Skip to main content
All Posts By

Donna Cournoyer

November 2024 Market Recap: November Surprises

Few were nonplussed by the outcome of the Federal Reserve’s meeting on November 7: a 0.25% cut in short-term interest rates.

The Fed has been consistently telegraphing a message that it believes there is room for further interest rate reductions.

The top of the target range for the Federal Funds rate, which influences how other short-term interest rates are set, is now 4.75%, down from a recent peak of 5.5%.

Somewhat surprising was how Americans voted in the November 5 presidential election.

Opinion polls had been forecasting a statistical dead heat, but the margin of victory in the popular vote was wider than expected: 1.6 percentage points, or about 2.5 million votes, in favor of Donald Trump.

More surprising was the gap in electoral votes (312 to 226), and that both houses of Congress will be under Republican control in January.

The biggest surprise for investors in November, though, was the extent to which the US stock market rallied.

The S&P 500 and the Dow Jones Industrial Average indices delivered their biggest monthly percentage gains of 2024 in November.

Stocks have pushed higher on expectations that proposed tax cuts and deregulation will further boost corporate profits.

And stocks have largely ignored the potential risks, such as higher inflation, that may weigh on the financial markets if pledges to impose tariffs on US trading partners come to pass.

For the month of November, US large company stocks gained 6% and US small company stocks did better still, registering an increase of 10.5%.

US investment-grade bonds returned 1.1%. Foreign stocks, where returns are measured in US dollars for US investors, struggled as the US dollar moved higher, and declined by 0.3%.

Year-to-date, US large company stocks have gained nearly 28%. US small company stocks are up by 23%. Foreign stocks have risen by about 6.5%, and US investment-grade bonds have returned 3%.

Here’s a snapshot of stock and bond performance for November:

US Small Co Stocks: CRSP US Small Cap Index; US Large Co Stocks = S&P 500 Index; US Bonds = Bloomberg US Aggregate Bond Index; Foreign Stocks = MSCI EAFE Index

-RK

Intelligent Investing

The Intelligent Investor, by Benjamin Graham, has been called “by far the best book about investing ever written” by investment superstar Warren Buffett.

Even so, you will be excused if you log onto Amazon, or visit your local bookstore, and choose to make another reading selection.

Graham’s book was first published in 1949 and contains references to companies and situations that may be unfamiliar to the 21st century reader.

But the third addition of the text, released last week, on its 75th anniversary, might be attractive to financially adventurous readers, in part as an interesting artifact, but also for contemporary commentary provided by the Wall Street Journal columnist Jason Zweig.

Graham was born in London in 1894 and entered Columbia University at age 16. Before the end of his senior year, Graham was offered faculty positions at Columbia in three different departments: English, Philosophy, and Mathematics.

Graham went on to start a successful investment company, in addition to holding university faculty positions.

His most famous student, while teaching at Columbia Business School, was none other than Warren Buffett. In addition, Graham was one of the original supporters of an investment certification program that eventually became the Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA) designation – of which I am a proud holder.

HarperCollins Publishers turned to Jason Zweig in June 2003 to revise Graham’s initial text. The second edition was published in 2005, and Zweig took on the new assignment of writing annotations for each chapter in the 3rd edition.

Among many important concepts, Graham introduced the idea of margin of safety: the belief that an investor should not focus exclusively on how much money can be made but on how much money can be lost, because even the best investors are likely to be wrong roughly 45 percent of the time.

For individual investors, the value in Graham’s “definitive book on value investing” may be more about what not to do, than what to do, with your money.

-RK

CTA Deadline Reminder

Given the importance of the new federal law to business owners, we’re re-publishing this article, which appeared in the October newsletter.

The Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) is a new federal law that aims to curtail money laundering and other illegal activities by making it clear who the individuals behind a particular business entity are.

The CTA was enacted in early 2021 and requires “reporting companies” to file information by January 1, 2025.

If you are a small business owner or own a corporate entity, such as an LLC, you likely will be required to report your company’s beneficial ownership information (BOI) to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) bureau, which is a division of the US Department of the Treasury.

We encourage all our clients who think that they might be subject to the CTA to contact their CPA or attorney to determine if they are subject to CTA reporting and to assist in handling the filing.

Below are links to resources so that you can learn more about the CTA if you think you might be required to file.

Key CTA Resources:

Moore Financial Advisors cannot give specific CTA advice or assist with actual filing.

