| 
		Fed remains a target as economy falls short of Trump's ambitious goals
		 Send a link to a friend 
		
		 [August 12, 2019]  By 
		Howard Schneider and Ginger Gibson 
 WASHINGTON (Reuters) - It has become a 
		jarring and frequent contradiction. President Donald Trump blames the 
		Federal Reserve for putting the U.S. economy at risk while data shows an 
		economy in "reasonably good" shape, as the head of the central bank 
		recently said.
 
 But behind that confusing dance between a norm-breaking Republican 
		president and a stick-to-its-knitting Fed lies a dilemma for Trump.
 
 "Reasonably good" is not what Trump promised to deliver during his 2016 
		campaign, and at this point he heads into a reelection year short of the 
		key economic goals he set and worried a recession could undermine his 
		bid for a second term.
 
 Growth is ebbing and well below the 3% annual rate he said his 
		administration would hit; the trade deficit has widened and there is no 
		sign of the "easy" victory he said would come in a trade war with China; 
		far from the surge in investment he promised would follow a corporate 
		tax cut, business capital spending of late has been a drag on growth 
		overall.
 
		
		 
		
 Each month there are more jobs. But that has been true for nearly nine 
		years, and as on many fronts the best days of "Trumponomics" may be in 
		the past as the economy's performance reverts to an Obama-era trend of 
		around 2% annual growth.
 
 "He is so focused on the Fed because in terms of avoiding a recession 
		that is truly in his eyes his biggest obstacle," to reelection, said a 
		source in regular communication with the White House, explaining that 
		Trump wants to take no chances, even if the risk of a downturn is low.
 
 It's in that context that Trump scorns a central bank whose longer-term 
		approach to policy has clashed with his more immediate interests - the 
		same tension apparent in other battles between the president and 
		government agencies with their own institutional powers or culture.
 
 In the Fed's case, while its chairman and Washington-based governors are 
		appointed by the president, its responsibility is to a "mandate" 
		established by Congress.
 
 The Fed's goals of "maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate 
		long-term interest rates" are distinct from, and sometimes in conflict 
		with, the economic or political priorities of the party in power, 
		whether it's maximizing annual growth, gaining leverage in a trade 
		negotiation or, gaining economic momentum in an election year with 
		interest rates lower than the data would warrant.
 
 Other things equal, lower interest rates can boost economic activity by 
		encouraging households and businesses to borrow, spend and invest, but 
		can also lead to financial excesses as happened in the early 2000s in 
		the U.S. mortgage market, and - less of a concern today - inflation.
 
 Managing those mandated goals, Fed officials note, can require 
		tradeoffs, involves looking further ahead than can be forecast with 
		certainty, and always includes a judgment about whether the lower 
		unemployment and other benefits that might come with easier monetary 
		policy are worth the risks involved.
 
 Trump's demands that the Fed stimulate the economy, by contrast, have 
		covered a gamut of immediate needs, and moved well beyond convention to 
		suggest, for example, that the Fed restart crisis-era asset purchases at 
		a time of historically low unemployment.
 
 One day it's to support a wobbly stock market. The next to boost growth, 
		and then later to gain an upper hand in trade talks through a cheaper 
		dollar, as Trump demanded twice last week when he said the U.S. central 
		bank should not allow the rate cuts and currency moves of other nations 
		to offset the impact of tariffs he has imposed.
 
		 
		When rates remained low through President Barack Obama's reelection 
		campaign and second term, Trump said the Fed had "become very 
		political." Advisers familiar with his thinking say he now expects the 
		same treatment, even if the economy is in a different place.
 
 (Graphic: Trump vs. the Fed - https://tmsnrt.rs/2Yy3yAK)
 
 
		
            [to top of second column] | 
            
			 
            
			The Federal Reserve Board building on Constitution Avenue is 
			pictured in Washington, U.S., March 27, 2019. REUTERS/Brendan 
			McDermid/File Photo 
            
			 
RATE CUT 'INSURANCE'
 It's debatable whether the Fed-bashing has had much influence.
 
 The source close to the administration said Trump believes his "relentless" 
public criticism of Fed Chairman Jerome Powell "has gotten him to play ball." 
The central bank cut rates by a quarter of a percentage point at its July 30-31 
policy meeting.
 
Fed officials see it differently.
 Powell, the private equity lawyer handpicked by Trump to head the Fed only to be 
blasted later by the president as an incompetent "nobody," has emphasized that 
he was "not going to make mistakes of character or integrity" - in other words, 
that he would not take Trump's election prospects into consideration in setting 
policy.
 
 The Fed has in fact steadily shifted gears since late last year but for a 
variety of reasons, including a sense that the fallout from trade wars may be 
greater than expected, and that its own estimate of the appropriate interest 
rate for the current state of the U.S. economy was too high.
 
 Perhaps above all was evidence that the faster growth produced by the $1.5 
trillion tax cut package passed in late 2017 and higher federal government 
spending in 2018 was fading quicker than expected.
 
 Early last year "we were looking for growth above trend and continued 
improvement in the unemployment rate," Chicago Fed President Charles Evans said 
last week. By later in the year "we began to wonder if things were playing out 
in a softer fashion ... The tax bill’s influence on business fixed investment 
was harder to see, it was sort of waning ... Trade negotiations were taking 
place with a brinkmanship style and that led to more uncertainty."
 
 
 In response, the Fed first shelved its plans to steadily raise rates this year. 
That decision came on the heels of four rate increases in 2018.
 
 At the most recent policy meeting, the Fed's rate-setting committee decided to 
go even further by cutting the central bank's benchmark overnight lending rate.
 
 The move was, arguably, a response to Trump - but to his actions, not his direct 
demands. In May, the president unnerved investors by threatening to impose 
tariffs on Mexico unless it curbed the flow of migrants heading north into the 
United States.
 
 Although a deal was reached to avert the tariffs, the linkage of trade policy to 
a largely non-economic goal resonated deeply among Fed officials, who became 
convinced they needed some rate cut "insurance" to protect the U.S. economic 
expansion from an increasingly uncertain global environment.
 
 But if the rate cut raised questions about whether the central bank was now 
tethered to Trump's tweets - destined to consider rate cuts when any threatened 
tariffs sent markets into a tailspin - Fed policymakers last week tried to put 
some distance between themselves and the Oval Office.
 
 From here on, said St. Louis Fed President James Bullard, among the stronger 
advocates for lower rates, "tit-for-tat" trade actions wouldn't warrant Fed 
action.
 
 Although traders are expecting the Fed to cut rates two more times this year, 
and some bond pricing may reflect a rising risk of a recession, Fed officials 
feel a downturn is unlikely and that they have matters in hand.
 
 "It certainly became clear to me with the Mexico situation ... that trade policy 
uncertainty is going to be high. It is going to be high into the foreseeable 
future," Bullard said. "We've adjusted for the ratcheting up ... Let's wait and 
see how the economy responds to that."
 
 (Reporting by Howard Schneider and Ginger Gibson; Editing by Paul Simao)
 
				 
			[© 2019 Thomson Reuters. All rights 
				reserved.] Copyright 2019 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, 
			broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.  
			Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |