Finance
Free trade flaws fueled Trump’s rise in 2016 — and the problems remain, top economist says
Former U.S. President Donald Trump speaks after attending a wake for New York City Police Department (NYPD) officer Jonathan Diller, who was shot and killed while making a routine traffic stop on March 25 in the Far Rockaway section of Queens, in Massapequa Park, New York, U.S., March 28, 2024.
Shannon Stapleton | Reuters
Decades of trade deficits and a strong dollar created too many “losers” in the U.S. economy who turned to Donald Trump’s protectionist policies, according to Richard Koo, chief economist at the Nomura Research Institute — and those conditions remain.
Trump’s “America First” economic policies led his administration to institute a slew of trade tariffs on China, Mexico, the European Union and others, including slapping 25% duties on imported steel and aluminum.
As the Republican nominee for the 2024 presidential election, Trump has proposed a baseline 10% tariff on all U.S. imports and a minimum levy of 60% on imported Chinese products.
These policies have drawn widespread criticism from economists, who argue that tariffs are counterproductive, as they make imported goods more expensive for the average American.
Speaking to CNBC’s Steve Sedgwick on the sidelines of the Ambrosetti Forum on Friday, Koo said protectionism was a “horrible thing,” but that Trump’s approach “does have some economic logic.”
“When we studied economics and free trade, in particular, we were taught…that free trade always creates both winners and losers in the same economy, but the gain that winners get is always greater than the loss of the losers, so the society as a whole always gains. So that’s why the free trade is good,” he noted.
Koo nevertheless argued that this rests on the assumption that trade flows are balanced or in surplus, while the U.S. has been running huge deficits for the last forty years, which have expanded the number of “losers.”
“By 2016, the number of people who consider themselves losers of free trade, were large enough to elect Trump president, and so we have to really go back and say to ourselves: what did we do wrong to allow this many people in United States to view themselves as losers of free trade?” he said.
For Koo, the key problem was the exchange rate, as the strength of the U.S. dollar incentivized foreign imports and hurt U.S. companies exporting around the world.
“We kind of let the exchange rate be decided by so-called market forces, speculators, my clients, Wall Street types, but the foreign exchange rate has to be set in a way that the number of losers does not grow to a point where the free trade itself is lost,” Koo said.
He pointed to a similar pivotal moment in 1985, when President Ronald Reagan faced the same issue of a strong dollar and rising protectionism. At the time, Reagan responded by facilitating the Plaza Accord with France, West Germany, Japan and the United Kingdom to depreciate the U.S. dollar against the respective currencies of these countries through intervention in the foreign exchange market.
“That’s the kind of thing we should have been more conscious of doing. Instead of allowing [the] dollar to go wherever the market takes [it], and then these people who are not as fortunate as we are in the financial markets, end up suffering and end up voting for Mr. Trump,” Koo added.
He argued that economists need to move beyond the idea that the trade deficit is simply down to “too much investment” and “too few savings” in the U.S., as this means deficit can only be reduced by remaining in recession until domestic demand weakens so much that U.S. companies can export more goods, which would not be possible in a democracy.
Koo again pointed to past dealings with Japan, suggesting that if the argument held that overseas companies are just filling in where U.S. companies cannot satisfy domestic demand, then the American companies fighting Japanese firms in the 1970s and 70s should have recorded huge profits due to excess demand.
“But that did not actually happen. It’s the opposite that happened. So many of them went bankrupt, so many losers of free trade were left in the streets, because it was not savings and investment issue, it was the exchange rate issue,” he said.
“The dollar should have been much weaker, and Reagan understood that that’s why he took that action.”
Workers setting up the TuSimple booth for CES 2022 at the Las Vegas Convention Center on Jan. 3, 2022.
Alex Wong | Getty Images News | Getty Images
Embattled Chinese autonomous trucking company TuSimple has rebranded to CreateAI, focusing on video games and animation, the company announced Thursday.