-RK

How Financial Aid Applications for College Consider Parent Assets

Our colleague and college specialist Donna Cournoyer contributed the following update for college planning

The topic of the FAFSA (Free Application for Federal Student Aid) has made frequent appearances in our client letters, especially since the major changes from the FAFSA Simplification Act were rolled out last year in the 2024-2025 application.

Many would say the FAFSA rollout could not have gone worse.

Late opening, lack of accessibility, and late communication of data to schools made for a very unpleasant year for financial aid applicants, as well as financial aid administrators.

There is hope for some improvement this year, although the opening is again delayed with the Department of Education aiming for a December 1 launch for the 2025-2026 form, instead of the usual October 1.

For first-time applicants, this can add additional stress to the already onerous process of preparing and applying to college and applying for financial aid.

Below is a breakdown of the information needed on the financial aid forms, with a focus on asset reporting requirements.

The Application Forms

FAFSA: The Federal application used to determine eligibility for any Federal funds, including Pell Grants, Federal Work Study and Federal Student Loans.

  • Required by every school for financial aid applicants
  • More limited questions on assets for parents

CSS Profile: The application provided by the College Scholarship Service, which schools can require for their applicants with additional questions for eligibility review.

  • Required for approximately 250 schools, mostly private, as a secondary form in addition to the FAFSA for determining eligibility for school grants and funds
  • More questions on parent assets which can lower a student’s eligibility for college specific need-based funds

Positive changes to the simplified FAFSA include fewer questions and some changes for 529 college savings account reporting.

  • Applicants’ sibling 529 accountslonger need to be reported
  • Distributions from any 529 accountfor educational expenses no longer need to be reported as untaxed income

Parents often have a lot of uncertainty about how assets are reported and weighed on the FAFSA and CSS Profile applications. And rightly so, as there are significant inconsistencies on how the Federal government looks at parental assets compared with how colleges view those assets.

Colleges have their own funds and awarding policies and can award their funds as they wish to their applicants.

Asset Comparison and Requirements for the FAFSA and CSS Profile

Parent Assets are counted at 5.64%, and Student Assets are counted at 20% (and in some cases up to 25%) on the CSS Profile.

Home Equity

  • FAFSA – Not required
  • CSS Profile – Required and considered in eligibility calculation

Equity in Other Investment Real Estate

  • Required on both FAFSA and CSS Profile and considered in eligibility calculation

Family Businesses

  • Required for both FAFSA and CSS Profile and considered in eligibility calculation

Cash Values of Life Insurance Policies and Qualified Annuities

  • Not required on FAFSA
  • CSS Profile – Non-Qualified Annuities are countedas assets

529 College Savings Accounts

  • Parent or Student Accounts required for both FAFSA and CSS Profile
  • Accounts in other names, such as grandparents or relatives are NOT required on the FAFSA, the CSS Profile may ask for this information
  • Withdrawals used to pay for college are not included on the forms

Parent Retirement Accounts

  • Parents’ personal retirement accounts, such as 401(k), IRA, Roth IRA, pensions, Keough Plans, are NOT required on the FAFSA, but the CSS Profile will ask for these, and could consider them

Other Parent Investments

  • Other investments which are non-retirement accounts, such as mutual funds, brokerage accounts and any other non-retirement accounts are required and considered on the FAFSA and CSS Profile

UGMA/UTMA Account

  • Required on the FAFSA and CSS Profile, and are in the Student’s Asset section, if the student is the custodian

Interest and Capital Gains

  • Will be considered, as they will show in income on your Federal Tax Return

Planning Ahead

If you are a few years or more away from your student applying to college, work with your accountant and financial advisor if you have expected one-time fluctuations in your income, such as the sale of a business.

Your financial advisor and accountant may also have suggestions on how to lower your adjusted gross income (within adherence to any tax laws) in the years leading up to the financial aid applications, which may help increase your eligibility for financial aid.

Final Thoughts

My general advice for completing these forms, especially the CSS Profile:

  • Report Accurately
  • Don’t Overestimate
  • Don’t Overshare

Parents may have conflicted feelings and concerns on sharing their personal information.

Getting qualified guidance for planning for any upcoming income changes in the years prior to college applications, along with guidance on how to answer FAFSA and CSS questions, will go a long way in contributing to your confidence in receiving accurate awards and talking to school counselors about your personal financial situation.

