There\u2019s broad consensus of the quietly accepting kind that Wall Street and pretty much anyone within a 6,371km radius will experience increased volatility in the run-up to the US election set for the 5th of November.<\/p>\n
Markets will experience increased volatility. Treasury yields will fluctuate. The US Dollar could become unhinged. Marriages will crumble, plate tectonics will agitate\u2026<\/p>\n
But the pressure will start cooking, says Dr Shane Oliver, head of Investment Strategy and chief economist, AMP, should former president and Republican nominee Donald Trump remain ahead of incumbent US President Joe Biden in the polls.<\/p>\n
That\u2019ll give investors time to have a think about the risks and reactions of a return to those Trumpian themes.<\/p>\n
The fallout of a renewed US-led trade war, the uncertainty of key US relationships, defence spending, taxes, budgets, social cohesion\u2026<\/p>\n
\u201cOr even the hit to both US jobs and the independence of the US Federal Reserve,\u201d Dr Oliver told Stockhead.<\/em><\/p>\n Historically, Shane says, shares and their markets have performed better under Democrat than Republican presidents with the best outcome typically being a Democrat president and Republican House or Senate control.<\/p>\n And what about us? What will happen to Aussie?\u00a0 How will Australia \u2013 so far from the worries of Washington \u2013 fare under another Trump presidency?<\/p>\n Well. Rather than try to answer them ourselves, we just fed the data, these questions and other various unknowns around the US presidential election into the Authentic Intelligence bot that is Dr Shane Oliver.<\/p>\n These are his instantly uploaded responses: \u201cGreetings Stockheads!\u201d\u00a0\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n \u201cFirstly, a few words from your Shane-bot on some bemusing Authentic Artificial Intelligence\u2026<\/p>\n \u201cOver the years I have been alerted to various fake Shane Oliver accounts on Twitter\/X (which we have reported and had removed \u2013 although I suspect there may still be more).<\/p>\n \u201cMore recently I have heard of various scams in my name offering trading schemes with one involving a WhatsApp account. And this week a colleague discovered numerous fake Shane Oliver accounts on Facebook and a fake website (shane-oliver.com) with lots of my material and interviews with the site directing people to a WhatsApp account (presumably phishing). Again we have reported these but they are harder to take down.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s part of the world we live in and imitation may be the sincerest form of flattery but I don\u2019t post to a Facebook account having my name (so any account doing that is a fake), I don\u2019t run my own website and I do not solicit funds or spruik trading schemes**.\u201d<\/p>\n ED:**Fake Shane-bots don\u2019t abruptly segue into the magic of a superbly crafted synth-pop track.<\/em><\/p>\n \u201cIn the late 1980s\/early 1990s the music production team of Stock Aiken Waterman were derided for churning out hit after hit of electro pop resulting in more than 100 top 40 hits in the UK.<\/p>\n \u201cSuccess often builds contempt. DJs hated them as did record companies who couldn\u2019t work out how they were having so much success with just a handful of people.<\/p>\n \u201cBut their songs certainly had magic in them and were catchy and bright (just what I like).<\/p>\n \u201cHere\u2019s one of their best and I\u2019ll have a think about another one while we talk Trading Trump.<\/p>\n \u201cIn the meantime, ladies and gents \u2013 Bananarama\u2019s \u2018I Heard A Rumour\u2019<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Stockhead:<\/strong><\/p>\n It\u2019s nearly four years since the tumultuous 2020 US presidential election and the next one is almost upon us. So far markets have paid scant attention to it or have instead focussed on the upside if Mr Trump returns (thinking: lower taxes and less regulation)\u2026 can we assume all that\u2019s going to change as the showdown to November 5th draws near?<\/p>\n Dr Shane:<\/strong><\/p>\n Well that\u2019s just a terrific question. With the first debate scheduled for 27 June and with a Trump victory running the risk of weakening US democracy and US global alliances and threatening a big ramp up in protectionism and a further reversal in free trade.<\/p>\n Being unable to run for a third term, a second Trump presidency will lack the electoral constraints of his first term (which led to the Phase One trade deal with China) and is likely to have less \u201cadults in the room\u201d.<\/p>\n Here\u2019s a few things to consider five months out:<\/p>\n Polls have Biden trailing<\/strong><\/p>\n \u201cReal Clear Politics poll average has Biden trailing Trump by 1 to 2 points in terms of favourability and presidential voting intentions.<\/p>\n \u201cThis is well behind where he was at the same point in 2020.