Trade Tariffs – The Worst That Could Happen

TRADE TARIFFS

As rhetoric regarding trade tariffs increased prior to the election and, with that same rhetoric continuing post-election, the danger to free trade and a strong economy is heightened.

In my article, The Danger Of Trade Tariffs, I said…

“Tariffs are taxes imposed on imported goods, ostensibly to protect domestic industries or gain a competitive edge. They are sometimes recommended and promoted by those who think they have identified an “unfair advantage” existing between trade partners.”

Special emphasis is applicable to the first three words: tariffs are taxes.

That alone should be justification for rejecting tariffs outright; however, some think there is reason to consider them in the name of “fairness”. Politicians are notorious for using the doctrine of “fair trade” to justify their threats and the imposition of tariffs (taxes) on trade partners.

The appeal to and appeasement of voters is uppermost in a politician’s mind when the “fair trade” issue is raised. For example, there are certain U.S. industries that are currently not as competitive and profitable as might be preferred. If the imported good is cheaper, then it is often claimed that the competitor uses “cheap labor”; or is “dumping their goods at cheap(er) prices”.

There might also be tariffs already imposed on domestic goods exported to another country, or countries. If a company or industry has done everything they possibly can to be competitive and profitable, the conditions can give rise to claims of unfair trade practices.

The mistake politicians and others make in calling for tariffs on imported goods is that, whether they are imposed in retaliation, or to “protect” a domestic industry and its workers, the net effect is overwhelmingly negative. Here’s why…

We said earlier that tariffs are taxes. A tariff is a tax on goods imported into a country.Currently, new tariffs are being proposed on imported goods coming from other countries. A tariff on something I buy that is made in China, or food I consume that is harvested in Mexico, means it will cost me more than I had been paying for those products.

I might choose to buy the same products after the increase in price; or, I might buy a substitute good of lesser quality. I will end up paying more for what I want, or be forced to compromise. Others will make similar choices; and neither choice leaves me, or anyone else (consumers) better off.

THE WORST THAT COULD HAPPEN

Trade tariffs often trigger a chain reaction and full-blown trade wars can result…

“America’s last major trade war happened after imposition of the 1930 Smoot-Hawley Tariff, which increased 900 import tariffs from 40-48%. It was supposed to support U.S. farmers whose land had been devastated by the Dust Bowl, but it resulted in higher food prices for Americans who were already crippled by the Great Depression.

America’s trade partners at the time hit back with their own tariffs and global trade fell by 65%, worsened the depression, and contributed to the beginning of World War II.

After Smoot-Hawley, the country suffered tremendously. The general public had little understanding of tariffs or trade agreements.” Tariffs And Trade Wars… by Anna Kucirkova

CONCLUSION

Tariffs are taxes imposed on imported goods, ostensibly to protect domestic industries or gain a competitive edge. They are usually recommended and promoted by those who think they have identified an “unfair advantage” existing between trade partners.

Trade tariffs harm small businesses and result in inefficient allocation of resources. Trade tariffs hinder productivity and economic growth; and, they can lead to trade wars. The end result is always higher costs for consumers.

President-elect Trump’s suggestion that selectively placed super-high tariffs could replace the income tax is just plain stupid. The results and the mathematics are impossibly workable and the attempt would be disastrous for international trade and the world economy. Besides, a tax is still a tax.

Kelsey Williams is the author of two books: INFLATION, WHAT IT IS, WHAT IT ISN’T, AND WHO’S RESPONSIBLE FOR IT and ALL HAIL THE FED

Global Credit Collapse Is Deflationary

NOTE TO READERS:  “Global Credit Collapse Is Deflationary” was originally published as an exclusive for TalkMarkets on October 29, 2024. I have not changed anything in the article, nor is there any reason to modify or alter what is written below because of U.S. election results.

Read more

If The Markets Turn Quickly, How Bad Can Things Get?

HOW BAD CAN THINGS GET? 

Pretty damn bad. Which means that it will likely be much worse than most of us can imagine. Other than Covid and its forced shutdown of economic activity by governments world-wide, the most recent learning experience for investors is the Great Recession of 2007-09. Beginning in October 2007 and ending in February 2009, the S&P 500 Index lost 53%…

 S&P 500 Index 2007-09

 

Most of that loss (38%) occurred during calendar year 2008. It was the largest single, calendar-year decline since a similar -38% in 1937. Both the NASDAQ (-53%) and DJIA (-50%) declined by similar amounts.