One Helluva Horse Race

Horse racing by actual horses in America may be on its last legs. Aside from big events like the Kentucky Derby, attendance at racetracks is abysmal.

Crowds at Belmont in New York, for example, are down by nearly 90% from four decades ago, according to the End Horse Racing Coalition; tracks are closing; and races are in fewer and farther in between.

However, the horse race for US president is in full stride with record participation likely at the polls.

Terms like neck and neck and down to the wire (relating to equine contests) come to mind when considering the election on November 5th.

Below are three different methods for forecasting the outcome of the 2024 Presidential campaign: traditional polling; the betting markets; and campaign fundraising.

The Economist forecast, constructed from traditional polling data, which had been giving the leg up to Harris after she entered the race in July, reset to even on October 30, and as of November 3 had moved slightly in favor of Trump (51% to 49%), but essentially shows a statistical dead heat.

Source: The Economist

The Economist forecast lines up with the last New York Times / Sienna College poll conducted from October 20 – 23, which asked the question: If the 2024 presidential election were held today, who would you vote for? The results were: 48% for Trump, 48% for Harris.

However, alternative indicators point strongly in different directions.

The betting markets have been consistently forecasting a Trump win. The website RealClear Polling (RCP) aggregates odds data from betting sites like BetOnline, Betfair, and Bwin, and the November 3 “average” from RCP put the odds of Trump winning at 53.9% versus 44.9% for Harris.

Betting sites are an interesting way to measure sentiment, because their signals are derived from people willing to put their money where their mouths are. Polymarket claims a total of $1.8 billion has been wagered on the 2024 US Presidential election on its platform.

But it is also possible that some big fish are skewing outcomes. In a recent MarketWatch article by Brett Arends (who has covered sports and political betting for decades) the columnist warns: “the betting markets have their own flaws as a forecasting tool and need to be taken with a grain of salt.”

The betting markets also have been quite volatile. As recently as mid last week, Polymarket gave Trump a 67% chance of winning. That’s now down to 52%.

Another money-where-your-mouth-is measure is fundraising, and Harris leads by a sizable margin in campaign fundraising.

The Harris campaign fundraising efforts have outpaced Trump’s efforts by 3:1, according to Federal Election Commission Filings, as reported by Forbes on Oct 25.

And Harris’s campaign set a political fundraising record in the third quarter, bringing in $1 billion in the three-month period that ended September 30.

The majority of both campaign committees’ spending has been on advertising.

Given her cash advantage, Harris has been able to spend more of her time campaigning during the weeks prior to the election in swing states, while Trump has had to allocate time raising money in places where his popularity is high.

We will need to wait until election day (or, if not, hopefully sometime soon thereafter) to see how the money advantage plays out in the polls.

I’ll share a closing thought on the elections related to investing from the folks at independent research firm DataTrek:

“We see the US presidential election as a toss-up and we’re entirely OK with remaining long (owners of) US large company stocks regardless of the outcome. Our mental model is that America is a business as much as it is a country…

No matter which party occupies the White House or controls the chambers of Congress, companies always adapt and continue to innovate and grow.”

In my view, the DataTrek opinion (above) is sound long-term financial thinking and is strong “case for” sticking to a portfolio that supports your long-term financial goals.

-RK

October 2024 Market Recap: Financial Markets Flop

With the approach of the US Presidential election, some investors had been fearing a “Shocktober” for financial markets, however, October proved to be more like “Floptober”.

Stock markets were generally in the black for the month, but on Halloween equity indices flopped to red. For the month as a whole US large company stocks declined by 0.9% and small company stocks fell by 0.7%.

Quarterly earnings reports released by a few large US technology companies last week underwhelmed Wall Street analysts. Concerns about the possibility of diminished tech profits in the future spooked stocks and seemed to be one of the factors behind the fall in stock prices.

Foreign stocks were negatively impacted by a strengthening US dollar and dropped by 5.3% in October.

Despite recent weakness, though, stocks have performed very well so far this year. With two months to go in 2024, US large company stocks have returned nearly 21%, small company stocks have risen 11.5%, and foreign stocks are up by 7%.

The past month delivered more tricks than treats for bond investors, too. Intermediate- and long-term interest rates rose by about a half percentage point which translated to negative performance for bond fund investors.

The bond market situation can be confusing for some investors, especially when longer-term interest rates go up at a time when the Federal Reserve has begun to reduce its target for short-term interest rates.