\u201d<\/p>\n\n Biden also lags Trump by around 1 to 9 points in key battleground states, whereas he was leading at this point in 2020, Shane says.<\/p>\n The \u2018PredictIt\u2019 betting market puts Mr Trump on 51% probability of winning versus Mr Biden on 44%, having just crossed over from favouring Biden.<\/p>\n \u201cIf Trump wins, it\u2019s likely the Republicans would regain control of the Senate (where they have an edge as the Democrats need to defend more seats) and keep the House, resulting in a clean sweep.\u201d<\/p>\n \n\u00a0<\/p>\n Stockhead:<\/strong><\/p>\n But, there\u2019s still like (counts on fingers) five months to go. That\u2019s an eon in Aussie politics\u2026 so you\u2019re not suggesting we should just pack it in and call this one for the Republicans?<\/p>\n Dr Oliver:<\/strong><\/p>\n Oh not at all. It\u2019s too early to write Biden off.<\/p>\n First,<\/em> the historical record indicates incumbent presidents tend to be reelected if there is no recession in the two years before the election.<\/p>\n Since 1932, all incumbents seeking re-election have failed if this was not the case. While leading indicators point to a high risk of recession, so far the economy has been strong.<\/p>\n But how it behaves up to November is critical.<\/p>\n\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Dr Oliver:<\/strong><\/p>\n Second<\/em>, normally around July in the election year incumbent presidents start to see an upswing in support.<\/p>\n Third<\/em>, polls indicate that roughly 14% are undecided and they often don\u2019t make up their minds until the end of the party conventions (July\/August).<\/p>\n Fourth<\/em>, around 20-25% of Trump supporters indicate that they will reconsider if he is convicted of a crime. Of course, several of the stronger cases against him have been delayed likely leaving the arguably less threatening for Trump New York \u201chush money\u201d case.<\/p>\n Finally<\/em>\u2026 while third party candidate Robert F Kennedy is more of a threat to Biden than Trump, it\u2019s likely he will be convinced to exit the race.<\/p>\n Of course, it can all blow the other way if there is a surge in oil prices (e.g. if the Israel war expands to include Iran and Russia curtails its energy exports in the hope it will support Trump who as president will cut support for Ukraine) and the economy slides into recession.<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Taxation:<\/strong> Trade:<\/strong> Biden has basically maintained Trump\u2019s China tariffs and recently announced he will add to them (but only on 4% of imports from China) and has dramatically ramped up subsidies for manufacturing in America.<\/p>\n This is part of a broader global trend towards protectionism and deglobalisation.<\/p>\n Trump (who sees the US trade deficit as a sign that America is being ripped off) would likely dramatically ramp this up accelerating the process of deglobalisation and adding to the likelihood of global trade wars as other countries retaliate on a far bigger scale than in 2018-19 and without political considerations getting in the way (as he can\u2019t have a third term).<\/p>\n Immigration:<\/strong> Fed independence:<\/strong> Climate policy:<\/strong> Regulation:<\/strong> Budget deficit:<\/strong> \u00a0<\/p>\n Stockhead: <\/strong><\/p>\n Alrighty then Shane-bot. From an economic perspective what might be some of the actions from the White House and what could we imagine some of the the reactions might be?<\/p>\n Dr Oliver:<\/strong><\/p>\n Trump\u2019s policies in support of tax cuts and deregulation could help boost the supply side of the US economy via a boost to productivity (which is already on the mend and will be helped by the rapid take up of AI in the US). However, on balance Trump\u2019s policies \u2013 with higher tariffs and hence higher import prices, sharply lower labour force growth and moves to weaken the Fed\u2019s inflation fighting credentials \u2013 will likely add to inflation.<\/p>\n There is also a risk that a higher budget deficit, with no sign of improvement at a time when US public debt is now very high (at 125% of GDP), will result in a market backlash and higher bond yields.<\/p>\n Furthermore, his brinkmanship and erratic policy making style is likely to add to policy uncertainty which could hamper business investment.<\/p>\n A lot will depend on the sequencing of his policy moves. If he runs with tax cuts first it could boost the economy in say 2025, but if he runs first with sharp tariff hikes, immigration cuts & an attack on the Fed it could be taken more negatively early on. In 2017 he ran with the positives first to help shore up the economy, but this time around he may run with negatives first as there will be no constraint from the desire to win another election.<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Firstly<\/em>, despite the heightened policy uncertainty the election year is normally an okay year for US shares. Since 1927, the election year, or year 4 in the presidential cycle, has had a return of around 12%.