Prior to the Great Recession, post-Y2K markets collapsed in a heap on the heels of the most profitable decade in U.S. financial and economic history. For more than 2 1/2 years, between February 2000 and September 2002, stocks were in a tailspin led by the NASDAQ which declined by 80%. The carnage is pictured on the chart below…

NASDAQ Composite 2000-02

 

The extent and breadth of the declines and accompanying bankruptcies of hundreds of dot.com companies is rivaled only by the Stock Market Crash of 1929 which is shown on the chart (source) below…

Dow Jones – 1929 Crash and Bear Market

Over an excruciating three years (September 1929 – July 1932), stocks declined by 90%. Stocks did not recover their original pre-crash levels until 1954, twenty-five years after the September 1929 peak. The accompanying economic depression lasted until 1941, although a significant portion of what is termed a resumption of economic activity, was accounted for by war-related industrial activity. Economic conditions on the homefront were characterized by rationing, price controls, and shortages.

WHAT MIGHT CAUSE A MARKET CRASH? 

Stock market crashes like those described above don’t happen spontaneously. There are a number of factors which lead to eventual corrections of significance. They include the evolution of normal business and economic cycles, duration and extent of previous stages of those cycles, intervention and manipulation by governments and central banks, the need for corrections and rebalancing due to poor judgement and market excesses, and political and economic factors.

U.S. economic activity has been declining broadly for more than a year or two. That is partially attributable to changes in interest rates which have caused a reassessment of cost factors and undermined the credibility of various investment strategies. The manipulative expansion of cheap and easy credit over the previous four decades resulted in excesses that weren’t fundamentally justified and which distorted the financial landscape. Highly disproportionate availability of cheap credit led to serious misallocation of resources and capital. 

In addition, the use of leverage has exacerbated the problem. The unfathomable and unexplainable derivatives monster has the potential to wreak incalculable damage on the financial markets. The use of leverage throughout all markets – stocks, bonds, commodities – and including the use of options, futures, and other more precarious derivatives, currently rivals its pre-1929 use which approached 90%.

The  currently added recent market excesses are based on expectations for a return to cheap credit. It is assumed that once the Fed announces a rate cut, that a return to the good old days is right around the corner. As much as a 50 basis point cut is already factored in to current stock and bond prices. What happens when that cut is announced? (see What Happens After A Rate Cut Is Announced?)

MORE ABOUT THE FED

The Fed will likely NOT pursue a series of significant rate cuts UNLESS there is an acceleration of the current decline in economic activity. It makes no sense to simply return to the hell that was brought about by its own intentions and actions previously, and which forced them to try to navigate a return to a more normal and reasonable, higher level for interest rates. On the other hand…

Since the Fed is occupied mostly with slaying dragons which it birthed by its own errant monetary policy, including more than a century of intentional inflation, they are doomed to a life of putting out fires and containing collateral damage. For investors, it is time to wake up to the fact that the Fed is not your financial savior and its purpose and goals, irrespective of any so-called mandates, are not aligned with yours.

CONCLUSION

It is possible that a deepening recession (official or not) could morph into something worse – an economic depression. Even if the Fed cuts rates aggressively, it might not be enough t0 stop the cascading waterfall of lower prices for all assets priced in dollars; including stocks, bonds, commodities, real estate, etc. A collapse in the credit markets such as that which occurred in 2007-08 would likely overwhelm any efforts by the Fed to stop the hemorrhaging.

It would not be unreasonable to see prices decline by  50% or more initially. Further declines would be likely as it is unlikely that an event of this nature at this particular time could be reversed in timely fashion. The prevailing conditions of unemployment and shuttered doors spawned by wholesale financial destruction would be too much for a beleaguered Fed.

It may or may not happen, but investors who ignore the possibility could be in for a shock. I do not consider the likelihood of such an event, or the reaction of the Fed or the government, to be altered in any significant way regardless of November election results. (also see: Default – Deflation – Depression)

Kelsey Williams is the author of two books: INFLATION, WHAT IT IS, WHAT IT ISN’T, AND WHO’S RESPONSIBLE FOR IT and ALL HAIL THE FED

Economic Growth Or Dead Cat Bounce?

WHAT ECONOMIC GROWTH?

From its low in 2020, the economy seems to have rebounded reasonably well, generally speaking. Net of the effects of both inflation and higher interest rates, reported statistics seem to indicate that the economy is growing, albeit slowly at times.  Setting aside temporarily the issues of accuracy, revisions, and manipulation, there is plausible evidence of economic growth.

However, a spate of recent announcements by major retailers says that momentum and direction is changing. Target, Walmart, and Walgreens highlight the list of firms that are taking conscious and deliberate action (broad-based price cuts) to attract and encourage increases in customer traffic. Spending, particularly discretionary spending, has declined measurably. (see Thoughts About Target, Retail Sales, And The Economy )

There is also evidence that large firms worldwide are clamping down on employee expenses; namely, travel and entertainment. Cost control is coming back with a vengeance. Question: Are these the delayed effects of serious damage that was inflicted during the forced shutdown of the economy four years ago? If so, might what has been presumed to be potential resumption of a long-term economic growth trend be considered a “dead cat bounce”?

DEAD CAT BOUNCE

A dead cat bounce is a temporary, short-lived recovery of asset prices from a prolonged decline or a bear market that is followed by the continuation of the downtrend. Frequently, downtrends are interrupted by brief periods of recovery—or small rallies—during which prices temporarily rise.

The name “dead cat bounce” is based on the notion that even a dead cat will bounce if it falls far enough and fast enough. (Investopedia)

For our purpose, we are not referring specifically to asset prices, but to economic activity. In order to see if the term applies in this case, or has merit, let’s look at some charts (source) of economic activity. Below are four charts which can be considered indications of economic activity. The shaded areas are recessions. I will make some comments after each chart and then talk about how the term “dead cat bounce” might apply and discuss some possible implications.

Durable Goods Orders (inflation-adjusted) Historical Chart

It is apparent from this chart that people are spending less ‘real’ money on cars, boats, televisions, and appliances. The declining, long-term trend in durable goods orders dates back twenty-five years. Since peaking in 1999, the “prolonged decline” has been interrupted by three “temporary, short-lived” recoveries which were each followed by a “continuation of the downtrend”. Sounds like dead cat bounce(s) to me. Question: How many times can a dead cat bounce?

Capacity Utilization Rate (percentage) – 50 Year Historical Chart

Capacity Utilization refers to the percentage of “resources used by corporations and factories to produce goods in manufacturing, mining, and electric and gas utilities for all facilities located in the United States” (source).  As the rate continues to decline it indicates that production plants and factories are being used less; and, more of them are sitting idle. The long-term decline in capacity utilization dates back to the late 1960’s and is more than six decades old. There are five dead cat bounces which are followed by continuations of the downtrend to new lows.

Auto and Light Truck Sales (number of units) Historical Chart

In the case of auto and light truck sales the volume peak came at the turn of the century. There are two cases since then which could be considered indicative of the term dead cat bounce. While a long-term decline in sales isn’t clearly apparent, neither is there any evidence of a long-term increase. There is, however, a great deal of volatility; past and potential.

Housing Starts (number of units) Historical Chart

The peak in housing starts came in the early 1970s. Since then, there have been four instances of extreme lows followed by extended bursts of activity (“if you build it, they will buy it”).  The chart refers to actual construction starts – not sales, not prices, not units under construction, etc. The long-term trend for housing starts is down and the periods of increase are followed by a resumption of the long-term declining trend. That fits the definition of dead cat bounce.

CONCLUSION 

Long-term economic growth most likely stopped twenty-five years ago at the end of the most productive and prosperous period in U.S. and World history. Since then there has been a series of ups and downs which have taken us broadly lower as far as productivity, abundance, and growth are concerned. Overall quality of goods and services are questionable and customer satisfaction is missing.

Indications that long-term growth is a thing of the past are evidenced by the frequent reversals and declining trends in economic activity shown on the charts above. The latest focus of consumers and retailers on discretionary spending, price conscious actions and policies, customer satisfaction surveys, etc. are warnings that all is not well.

Moreover, what is presumed to be economic growth is not growth at all. Measured progress refers to efforts attempted to recover what was lost and return to where we were before the most recent crisis occurred (pre-Covid; pre-2008 Great Recession, etc.).

The past four years have been highlighted by increases in the effects of inflation, rising interest rates, overblown asset prices, and a general decline in economic activity. Slow growth/no growth is about the best we can hope for. As far as dead cat bounces go, the next one won’t come until after the cat “falls far enough and fast enough”.