Concerns about persistently wide Federal budget deficits and increasing US government debt, and the possibility of both conditions worsening under either future Republican or Democrat administrations, were factors behind rising intermediate and long-term interest rates, and poor bond performance, in October.

The performance picture is murkier for bonds going forward. Satisfactory returns from short-term bonds seem likely, because interest rate fluctuations have a lesser impact on bonds maturing on the sooner side (and bond funds which hold these securities).

However, for bonds maturing farther out in time (and bond funds that hold these securities), rising interest rates are a drag on near-term performance.

The benchmark intermediate-term US bond index fell by 2.5% in October. Year-to-date, intermediate-term bonds have registered a positive return of 1.5%.

For short-term bonds, Morningstar’s bond benchmark that tracks performance for US bonds with less than a year to maturity had a positive 0.25% return in October, and is up by nearly 5% year-to-date.

Despite softer financial markets in October, new data related to the US economy remained upbeat.

Gross Domestic Product (GDP), which quantifies the total value of all goods and services produced within a country’s borders, and therefore acts as a kind of quarterly economic “check-up”, continues to show that the US economy is in good health.

The Commerce Department reported last week that GDP rose by a 2.8% annual rate in three months ending September 30, after adjusting for inflation. That came close to the 3% growth rate in the second quarter.

While output in some areas, such as the housing market, has been lackluster, overall the US economy remains buoyant, supported by wages that continue to rise and consumers whom are willing to spend.

Here’s a snapshot of stock and bond performance for October:

US Stocks = S&P 500 Index; US Bonds = Bloomberg US Aggregate Bond Index; Foreign Stocks = MSCI EAFE Index

-RK

The Landscape Looks a Lot Different Today (Even Compared to a Few Years Ago)

Our colleague and college specialist Donna Cournoyer contributed the following update for college planning, as a follow-up to her April article, Shifting the “Dream School” Mindset

There are many factors that shape the philosophies, policies, and practices of colleges throughout the US. However, the overarching key factor is this: colleges are businesses that need revenue to exist.

Most of this revenue comes in the form of tuition and housing fees that families pay each year. And of course, fundraising and building upon existing endowments are significant contributors, too.

Endowments are permanent funds, used as a self-sustaining funding source for the school’s mission, including funding for scholarships and grants for students.

However, endowments are invested funds and only a small portion is consumed each year. In many cases most universities spend only the interest that accrues annually from the investments.

The need for colleges and universities to enroll a certain number of students each year, in order to stay within their operating budgets, drives institutional goals and determines how the schools market to students they want to attract.

The Enrollment Cliff

Another factor driving the enrollment policies of universities is the significant decline in the number of college-bound students expected in the years ahead.

This drop in predicted enrollment is a function of a declining birth rate; fewer high school graduates choosing to go to college (related to price and value perception, among other reasons); and predicted lower high school graduation rates.

This puts a lot of pressure on colleges and universities to meet their enrollment goals each year, in an environment where it’s getting harder and harder to do.

How Colleges Entice Students

Marketing is a large expense at many colleges and universities. Schools want to entice students by creating beautiful grounds, building new dorms, providing the latest technology in classrooms, and guiding families on tours where they aim to make an emotional connection with the student.

Schools market to all students and families on the tours – even the ones who cannot afford to attend.

Think about this: as has been a common practice for decades, many families create a list of schools based on perceived elite status, reputation, location, aesthetics, amenities, and, of course, academic programs. Sometimes, price is considered before visiting. But often it isn’t.

Then families visit their chosen schools, where tour guides aim to make that highly charged emotional connection with the student (and the student’s family). They are often very successful. When you come down to it, this is the process of the sale, and tour guides are selling the school to the student.

What happens next?

The student makes a snap decision to attend one of the visited schools based on feeling and emotion (I have seen this many times in my experience working at a university) and ultimately the family agrees.

Cost might not even have factored into the decision, and this can have far-reaching financial implications for the student and parents.

Consider this: the four-year sticker price for many schools now totals nearly $400,000which is very close to the current median price for existing-home sales in the US, according to the National Association of Realtors.

In a Bloomberg article from September 26, columnist Charlie Wells said something that resonates with me as a college planner and financial advisor:

Financial advisers say having a budget and setting expectations is crucial to avoiding disappointment — or mountains of debt — later. (Just think: Would you let your 16-year-old decide which house you were going to buy after one walk-through? School choice is not so different.)”