The news comes as GM folded its Cruise robotaxi business this month, and the once-hot sector of self-driving startups has started to weed out stragglers. TuSimple, which straddled the U.S. and China markets, had its own challenges: concerns over vehicle safety, a $189 million settlement of a securities fraud lawsuit and delisting from the Nasdaq in February.
Now, just over two years after CEO Cheng Lu rejoined the company in the role after being pushed out, he expects the business can break even in 2026.
That’s thanks to a video game based on the hit martial arts novels by Jin Yong that’s slated to release an initial version that year, Cheng said. He anticipates “several hundred million” in revenue in 2027 when the full version is launched.
Before the delisting, TuSimple said it lost $500,000 in the first three quarters of 2023, and spent $164.4 million on research and development during that time.
Company co-founder Mo Chen has a “long history” with the Jin Yong family and started work in 2021 to develop an animated feature based on the stories, Cheng said.
The company claims its artificial intelligence capabilities in developing autonomous driving software give it a base from which to develop generative AI. That’s the next-level tech powering OpenAI’s ChatGPT, which generates human-like responses to user prompts.
Along with the CreateAI rebrand, the company debuted its first major AI model called Ruyi, an open-source model for visual work, available via the Hugging Face platform.
“It’s clear our shareholders see the value in this transformation and want to move forward in this direction,” Cheng said. “Our management team and Board of Directors have received overwhelming support from shareholders at the annual meeting.”
He said the company plans to increase headcount to around 500 next year, up from 300.
Cutting production costs by 70%
While still under the name TuSimple, the company in August announced a partnership with Shanghai Three Body Animation to develop the first animated feature film and video game based on the science fiction novel series “The Three-Body Problem.”
The company said at the time that it was launching a new business segment to develop generative AI applications for video games and animation.
CreateAI expects to lower the cost of top-tier, so-called triple A game production by 70% in the next five to six years, Cheng said. He declined to share whether the company was in talks with gaming giant Tencent.
When asked about the impact of U.S. restrictions, Cheng claimed there were no issues and said the company used a mix of China and non-China cloud computing providers.
The U.S. under the Biden administration has ramped up limits on Chinese businesses’ access to advanced semiconductors used to power generative AI.
WASHINGTON – The Federal Reserve on Wednesday lowered its key interest rate by a quarter percentage point, the third consecutive reduction and one that came with a cautionary tone about additional reductions in coming years.
In a move widely anticipated by markets, the Federal Open Market Committee cut its overnight borrowing rate to a target range of 4.25%-4.5%, back to the level where it was in December 2022 when rates were on the move higher.
Though there was little intrigue over the decision itself, the main question had been over what the Fed would signal about its future intentions as inflation holds steadily above target and economic growth is fairly solid, conditions that don’t normally coincide with policy easing.
In delivering the 25 basis point cut, the Fed indicated that it probably would only lower twice more in 2025, according to the closely watched “dot plot” matrix of individual members’ future rate expectations. The two cuts indicated slice in half the committee’s intentions when the plot was last updated in September.
Assuming quarter-point increments, officials indicated two more cuts in 2026 and another in 2027. Over the longer term, the committee sees the “neutral” funds rate at 3%, 0.1 percentage point higher than the September update as the level has drifted gradually higher this year.
“With today’s action, we have lowered our policy rate by a full percentage point from its peak, and our policy stance is now significantly less restrictive,” Chair Jerome Powell said at his post-meeting news conference. “We can therefore be more cautious as we consider further adjustments to our policy rate.”
“Today was a closer call but we decided it was the right call,” he added.
Stocks sold off following the Fed announcement while Treasury yields jumped. Futures pricing pared back the outlook for cuts in 2025 to one quarter point reduction, according to the CME Group’s FedWatch measure.
“We moved pretty quickly to get to here, and I think going forward obviously we’re moving slower,” Powell said.
