US Commerce Secretary Wants to Remove Government Spending From GDP
U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick's plan to strip out government spending from the gross domestic product (GDP) report would significantly alter the economic landscape, leading to increased volatility in data and potential distortions in measuring economic performance. The move is likely to have far-reaching implications for policymakers, economists, and businesses, as it would require adjustments to various financial metrics and indicators. Critics argue that such a change would undermine the accuracy of GDP calculations, making it difficult to compare economic growth across different regions and time periods.
This potential shift could lead to a renewed focus on private sector performance, potentially highlighting areas where governments can improve their efficiency and stimulate economic growth through targeted policies.
How will the removal of government spending from GDP impact the ability of researchers and policymakers to accurately forecast economic trends and make informed decisions about future investments and resource allocation?
U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick's plan to strip out government spending from the gross domestic product (GDP) report could have significant implications for how the economy is measured and understood, potentially leading to a more accurate representation of private sector growth. This move aligns with Lutnick's stated goal of making GDP more transparent and free from what he sees as "wasted money" on government programs. The potential impact of this change on economic analysis and comparison with global peers is still uncertain.
Removing government spending from GDP could provide a clearer picture of the private sector's contribution to economic growth, potentially helping policymakers make more informed decisions about fiscal policy.
How might the removal of government spending from GDP affect our understanding of the economy's overall resilience and ability to weather recessions?
Government spending could be separated from gross domestic product reports in response to questions about whether the spending cuts pushed by Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency could possibly cause an economic downturn. The Commerce Secretary's remarks echoed Musk’s arguments made Friday on X that government spending doesn’t create value for the economy. This move may obscure the impact of DOGE cuts on the economy, but it also raises concerns about how alternative measures of GDP would accurately reflect the true state of economic health.
By excluding government spending from GDP, the administration is essentially counting only those economic activities that generate profits, potentially leading to a skewed understanding of economic growth and stability.
How will this redefinition of GDP impact policymakers' ability to assess the effectiveness of their spending programs in driving long-term economic growth and development?
Trump administration officials are considering a new approach to measuring the economy's health, which may downplay the negative effects of downsizing federal agencies under Elon Musk's leadership. The proposed measure, based on Value Added by Private Industries (VAPI), aims to exclude government spending from the traditional GDP calculation. This change could be seen as an attempt to minimize the impact of DOGE cuts, raising concerns about transparency and accountability in economic reporting.
This proposed shift highlights the growing unease among economists about the lack of clarity on how Trump's policies will affect the economy, particularly when it comes to measuring its health.
How will policymakers navigate the complexities of evaluating the economic impact of executive actions when the traditional metrics may no longer provide a clear picture?
Treasuries have dropped as investors wait for a reading on fourth-quarter US GDP growth, which may indicate the economy is slowing down. The two-year yield has risen four basis points to 4.11%, its biggest monthly drop since September, amid concerns about inflation and interest rates. Traders are weighing the potential impact of President Trump's trade policies and their effect on the economy.
The growing uncertainty surrounding economic growth and inflation may lead to a shift in market expectations, with investors increasingly focusing on monetary policy decisions by the Federal Reserve.
Will the upcoming GDP data provide clear guidance on the path forward for interest rates and monetary policy, or will it remain uncertain due to ongoing global trade tensions?
Weaker-than-expected data has led to a decline in US economic growth forecasts, with some economists now predicting a slower pace of growth than initially thought. The Atlanta Fed's GDPNow tool projects a 2.8% decline in the first quarter, down from a previous projection of a 1.5% decline. Uncertainty around President Trump's tariff policy appears to be weighing on business activity, particularly in the manufacturing sector.
This weakening economic outlook underscores the vulnerability of global supply chains, where timely delivery of parts is crucial for meeting production goals, and may signal a more prolonged period of economic uncertainty.
Will policymakers respond to the growing concerns about trade tensions with aggressive monetary easing or fiscal stimulus, potentially alleviating some pressure on business investment and consumer spending?