Looking at a family’s plan to pay for college is intertwined with many factors including the ways in which colleges aim to attract and solidify commitments from students to attend their school.

When planning your strategy for choosing and paying for college, remember these key points:

  • Rankings: Some of the factors that have been touted for years about U.S. News and World rankings, for example, are starting to take a back seat as many people no longer believe they are relevant to deciding on a college.
  • Elite Status: Studies have shown that WHERE a student goes to college is not a significant factor in their success.
  • Apply to Competing Schools: This may give you a chance to leverage offers from one school to gain additional funds from another, as many schools will “match offers” to get a student to commit.
  • Set Financial Expectations: Have a Financial Plan and start early. Discuss together as a family what are the realistic and agreed upon financial strategies: How much are parent(s) willing and able to contribute? Will anyone need to borrow? What is the student’s responsibility? Do this BEFORE visiting and applying to schools.
  • Merit Scholarships and Financial Aid: Research the financial health of the school, along with their policy and average amounts of aid and merit scholarships. This is not always transparent so call the Admissions staff to ask for average, if necessary.
  • Appeals: While not everyone’s favorite process, often students may benefit from appealing their offer. Remember, schools need to make their enrollment, so offering additional incentives is a way in which they aim to do so.

One of my goals as a college financial planner is to help shift how parents perceive “what is the best school for my student”.

I’ve observed that families with well-planned strategies that consider the current landscape of college admissions are more likely to conclude their college search confidently, and are more successful in ensuring that, in the end, their college dollars are well-spent.

-DC

Medicare Brief: What to Know Prior to Open Enrollment

Our colleague and MFA founder Susan Moore contributed the following update on Medicare.

Medicare open enrollment period starts October 15 and continues through December 7.

During the open enrollment period, Medicare enrollees can make certain changes in their coverage. Here are some of the changes you might consider during this enrollment period:

  • If you’re enrolled in original (traditional) Medicare, change your Part D drug plan
  • If you’re enrolled in Medicare Advantage, switch to a different Advantage plan
  • Switch from original Medicare to Medicare Advantage
  • Switch from Medicare Advantage to original Medicare – but note below that limitations apply in some states

This year’s enrollment period may be one of the more significant in Medicare’s 59-year history due to some of the changes that are coming. Here is what we know about Medicare changes and costs for 2025.

Medicare Part D

Most Advantage plans include drug coverage at no extra cost, but many people on original Medicare buy a stand-alone Part D plan for drug coverage. While the average projected monthly Part D premium will decrease to $46.50 from $53.95 in 2024, some plans have announced significant increases in premiums.

For this reason, it’s especially important this year to shop for your Plan D coverage. You may be able to lower your annual drug costs by switching to a different Plan D.

To compare plans, go to the Medicare.gov site and set up your account. In the “What do you want to do?” section, select “Open all options”, then “Find health & drug plans.”

One of the bigger developments for 2025 is a new, $2,000 cap on out-of-pocket drug costs. It applies to drug coverage through both stand-alone Part D and Advantage plans.

But it only applies to covered drugs, so it’s really important to make sure your plan covers the specific medications you take. Approximately 1.5 million Medicare beneficiaries have drug costs that exceed that amount, so this change will be a big help to them.

Switching to a Different Medicare Advantage Plan

Medicare Advantage plans are also seeing big changes. Insurers are facing increasing cost pressures, and many will push higher expenses onto members.

Enrollees may see changes in out of pocket costs. Although the average monthly premium for all Advantage plans is likely to drop slightly, it’s important to pay attention to changes in copays, deductibles, and other benefits (e.g., dental, vision, health clubs, etc.)

Switching from Medicare Advantage to Original Medicare

Some Advantage plans may even exit the market next year. If your Medicare Advantage plan is being eliminated, you must actively enroll in a new plan to stay in the Advantage program.

If you don’t make a choice, you will automatically be placed in traditional Medicare for 2025 and have the chance to buy a Medigap supplement plan without going through an underwriting process.

Normally in most states (except during a narrow period when you first enroll in Medicare,) when someone switches from Advantage to original Medicare, they must pass underwriting to buy a Medigap supplement plan. (MA, CT, ME and NY do not allow Medigap insurers to require underwriting for those who switch.)

If you switch from Medicare Advantage to original Medicare because your insurer exited the market, you will not have to undergo underwriting in order to obtain a Medigap plan.

