious, Investment Strategist • One potential surprise for investors in 2015 could be public sector efforts that boost U.S. growth and cyclical assets • A more supportive economic and fiscal backdrop as well as political need lead us to see the potential for stimulus • Stronger-than-expected growth seems more likely to be the sum of many small actions rather than any single major stimulus package As we think about 2015 and what might surprise consensus expectations — and in turn move financial markets — one possible catalyst that has caught our attention is the U.S. public sector. Specifically, could we see U.S. GDP stronger than expected, with related support for U.S. cyclical assets, emerge in part because of governmentrelated efforts? Certainly, after recent years of heightened dysfunction in Washington that included the first government shutdown since the 1990s, effective, bipartisan policymaking would be a surprise to some. But we see at least two strong arguments for more public sector stimulus in the year ahead: a friendlier economic and fiscal backdrop and political need. On the economic side, it is noteworthy that the U.S. budget deficit has narrowed more quickly than many expected; indeed, it is projected to reach 2.6% of GDP in the coming year, the best outcome since 2007. The resistance to fiscal stimulus has receded, at least for now. Meanwhile, U.S. politicians are aware of their generally lackluster opinion-poll approval ratings and are looking for ways to gain support going into the 2016 elections. (Recent polls have put Congressional approval ratings at a mere 14%, while President Obama’s approval rating — at 42% in mid-December — was near his presi dency’s lows.) Fiscal stimulus, supporting the economy, would be one way to improve voters’ perceptions. Interestingly, looking back at past U.S. electoral cycles, the year before a presidential election has regularly seen relatively greater fiscal stimulus, regardless of the party in power or whether it was a president’s first or second term. So what public sector efforts might unfold in the coming year? Below, we look at possible steps — on the federal, state, and local levels, as well as indirect stimulus via regulatory changes. Overall, the potential for incremental public sector growth support next year seems more likely to be the culmination of many small steps, rather than one large fiscal leap. Market Update: Public Sector Stimulus — The 2015 Growth Surprise? Fiscal Snapshot Budgetary Trends and Impact Consistent with the public’s diminishing focus on the federal budget deficit, Exhibit 1 provides a historical perspective of the government’s finances. As discussed in our recently released year-ahead Quarterly Investment Perspective: What Really Matters in 2015, we believe a few additional forces could help federal spending pick up in the coming year. Following stimulus measures taken during the financial crisis, Congress reduced the budget deficit by $907 billion over the past five years via stronger tax revenues and decreased spending through the 2011 Budget Control Act (BCA). Over the last five years, this increase in revenue and decrease in spending has provided a 7% headwind to economic growth. Over these five years, the shrinking government deficit has provided a 7% headwind to economic growth, with the heaviest fiscal drag occurring over the past 2 years. We see fiscal policy turning the corner in 2015 and potentially becoming additive to GDP, fueled by Congress’s recently passed “CROmnibus” package. This package extends the base discretionary budget through September 30, 2015 (fiscal year 2015) at levels set by the Ryan-Murray agreement (a two-year agreement reached in December 2013) for 11 of the 12 appropriation bills (known as an omnibus). However, this budget would only fund the Department of Homeland Security through February (via a continuing resolution or CR), which will then allow the GOP-led Congress to seek to defund the president’s immigration executive order via the budget process early in 2015. Indeed, under this CROmnibus package, fiscal drag looks set to significantly diminish in the year ahead. Assuming the government does nothing to change current projections, economic growth should notably accelerate in 2015 as the private economy becomes less encumbered by government Exhibit 1: Federal Budget Deficit % of GDP % 0 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 (2) (4) (6) (8) (10) 6.9% Fiscal Drag Over 5 Years (12) As of August 27, 2014. Years reflect fiscal year budgets as a percent of GDP. 2015-2027 are Congressional Budget Office estimates. Source: Congressional Budget Office 2 2024 Market Update: Public Sector Stimulus — The 2015 Growth Surprise? Exhibit 2: Fiscal 2015 Federal Budget Net Interest: $251bn Discretionary Defense: $551bn Other: $302bn Discretionary Non-defense: $638bn Corporate Taxes: $389bn Other: $415bn Social Insurance Taxes: $1,065bn Social Security: $887bn Mandatory Income Taxes: $1,526bn Healthcare: $1,009bn Outlays Revenues As of December 13, 2014. Revenue estimates reflect the Congressional Budget Office’s 2015 baseline. Source: Congressional Budget Office contraction. As Exhibit 2 depicts, the 2015 Federal budget projects spending to exceed revenues by $470 billion, equating to a 2.6% deficit in fiscal 2015 under current law. Relative to the massive -2.7% and -1.2% fiscal drags in 2013 and 2014 alone, a federal budget deficit around 2.6% of GDP should provide a minimal if somewhat immaterial headwind of only -0.2% to growth in 2015. Nevertheless, this also creates a very low hurdle of only $38 billion in additional spending or tax decreases needed for a stimulative federal government. While not our base case, we see the potential for additional spending, which, in turn, could potentially flip the federal budget to a net positive for 2015 GDP growth. 2015 Fiscal Surprises? While, under current law, the fiscal drag experi enced over the past few years will most likely decrease in 2015, the current political and economic environment may be setting the stage for a potential increase in government spending. This would not come as a surprise; historically, there has been a propensity for the federal government to increase the fiscal deficit in the third year of a president’s term (Exhibit 3). Nevertheless, while we always approach “average” estimates with a degree of caution, the stage seems to be set for upside fiscal surprises in the year ahead and does make some sense looking backward. After all, an incumbent president looking to get re-elected or have his party re-elected would want happy voters. Stronger economic growth — to the degree it translates into more jobs and income — tends to put smiles on voters’ faces and reward the party in power that supported those growth efforts. Exhibit 3: Average Annual Increase in the Federal Budget 1975-2013 % 0.1 Reducing deficit = drag on GDP 0.0 (0.1) Greater deficit = boost to GDP (0.2) (0.3) Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Presidential Year Year 4 As of December 13, 2014. Source: Congressional Budget Office, Bureau of Economic Analysis 3 Market Update: Public Sector Stimulus — The 2015 Growth Surprise? Potential Upside Surprises state and local spending). The last time the U.S. Congress passed a repatriation bill was in October 2004, and it is estimated that roughly $362 billion was repatriated in the one-year “holiday” window (through the end of 2005). While this would have a modest impact on the economy, studies from the 2004 repatriation showed that shareholders were the biggest beneficiaries — in other words, repatriation helped U.S. equities. Federal (39% of Government Spending, 7% of GDP) While Republicans will take control of both chambers of Congress in January, they still don’t have the numbers to overcome a presidential veto on contentious items. As such, we would look for potential progress (and upside surprises) on those issues that have some bipartisan support. Here is a closer look at those issues: • Repatriation holiday: Over the past few years, • Defense: While federal spending has come under pressure during the past few years in general, defense spending in particular has decreased by $105 billion since the peak in 2011 (Exhibit 4), primarily due to the sequester (a product of the above-mentioned BCA) as well as the winding down of multiple wars. Notably, these actions have negatively impacted both the base defense budget, which is capped by the BCA, and overseas contingency operations (OCO), the latter outside the budget and used to fund wars. While the OCO spending has come down over the past few years, this may ultimately not be the case in 2015 as the president seeks additional funding for the war on the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). It is worth noting that Ashton Carter, the president’s nominee for Defense Secretary Republicans have pushed to reduce corporate taxes, while Democrats have sought to ramp up infrastructure spending. One concept to address both issues which has been gaining bipartisan support is that of a tax repatriation holiday. As it currently stands in the tax code, a company that earns a profit overseas and wants to bring the cash back to the U.S. (repatriate) would have to pay taxes in both countries. As a result, many companies have decided to leave their cash abroad, an amount estimated to equal $2.5 trillion. One solution would be to enact a repatriation tax — which would be meaningfully lower than current tax rates — on funds brought from overseas, with the taxed portion used to fund infrastructure projects (thereby enhancing Exhibit 4: Real Government Consumption and Investment Annual % Change % 15 After years of contracting, government spending seems to be finally turning a corner Defense 10 Non-defense 5 0 State and Local (5) (10) 2000 2001 2002 2003 As of November 25, 2014. Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis 4 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Market Update: Public Sector Stimulus — The 2015 Growth Surprise? to replace outgoing Secretary Chuck Hagel, has been quoted as saying the defense budget has been hit too hard and the sequester is bad policy. The combination of the growing global threat level, coupled with increased bi-partisan support to overturn the sequester caps, could ultimately lead to a higher defense spending package in 2015 than is widely anticipated. • Other: Republican leaders have indicated that one of the first items on their agenda for 2015 is energy reform. Specifically, they are hoping to approve the Keystone pipeline (which would then go to the president for his signature/veto) and revisit the ban on crude oil exports. As Keystone is a privately financed, $8 billion project, its approval could have a macro impact. Also, the president’s recent actions lead us to another issue that has the potential to benefit the economy over time — immigration reform. As we highlighted in a recent Market Update, immigration reform could lead to improvements in productivity and stronger consumer demand, which would, in time, likely lead companies to boost production, thereby creating more jobs and capital and increasing the wage rate and GDP in the long run. While we acknowledge that the potential impacts on GDP from energy and immigration reform are longer term in nature, we do believe that legislative progress on these issues could still support growth sentiment, which in turn could prove helpful for cyclical U.S. assets. State & Local (61% of Government Spending, 11% of GDP) In contrast to federal spending, state and local spending has expanded at a 0.8% annual pace over the past six quarters (Exhibit 4), helping to reduce some of the fiscal drag discussed above. However, while spending by municipalities has historically led the more volatile federal spending categories, consumption estimates for the year ahead can be difficult to ascertain given the idiosyncratic nature of each state’s financial position. Still, general improvement in state finances and the need for additional infrastructure investment since the recession set the stage for longer-term spending projects at the state and local level. (Data from a 2012 Council on Foreign Relations report suggested that U.S. public infrastructure investment, at 2.4% of GDP, had been cut in half versus levels seen 50 years prior.) In the meantime, we continue to see improvements in state payroll growth, which can serve as a very rough proxy for municipality spending intentions. Indeed, state and local governments have added 85,000 jobs to the U.S. labor force year to date, representing 88% of total government employment and helping to reverse the nearly 300,000 in state and local payroll cuts since 2011 (Exhibit 5). Exhibit 5: Government Employment Annual Change, Thousands % 100 50 Federal Employment State and Local Employment 0 (50) (100) (150) (200) (250) (300) 2011x 2012x 2013x YTD 2014 As of December 5, 2014. Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics Mortgage Lending In addition to possible spending on the federal and state side, there are other policies from Washington that might lift growth. Policy changes around the housing market in particular bear watching as mortgage lending still appears very tight. The director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), Melvin Watt, has been working on several 5 Market Update: Public Sector Stimulus — The 2015 Growth Surprise? policies to help expand the availability of credit to homebuyers and ultimately stimulate the housing market. While there are several proposals and policies in the works, two recent announcements caught our attention. The first of these two recent proposals relates to what defines a Qualified Residential Mortgage (QRM). A QRM is a mortgage that financial sponsors can securitize and sell into the market without the need to retain risk in the loan. The need for underwriters to keep some “skin in the game” and retain risk (at least 5%) in all their loans goes back to Dodd Frank, in response to the excessive lending practices that are believed to have fueled the financial crisis. When the initial rule was proposed in 2011, it was believed to be far more onerous on financial institutions than what was recently decided. Most notably, it was initially proposed that in order for a loan to qualify as a QRM, buyers had to put a minimum down payment of 20% towards the purchase price. This requirement, of course, limited the number of loans that would qualify as a QRM, and further