Kelsey Williams is the author of two books: INFLATION, WHAT IT IS, WHAT IT ISN’T, AND WHO’S RESPONSIBLE FOR IT and ALL HAIL THE FED!

More Retailers Announce Price Cuts; Economy Weakens Further

MORE RETAILERS ANNOUNCE PRICE CUTS

Walgreens (WBA) has joined the growing list of retailers that have announced sweeping price cuts for their products. The list also includes Walmart, Target, Amazon, etc. All of them cite the need to increase customers traffic. Presumably the increase in traffic will also increase sales and translate to higher profits. Let’s hope so. The attitude of current shoppers is almost defensive in nature. Impulse shopping has been replaced by planned shopping for specific items and includes conscious price comparisons with competing vendors and online searches.

Read more

Thoughts About Target, Retail Sales, And The Economy

THOUGHTS ABOUT TARGET

MINNEAPOLIS, May 20, 2024 /PRNewswire/ — Target Corporation (NYSE: TGT) announced today it will lower everyday regular prices on approximately 5,000 frequently shopped items…

When I saw Target’s announcement (above) concerning merchandise price cuts, I had several questions.  First, I wondered whether this was something peculiar to Target, or something indicative of bigger problems for the retail industry. But, that was not what concerned me the most. A more important question is whether Target’s woes are symptomatic of a fundamentally weak economy.

My own impressions of Target from a consumer’s perspective is that it is a fairly popular brick and mortar store with a variety of products which are moderately priced. I am not impressed with the grocery department and I don’t shop there for groceries. Otherwise, I find myself stopping by for a specific item or two from time-to-time. Given that I think most others who shop there find more to their liking and do so more often, I also wondered “Why is Target experiencing this problem?”

Apparently, Target’s prices are not as “consumer friendly” as I had assumed. In fact, my wife, who works in Campus Recreation Department for Utah Tech University, related a story concerning the purchase of some needed supplies. The supplies are normally ordered online via another source. The words used were “expensive” and “over-priced.”

Target’s own announcement and articles about it are universal in their indication that the purpose of the price(s) reduction is to attract customer traffic and increase sales. Recognition is given to inflation and the toll that higher prices have extracted on consumers.

Is it Target’s niche market that is suffering more from the effects of inflation? Or, is this something that is happening to others in the retail industry or throughout the economy? For example, can we expect a similar announcement from Walmart in the future?

Some additional questions: 1) Will this round of price cuts for Target be enough to draw sufficient traffic into the stores? 2) Will additional traffic translate into higher sales volume AND net profits for Target?

Normally, the higher consumer prices associated with inflation help compensate the retailer for their own higher costs to bring goods to the marketplace. It seems logical then, that if those higher prices are necessary to cover costs, and that customer traffic is declining; then, how can price reductions, even if they accomplish the primary purpose (to attract customer traffic), make up for the absorption of higher costs by the retailer? A smaller profit margin will require a lot more sales revenue to maintain profitability.

This begs the question, “Is one round of price cuts enough?” Further price reductions can only be undertaken if the profit margin is large enough to accommodate them. Otherwise, the purpose changes to just an attempt to accelerate cash flow, albeit temporarily.

If Target’s problems are not unique, then the entire retail industry might be in trouble. Depending on how widespread and how deep the issues are, then the indications for the economy as a whole are ominous.

Below is a chart of retail sales…

Real (inflation-adjusted) Retail Sales Historical Chart

As can be seen in the chart above, real (inflation-adjusted) retail sales peaked three years ago, in April 2021. The decline since then has been somewhat volatile, but a bigger concern would be the possibility of a slowing economy which leads to further significant declines. What we experienced in 2020 could be a precursor to something similar. This time, though, it could be worse and last longer.

CONCLUSION 

Investors should exercise caution regarding the stocks of Target and other retailers. As far as Target is concerned, their problems seem to be broader than just that which might be inferred by their own pricing structure complications. In other words, the problems are bigger than just competitive pricing. Consumers can enjoy the lower prices at Target for now, but there may be similar announcements and actions from other retailers soon. Target’s announcement and others that may follow are more likely indicative of broadly slowing economic activity that could worsen further before relief can be expected.

Kelsey Williams is the author of two books: INFLATION, WHAT IT IS, WHAT IT ISN’T, AND WHO’S RESPONSIBLE FOR IT and ALL HAIL THE FED!