<\/p>\n\n Second<\/em>, the run up to the election will likely see increased share market volatility if Trump remains ahead and investors start to focus on the risks of a new trade war, a hit to the US labour force and to the Fed under Trump.<\/p>\n After Trump\u2019s victory in 2016 shares soared 38% to January 2018 as the focus in his first year was on business-friendly tax cuts and deregulation but they fell in 2018 as the focus shifted to trade wars.<\/p>\n So, if there is a Trump victory, the share market\u2019s reaction in the first 6-12 months will be heavily influenced by his sequencing of tariff hikes versus tax cuts.<\/p>\n Third,<\/em> historically US shares have done best under Democrat presidents with an average return of 14.4% pa since 1927 compared to an average return under Republican presidents of 10% pa. However, the best average result has actually occurred when there has been a Democrat president and Republican control of the House, the Senate or both and the worst average return has been when there\u2019s been a clean Republican sweep.<\/p>\n\n Finally<\/em>, a Trump presidency would likely mean higher bond yields (with somewhat higher inflation and budget deficits) and a higher $US (partly reflecting higher global economic uncertainty and the impact of US tariffs).<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Stockhead: <\/strong><\/p>\n Ok. What would it all mean for how we go about our business here at home. What\u2019d be the implications of a retrun to Trump for\u00a0 Australia?<\/p>\n Dr Oliver:<\/strong><\/p>\n As a relatively open economy with high trade exposure to China, Australia would be vulnerable to an intensification of global trade wars as a result of a Trump victory, particularly if it weighs on demand for Chinese exports.<\/p>\n An OECD study showed that Australia could suffer a 1.2% reduction in GDP as a result of a 10% reduction in global trade between major countries.<\/p>\n This is second only to Korea in OECD countries and reflects Australia\u2019s high exposure to China. Resources shares would be most at risk and the $A would likely fall. Of course, similar fears existed during the last Trump trade war, and it didn\u2019t turn out so bad.<\/p>\n Much would depend on how other countries respond and how hard Trump goes.<\/p>\n And of course, Trump may not win!<\/p>\n Stockhead:<\/strong><\/p>\n Okay\u2026. But \u2026it\u2019s just when you say it like that \u2013 with a sudden degree of emphasis \u2013 that I can only assume you\u2019re pretty sure Trump\u2019s going to win.<\/p>\n Dr Oliver:<\/strong><\/p>\n No. I\u2019m not.<\/p>\n Stockhead:<\/strong><\/p>\n Am I talking to the real Dr Oliver-bot?<\/p>\n Dr Oliver:\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n Yes. Yes you are.<\/p>\n Stockhead:<\/strong><\/p>\n Hmm. Prove it.<\/p>\n Dr Oliver:\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n As promised ladies and gents, give it up for one of Our Own \u2013 Kylie Minogue\u2019s kick your shoes off and have a boogie number 1 single\u00a0 \u2013<\/p>\n What Do I Have To Do?<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n <\/span><\/p>\n The post Trading Presidents: Dr Shane Oliver on how markets will play the Trump card<\/a> appeared first on Stockhead<\/a>.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\n\u00a0<\/p>\nArtificial Oliver and the shallow fakes<\/h2>\n
Trading Trump<\/h2>\n
\u201cIt\u2019s the (stupid) economy, stupid\u201d<\/h2>\n
Shane\u2019s key policy diffs Trump Vs Biden<\/h2>\n
\nTrump would look to make the 2017 corporate and personal tax cuts (which took the corporate rate to 21% and the top marginal tax rate to 37%) permanent (as they expire in 2025 which would result in higher taxes under Biden) and to lower them possibly further.<\/p>\n
\nTrump is threatening to impose a 10% tariff on all imports and a 60% tariff on all imports from China. This would take the average US tariff rate from around 2.5% to around 17%, far surpassing the 3% peak seen in Trump\u2019s first term. This may be \u201cmaximum pressure\u201d bluster, but while \u201cwe shouldn\u2019t take him literally, we should take him seriously.\u201d <\/p>\n
\nImmigration has surged under Biden making it a big issue and Trump will likely aggressively curtail both legal and illegal immigration.<\/p>\n
\nTrump would seek to replace Jerome Powell and his supporters are looking at ways to roll back the Fed\u2019s independence.<\/p>\n
\nTrump will likely reverse the US\u2019 net zero commitments and most of the policies Biden introduced to support it. Subsidies for green manufacturing are likely to be replaced with wider industry subsidies.<\/p>\n
\nTrump is likely to slash regulation particularly benefitting the energy and financial sectors.<\/p>\n
\nThe deficit remains huge (at 6.3% of GDP) owing to big government spending. It would likely get bigger under Trump\u2019s tax policies.<\/p>\nLikely market reaction<\/h2>\n