restricted lending in the housing market. While the new rules are set to go into effect in a year, and we have yet to see how financial sponsors will modify their lending practices, having more clarity around these regulations certainly bodes well for the housing market. In addition to clarifying these rules, expanded guidelines around Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have recently been announced in an effort to help further stimulate the housing market. Most notably is the proposal to reduce the required down payment from 5% to 3% for qualified buyers. While the details are not yet ironed out, we do know that minimum credit scores and other forms of mortgage insurance will be required, as the goal is to expand credit but avoid a repeat of lending practices that led to the financial crisis. 6 All of these policies, while clearly a balancing act, are part of Director Watt’s plan to help expand credit in the housing market and reach buyers that have limited access to capital. As experienced in previous dec ades, a tight housing market and accretive home values have the potential to unlock additional spend ing. While housing investment represents only a minimal 3% of GDP, it accounts for 24% of household assets and a disproportionate 60% of assets for the bottom half of the income distribution. Simply put, a stronger housing market in the year ahead has the potential to increase household con sumption, which is the engine of the U.S. economy. Putting It All Together As we head into 2015, the U.S. fiscal deficit is clearly in a better position relative to where it has been over the past five years, and is no longer the most pressing issue facing Congress. More importantly, if current law stands, we should see very little, if any, fiscal drag heading into next year. This clearly bodes well for U.S. economic growth and risk assets. Since 2009, the U.S. economy has faced an average annual fiscal drag of 1.7%, yet has managed to grow at an average pace of 2.2%. Without this drag, it should be clear to see why growth rates above 3% are now achievable. The risk to the upside, we believe, is that addi tional spending measures could be announced, possibly leading to fiscal thrust heading into 2015. These measures, while relatively small on their own, have the cumulative potential to stimulate economic growth. This asymmetric risk supports our constructive outlook on the U.S. economy and overweight position in U.S. equities. Many thanks to Tom Healy III, director of Client Portfolio Analysis at Bessemer Trust, and Anthony Wile, Investment Strategies associate at Bessemer Trust, for their contributions to this piece. Market Update: Public Sector Stimulus — The 2015 Growth Surprise? Recent Insights Market Update: Political Uncertainty Rattling Greece (December 2014) Market Update: Oil Spillover (December 2014) Market Update: U.S. Legislative Outlook — Lame Duck and 2015 (December 2014) Market Update: The Economics of Immigration Reform (November 2014) Quarterly Investment Perspective: Sizing Up the Markets (October 2014) Quarterly Investment Perspective: Common “Cents” – All About the Dollar (July 2014) To view these and other recent insights, please visit www.bessemer.com. About Bessemer Trust Founded in 1907, Bessemer Trust is a privately owned wealth and investment management firm that focuses exclusively on ultra-high-net-worth families and their foundations and endowments. We oversee $97.5 billion for approximately 2,200 clients and provide an integrated approach to the investment, trust, estate, tax, and philanthropic needs of our clients. This material is for your general information. It does not take into account the particular investment objectives, financial situation, or needs of individual clients. This material is based upon information obtained from various sources that Bessemer Trust believes to be reliable, but Bessemer makes no representation or warranty with respect to the accuracy or completeness of such information. Views expressed herein are current only as of the date indicated, and are subject to change without notice. Forecasts may not be realized due to a variety of factors, including changes in economic growth, corporate profitability, geopolitical conditions, and inflation. The mention of a particular security is not intended to represent a stock-specific recommendation, and our view of these holdings may change at any time based on stock price movements, new research conclusions, or changes in risk preference. Atlanta • Boston • Chicago • Dallas • Denver • Greenwich • Houston • Los Angeles • Miami Naples • New York • Palm Beach • San Francisco • Seattle • Washington, D.C. • Wilmington • Woodbridge Cayman Islands • New Zealand • United Kingdom Visit us at www.bessemer.com. Copyright © 2014 Bessemer Trust Company, N.A. All rights reserved.