The central bank's GDPNow tracker is indicating that gross domestic product is on pace to shrink by 1.5% for the January-through-March period, according to a Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta measure. Early economic data for the first quarter of 2025 is pointing towards negative growth, with consumers spending less than expected during inclement January weather and exports being weak. The downgrade coincides with some other measures showing a growth slowdown.
This downgraded forecast raises questions about whether policymakers' expectations are too high, given the current trend in consumer confidence and rising inflation concerns.
How will monetary policy adjustments by the Fed respond to this growth slowdown, and what impact might these rate cuts have on the overall economy?
The latest round of tariffs from President Trump is expected to have a significant impact on the US economy, potentially causing a sharper decline in GDP than his previous tariffs. The proposed duties on Canada and Mexico alone are projected to surpass the economic toll of his entire first term if kept in place. This could lead to increased costs for American households, with estimates suggesting an additional $1,000 per household.
The escalating trade tensions under Trump's leadership may serve as a wake-up call for policymakers to reevaluate their approach to international trade and its impact on the global economy.
Will the US government's reluctance to confront these economic headwinds through targeted reforms lead to increased uncertainty and volatility in financial markets, ultimately undermining the country's long-term competitiveness?
The Atlanta Fed's GDPNow model has signaled a concerning -2.8% growth estimate for the current quarter, a stark decline from previous projections and the fastest contraction since the pandemic lockdown. This drop is attributed to a combination of a record-high trade deficit and weakening manufacturing activity, reflecting broader economic uncertainties tied to President Trump's policies. As consumer sentiment falters and market indicators flash warning signs, the potential for a "Trumpcession" looms, raising questions about the Federal Reserve's next steps.
This unexpected economic downturn highlights the fragility of recovery in the face of political and trade-related uncertainties, suggesting that policy decisions carry significant weight in shaping real economic outcomes.
In what ways might the evolving economic landscape influence voter sentiment and policy priorities leading up to the next election cycle?
President Trump's tax plan could reduce federal revenue by $5 trillion to $11.2 trillion over the next decade, according to estimates from the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. This plan would effectively increase the nation's debt by eliminating current or anticipated revenue sources and includes extending tax cuts from the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Critics warn that there are severe fiscal consequences, particularly in regard to rising the national debt.
The potential economic growth sparked by Trump's tax plans could be offset by increased inflation and reduced government revenue in other areas, such as healthcare and education.
How will policymakers balance the competing demands of stimulating economic growth with ensuring the long-term solvency of the US debt?
The U.S. budget is replete with dollars that don't equal a dollar, as some are worth far more, which only further distorts the math used to justify spending cuts. The proposed tax cuts would extend $4.5 trillion in tax savings over 10 years, but most of these benefits accrue to wealthier individuals rather than being spent, and there's little evidence to support the trickle-down effect promised by Trump and generations of Republicans. The plan aims to slash $1.5 trillion in expenses over the next decade, including $880 billion from Medicaid spending.
This shortsighted approach neglects the economic multiplier effects of government spending, where every dollar invested leads to a disproportionate increase in output.
Will the U.S. ever achieve fiscal sustainability if it continues down this path, which seems to be driven by ideology rather than evidence-based policy?
Trump's tariffs are set to hit the US economy at what appeared to be a challenging time even without new costs for businesses and consumers. The president said Monday that Tuesday night "WILL BE BIG," with the economy undoubtedly a major focus. Ahead of these expected tariffs, stocks got crushed on Monday. Economic growth forecasts have tumbled in recent days, as Yahoo Finance's Josh Schafer writes, highlighted by the Atlanta Fed's GDPNow model projecting -2.8% GDP growth for the first quarter.
The timing of Trump's latest tariff moves could be seen as a calculated gamble, but it's unclear whether the US economy can absorb the shock without sparking a broader economic downturn.
How will the global response to these tariffs affect the already fragile supply chains and international trade relationships that have been impacted by the pandemic?