Some people switch from Medicare Advantage to original Medicare because they don’t like the restricted network of an Advantage plan, or because frequent copays for services have become expensive.

If you make this change and you want drug coverage, be sure to sign up for a Medicare stand-alone prescription drug plan (Plan D), unless you have creditable drug coverage from another source. If you do not, and you decide to sign up for Part D coverage later, you may face a penalty for late enrollment.

And if you want a Medicare Supplement Plan (or Medigap Plan, which covers most out of pocket costs) you’ll need to sign up for that then, too.

In most states (except MA, CT, ME, and NY) Medigap insurers are not required to sell you a policy after your first year on Medicare if you don’t meet the medical underwriting requirements. In that situation, they can deny coverage or charge higher premiums.

Medicare Part B

Everyone who has Medicare coverage (original Medicare or Medicare Advantage) gets Medicare Part A free, but pays for Medicare Part B.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) hasn’t said yet how much the base cost of Part B will be in 2024, but the annual Medicare Trustees report in March forecast the monthly price to rise from $174.70 to $185.00, a 6% increase, in 2025.

Income-Related Monthly Adjustment Amount (IRMAA)

Some people pay more in IRMAA charges for Medicare Part B and Part D based on income.

Your tax return for 2023 will be used to determine whether you will be subject to an IRMAA charge for 2025. If you retired in or after 2023, or had another life-changing event (e.g., marriage, divorce, death of spouse, etc.) you can file form SSA-44 to request that your IRMAA amount be reduced or eliminated.

IRMAA charges have not been released yet for 2025 but are expected to be about 6% higher than in 2023.

If you have questions or would like help evaluating your Medicare options, please let us know.

-SM

Presidential Polls & Policy Update

We are now one month away from the next Presidential election, and the race continues to look like it will be very close.

What the Polls Say

The Economist forecasting model, which we’ve been following, has shown no change during the past month. The projection as of October 4 shows Harris leading by 274 electoral votes to 264, with 270 electoral votes required to win.

Source: The Economist

The Economist also keeps a running average of national head-to-head polls, which gives a sense of how the race is progressing. In early September, Harris was ahead 49% to 47%. This margin has expanded slightly in favor of the Democrat, and as of early October was 50% to 46%.

Interestingly, during his previous two presidential campaigns, Trump never led in general-election polling averages. In 2016, he trailed Clinton by four percentage points on election day. In 2020, Trump’s deficit was eight percentage points.

The seven swing states, where the race likely will be decided, remain highly competitive according to the latest forecast from The Economist.

Currently, Democrats seem to have a slight edge in Michigan, Nevada and Wisconsin. Republicans have the lead in North Carolina, Georgia, and Arizona. And Pennsylvania appears to be a virtual dead heat.

Policy Points

While it’s unclear who will be sitting in the Oval Office in mid-January 2025, we can take a closer look at the two parties’ tax and spend proposals to get a better understanding of candidate and party priorities, and the future impact on Federal finances.

The bottom line is that both candidates’ proposals are out of balance (in terms of dollars and cents) and will continue the trend of running large deficits and push the US further into debt.

From what has been revealed so far, the impact on the deficit and debt looks to be less bad under Harris.

The two charts below, courtesy of Michael Cembalest of JP Morgan Asset Management, show the fiscal impact of the tax and spend policies of each candidate.

Harris’ fiscal policies take a standard redistributionist approach, where there are an additional $1.3 trillion of taxes on the wealthy and $2.8 trillion of taxes on corporations over a 10-year period.

This revenue would be used to extend tax cuts for people earning less than $400,000 in income and for a variety of entitlements for families and home buyers.

The Harris tax and spend plans will have about a $1.5 trillion net negative impact on the deficit, compared to the baseline forecast of the Congressional Budget Office.

Source: JP Morgan Asset Management

The fiscal impact under Trump would likely be two to three times worse than under Harris and translate to a $4 trillion net negative impact on the deficit, compared to the baseline forecast of the Congressional Budget Office.

Trump is proposing large tax cuts, including extending all the individual and business tax cuts initiated in 2017 that are set to expire in 2026; eliminating taxation on Social Security benefits; and repealing the cap on the State and Local Tax (SALT) deduction.

Also, further cuts to the corporate income tax rate have been floated. The cuts are to be partially offset by revenue raised from tariffs and a repeal of clean energy subsidies.