Money Supply Continues To Fall, Economy Worsens – Investors Don’t Care

The money supply continues to fall, but investors don’t seem to care. They are convinced that their success is connected to a potential Fed shift in interest rate policy. Nothing else seems to matter. That is partially attributable to the fact that, as the financial markets continue their upward trajectory, less and less attention is paid to the deteriorating economy. And, the deterioration is getting worse.

Read more

System Liquidity Risk – Cash Is Preferred & Appreciated

SYSTEM LIQUIDITY IS THE BIGGER RISK – “CASH IS PREFERRED AND APPRECIATED”

There is quite a bit of debate right now about whether inflation’s effects will worsen again soon; or, whether the inflation threat has been minimized and “disinflation” will prevail. Don’t look now, but the specter of a liquidity crisis is looming in the background.

The situation is such that a liquidity crisis of epic proportion might overtake all of us in our arguments about the quantity and extent of inflation’s effects. My concern was heightened this past weekend when I drove to a small, local restaurant to pick up a take-out order.

Read more

Gold Continues 3-Year Decline

GOLD CONTINUES DECLINE

Gold continued its downward path this past week and all but confirmed that lower prices are ahead. Below is a chart of price action dating back to the peak in 2020…

Gold Prices (inflation-adjusted) 2020-23Gold Price Decline Chart

Read more

The Danger Of Trade Tariffs

The renewed danger of trade tariffs by various presidential candidates is a clear and present danger to free trade and the world economy.

In today’s globalized world, trade is the lifeblood of economies; connecting nations and fostering prosperity. However, there is a contentious tool that is often used in international trade relations: tariffs.

Tariffs are taxes imposed on imported goods, ostensibly to protect domestic industries or gain a competitive edge. They are sometimes recommended and promoted by those who think they have identified an “unfair advantage” existing between trade partners.

Even though politicians say otherwise, tariffs are guaranteed to produce net negative results that are much worse than any short-term theoretical benefits.

ECONOMIC DISRUPTION

The primary danger of trade tariffs is the economic disruption they can cause.

When tariffs are imposed, they disrupt the equilibrium. Domestic industries might benefit in the short term, but at what cost?

Since the prices of imported goods rise due to tariffs, consumers end up paying more for the things they want to buy.

Trade tariffs often trigger a chain reaction, leading to retaliatory measures from affected countries.  Full-blown trade wars can result…

“America’s last major trade war happened after imposition of the 1930 Smoot-Hawley Tariff, which increased 900 import tariffs from 40-48%. It was supposed to support U.S. farmers whose land had been devastated by the Dust Bowl, but it resulted in higher food prices for Americans who were already crippled by the Great Depression.

America’s trade partners at the time hit back with their own tariffs and global trade fell by 65%, worsened the depression, and contributed to the beginning of World War II.

After Smoot-Hawley, the country suffered tremendously. The general public had little understanding of tariffs or trade agreements.” Tariffs And Trade Wars… by Anna Kucirkova

NEGATIVE IMPACT ON SMALL BUSINESS

Small businesses bear the brunt of trade tariffs. Without the resources to absorb the increased costs imposed by tariffs, They struggle to compete with larger companies that have more significant financial reserves.

Moreover, the uncertainty created by trade tariffs can deter small businesses from growing and expanding, stifling growth and harming the overall economy in the long run.

INEFFICIENT RESOURCE ALLOCATION

Trade tariffs can distort the allocation of resources within an economy. When protectionist measures artificially support certain industries through tariffs, it can lead to inefficiencies.

Resources can flow to industries that are protected rather than those that are genuinely competitive.

This misallocation of resources hinders economic growth and productivity. It may also delay the necessary transitions to more sustainable industries, as resources are tied up in less efficient sectors.

CONCLUSION

Regardless of the intentions of the countries involved, and irrespective of who levies the first assessment (penalty), tariffs and other protectionist trade measures come with unintended consequences which outweigh exponentially any perceived benefits. In addition, they hinder cooperation on other global issues.

In short, they do not work. Historically, they have always failed – despite the near-sighted promises and illogic of the politicians.

It is no different this time. Beating up on China won’t solve any problems. As bad as things appear to be economically for both the United States and China, expect them to get worse if either country takes action.

Kelsey Williams is the author of two books: INFLATION, WHAT IT IS, WHAT IT ISN’T, AND WHO’S RESPONSIBLE FOR IT and ALL HAIL THE FED!