The US economy is bracing for an uncertain period, with President Trump attributing recent market volatility to "big" changes that will ultimately boost growth. The president's comments, while avoiding a recession call, are part of a broader narrative centered on tax cuts and tariff revenue as the driving force behind economic renewal. Trump's approach remains at odds with concerns from top administration officials about the need for "detox" from public spending.
This shift in tone from the White House signals a fundamental rethinking of the relationship between government intervention, fiscal policy, and economic growth, which could have far-reaching implications for policy makers and investors.
How will the Trump administration's emphasis on long-term growth prospects over short-term stability impact the economic outlook for vulnerable populations and regional economies?
The US government's General Services Administration department has dissolved its 18F unit, a software and procurement group responsible for building crucial login services like Login.gov. This move follows an ongoing campaign by Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency to slash government spending. The effects of the cuts will be felt across various departments, as 18F collaborated with many agencies on IT projects.
The decision highlights the growing power struggle between bureaucrats and executive branch officials, raising concerns about accountability and oversight in government.
How will the dismantling of 18F impact the long-term viability of online public services, which rely heavily on the expertise and resources provided by such units?
The latest data on consumer spending has sparked concerns that the US economy might be experiencing stagflation, a phenomenon where inflation rises alongside an economic downturn. This has significant implications for policymakers, including the Federal Reserve, which is expected to assess its next policy move. The uncertainty surrounding the Fed's actions could lead to further market volatility and impact investor expectations.
The mixed performance of Wall Street's main indexes may indicate that investors are struggling to pinpoint a clear direction for the economy, highlighting the need for more precise data on consumer spending trends.
How will the potential shift towards stagflation affect the likelihood of interest rate cuts by the Fed in the coming months?
U.S. Senate Republicans pushed for the U.S. Congress to codify spending cuts identified by billionaire Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency on Wednesday, after the Supreme Court declined to let President Donald Trump withhold payments to foreign aid organizations. This move aims to formalize the spending reductions into law, preventing potential future disputes over their implementation. The proposal also seeks to address public concerns about the DOGE's methods and ensure accountability for its actions. Senate Republicans acknowledged that the Supreme Court ruling does not bode well for White House hopes of taking unilateral action on spending cuts.
The codification of these spending cuts could mark a significant shift in the balance of power between the executive branch and Congress, potentially limiting future flexibility in government spending decisions.
How will the involvement of Republican lawmakers and the role of Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency impact the overall structure and accountability of the federal government?
U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has laid out the Trump administration's ambitious plans to reshape international trade relations through tariffs and sanctions, while also easing financial regulations on American banks. The new strategy is aimed at promoting American prosperity and upward mobility, with a focus on protecting domestic industries and boosting economic growth. By leveraging tariffs as a revenue source and negotiation tool, Bessent hopes to rebalance the global economic system in favor of the United States.
The potential for a more aggressive trade policy could have far-reaching implications for global supply chains and the competitiveness of non-American companies.
Will the new regulations and sanctions on Iran have a significant impact on its economy, or will they simply serve as a warning to other countries with similar practices?
U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has downplayed concerns that tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump will lead to an increase in inflation, citing China's ability to absorb the costs of the tariffs. The secretary expressed confidence in China's business model and stated that it will "eat any tariffs that go on." However, experts have raised concerns about the potential impact of the tariffs on the global economy and consumer prices.
The Treasury Secretary's downplaying of tariff concerns may be seen as a deliberate attempt to mitigate public anxiety, but this move raises questions about his understanding of economic reality.
How will the international response to U.S. trade policies, including China's potential retaliation, shape the trajectory of global trade and inflation in the coming years?
The US President's assertion that his administration's changes to tariff threats against some of its closest trading partners mark a "period of transition" raises questions about the accuracy of this assessment, given the growing evidence of economic uncertainty and potential recession. The ongoing tit-for-tat tariffs with China and Mexico have sparked concerns among investors, who fear higher prices and reduced growth in the world's largest economy. As the US economy teeters on the brink of a potential downturn, it remains to be seen whether Trump's "transition" will ultimately prove to be a successful strategy.