Source: JP Morgan Asset Management

Jason Furman, Harvard professor and former chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisors, recently noted that “the first modern presidential race between two candidates with undergraduate degrees in economics hasn’t thrilled economists”.

Both candidates’ plans pose longer-term risks to the US economy by further expanding the Federal deficit, but regarding this measure of risk, the scales are currently tipped toward Trump.

Apart from a widening budget deficit, a major risk under the Harris proposal is that higher corporate tax rates could push businesses to relocate headquarters out of the US to save on taxes.

This activity, known as “corporate inversion”, has slowed meaningfully since the Federal corporate tax rate dropped to 21% from 35% in 2017.

A major risk under the Trump proposal is the re-ignition of inflation from higher prices that are likely to result from tariffs on imports and potential retaliation from other countries.

It is worth noting that estimates of the fiscal impact of the Democrat and Republican policy proposals vary widely.

For example, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a nonpartisan group that favors lower deficits, estimates an even larger negative fiscal impact from both red and blue party policy proposals than what the JP Morgan analysis shows.

A Republican sweep or a Democratic sweep of the executive and legislative branches would probably result in more caution in the markets, as investors wait to see the scope and speed of enactment of new policies.

But the most likely outcome in the coming election is some kind of split government.

If this were to happen, neither candidate’s proposals likely would be passed into law as currently articulated. And divided government tends to have fewer negative implications for investors.

-RK

The “Shake It Off” Economy

Taylor Swift’s mega hit Shake It Off is a decade old this year. Over the course of ten years, the songwriter-musician-performer has gone from sensation to superstar. Her net worth, too, has gone from sensational to off the charts.

In addition to the financial benefits that have accrued to her personally, the demand created by The Eras Tour (149 concerts over 20 months spanning 5 continents) has had a meaningful economic impact. Swiftonomics refers to Taylor’s economic influence.

For example (according to Investopedia) ahead of her six concerts in Los Angeles, the California Center for Jobs & the Economy estimated the tour would result in a $320 million increase to the LA County GDP.

The Center also expected The Eras Tour would increase area employment by 3,300 and local earnings by $160 million.

Despite (or more likely because of) her success, there are haters. Imagine!

Like Taylor Swift, the US economy has been creating jobs and facilitating profits for companies since the last downturn in 2020.

The most recent jobs report, released by the Labor Department on October 4, showed US employers added more than a quarter million jobs in September, “blowing past expectations” according to the Wall Street Journal.

Nonetheless, the US economy still has its “haters”, too.

Bill Dudley, a well-respected economist and former head of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, had been one of the haters, but has recently shaken off his negative outlook.

Dudley wrote an editorial published by Bloomberg on October 3, where he stated: “I’ve been too pessimistic about the risks of a so-called hard landing (recession) for the US economy” and “a recession remains very much in doubt.”

Dudley went on to highlight the following positives:

  • The economy retains considerable forward momentum: “Growth in the second quarter was revised up to a 3.0% annualized rate, and the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta’s GDPNow estimate for the third quarter is currently 2.5%”
  • The labor market is holding together quite well: “Although the unemployment rate has risen above 4% from a low of 3.4% in 2023, the increase has mainly been driven by rapid growth in the labor force rather than permanent job layoffs”
  • Financial conditions have improved: “Although monetary policy remains tight by almost anyone’s standard (interest rates are high), financial conditions have eased massively over the past year (stock prices have soared and bond yields have declined)”

Dudley concludes with the following: “What does this mean for financial asset prices? As I see it, a soft-landing scenario (lower growth but no recession) implies a buoyant stock market.”

I concur with Dudley: a strong US jobs market and declining interest rates are supporting economic expansion and higher stock prices.

Absent a nationwide catastrophe, or an about-face on key government policies, it’s reasonable to expect more of the same in the coming months: more economic growth, more US profit growth, and satisfactory returns from the financial markets.

For those concerned about the potential impact of the presidential election on the economy and financial markets, it may be helpful to consider the following chart that shows the direction of the stock market during US presidential administrations from Roosevelt to Biden, courtesy of Clearnomics.

Source: Clearnomics

The stock market, like the US economy, has experienced long-term growth under both major political parties, and has the propensity to “shake it off” when it comes to dealing with adverse conditions.

It is not the case that the market or economy turns down when a particular political party is in office This is because the underlying drivers of market performance – including economic cycles and company earnings – are far more important than who occupies the White House.

-RK