For the second consecutive meeting, one FOMC member dissented: Cleveland Fed President Beth Hammack wanted the Fed to maintain the previous rate. Governor Michelle Bowman voted no in November, the first time a governor voted against a rate decision since 2005.
The fed funds rate sets what banks charge each other for overnight lending but also influences a variety of consumer debt such as auto loans, credit cards and mortgages.
The post-meeting statement changed little except for a tweak regarding the “extent and timing” of further rate changes, a slight language change from the November meeting.
Change in economic outlook
The cut came even though the committee jacked up its projection for full-year gross domestic product growth to 2.5%, half a percentage point higher than September. However, in the ensuing years the officials expect GDP to slow down to its long-term projection of 1.8%.
Other changes to the Summary of Economic Projections saw the committee lower its expected unemployment rate this year to 4.2% while headline and core inflation according to the Fed’s preferred gauge also were pushed higher to respective estimates of 2.4% and 2.8%, slightly higher than the September estimate and above the Fed’s 2% goal.
The committee’s decision comes with inflation not only holding above the central bank’s target but also while the economy is projected by the Atlanta Fed to grow at a 3.2% rate in the fourth quarter and the unemployment rate has hovered around 4%.
Though those conditions would be most consistent with the Fed hiking or holding rates in place, officials are wary of keeping rates too high and risking an unnecessary slowdown in the economy. Despite macro data to the contrary, a Fed report earlier this month noted that economic growth had only risen “slightly” in recent weeks, with signs of inflation waning and hiring slowing.
Moreover, the Fed will have to deal with the impact of fiscal policy under President-elect Donald Trump, who has indicated plans for tariffs, tax cuts and mass deportations that all could be inflationary and complicate the central bank’s job.
“We need to take our time, not rush and make a very careful assessment, but only when we’ve actually seen what the policies are and how they’ve been implemented,” Powell said of the Trump plans. “We’re just not at that stage.”
Normalizing policy
Powell has indicated that the rate cuts are an effort to recalibrate policy as it does not need to be as restrictive under the current conditions.
“We think the economy is in really good place. We think policy is in a really good place,” he said Wednesday.
With Wednesday’s move, the Fed will have cut benchmark rates by a full percentage point since September, a month during which it took the unusual step of lowering by a half point. The Fed generally likes to move up or down in smaller quarter-point increments as its weighs the impact of its actions.
Despite the aggressive moves lower, markets have taken the opposite tack.
Mortgage rates and Treasury yields both have risen sharply during the period, possibly indicating that markets do not believe the Fed will be able to cut much more. The policy-sensitive 2-year Treasury yield jumped to 4.3%, putting it above the range of the Fed’s rate.
In related action, the Fed adjusted the rate it pays on its overnight repo facility to the bottom end of the fed funds rate. The so-called ON RPP rate is used as a floor for the funds rate, which had been drifting toward the lower end of the target range.
China self-driving truck company TuSimple pivots to genAI for games
M&A roundup: From Minnesota to Memphis
What to know before rebalancing with bitcoin profits, advisor says
New 2023 K-1 instructions stir the CAMT pot for partnerships and corporations
Are American progressives making themselves sad?
U.S. Beneficial Ownership Information Registry Now Accepting Reports
-
Finance1 week agoStocks making the biggest moves after hours: ORCL, AI, MTN, PL
-
Accounting1 week agoReplacing mortgage deduction may boost homeownership
-
Personal Finance1 week agoThe Fed cut interest rates but some credit card APRs haven’t gone down
-
Accounting1 week agoIt’s time to get your WISP in order
-
Accounting1 week agoPCAOB staff report outlines 2025 inspection priorities
-
Accounting1 week agoBig changes expected at SEC under new chair Paul Atkins
-
Accounting1 week agoCanada pressured to respond to Trump’s tax cut regime
-
Leaders1 week agoRishi Sunak, The politic and the Successful Businessman