The long-term consequences of escalating trade wars may lie not only in economic stagnation but also in the erosion of trust between nations and the rise of protectionism as a major global policy driver.
Can the US administration effectively navigate the complexities of global trade and commerce without sacrificing its economic interests at home?
U.S. President Donald Trump's stance on fentanyl-related tariffs remains unwavering despite growing concerns about their economic impact, with U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick stating that the president will not relent unless progress is made in combating the opioid crisis. The tariffs, which target steel and aluminum imports from Mexico, Canada, and China, are set to take effect as scheduled on Wednesday. Lutnick's comments come amidst fears of a recession in the United States, but he insists that the tariffs will lead to lower prices for American consumers.
The fact that Trump is willing to hold firm on these tariffs despite mounting evidence suggesting they may not be effective in reducing fentanyl production raises questions about the true motivations behind his stance.
Will the ongoing trade tensions between the US and its key trading partners ultimately outweigh the potential economic benefits of cracking down on fentanyl trafficking?
Anneliese Dodds' resignation follows PM Starmer's slashing of foreign aid budget to boost defence spending. The UK's international development minister had criticized the move, stating it would harm British influence abroad and devastate those relying on aid. The cuts will now take effect, reducing Britain's overseas development budget from 0.5% to 0.3% of GDP.
The reduction in foreign aid could have far-reaching consequences for the UK's diplomatic relationships and its reputation as a global leader in humanitarian efforts.
How will the impact of these cuts on British public opinion be measured in terms of long-term political capital lost?
Scotiabank economist Derek Holt claims that U.S. President Donald Trump and Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick are misrepresenting the fentanyl crisis to justify tariffs against Canada, which he argues is not a significant source of fentanyl. Holt describes the U.S. administration as "pugilistic" and asserts that the use of tariffs allows them to circumvent Congress, undermining genuine trade negotiations. He suggests that Canada’s only viable response is a robust counteraction, as the current U.S. trade stance is based on fabricated claims rather than substantive issues.
Holt's critique highlights the complexities of international trade where national security concerns can be weaponized, raising questions about the integrity of diplomatic negotiations and economic policies.
What implications might this approach have for future U.S.-Canada relations and the broader landscape of international trade agreements?
U.S. consumers cut back sharply on spending last month, the most since February 2021, even as inflation declined, though stiff tariffs threatened by the White House could disrupt that progress. Americans are becoming more cautious in their spending due to rising economic uncertainty and the potential impact of tariffs on prices. The decline in spending may be a sign that consumers are preparing for potential economic downturns.
This increase in caution among consumers could have far-reaching implications for businesses, as reduced demand can lead to lower profits and revenue.
How will policymakers respond to concerns about the potential negative effects of tariffs on consumer spending and inflation?
U.S. economic activity has shown a slight uptick since mid-January, although growth remains uneven across regions, with some districts reporting stagnation or contraction. The Federal Reserve's Beige Book highlights rising uncertainty among businesses regarding the impact of President Trump's tariff policies and immigration plans on future growth and labor demand. Amid these concerns, expectations for economic activity remain cautiously optimistic, despite warnings of potential inflation and slower growth.
The juxtaposition of slight economic growth against a backdrop of rising tariffs and uncertainty reflects the complex and often contradictory nature of modern economic dynamics, where optimism can coexist with caution.
How will the evolving trade policies and their implications for inflation influence consumer behavior and business investment in the near future?
The FTSE 100 (^FTSE) and European stocks moved lower on Monday morning as traders and economists remained cautious about Donald Trump's tariffs on major trading partners and slashing the size of the Federal government, which may hurt growth. The American president said that the world's largest economy faces "a period of transition", echoing words used by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on Friday. Bond traders are now increasing their bets on a US recession as the trade war deepens.
This downturn in investor sentiment could have far-reaching consequences for global economic stability, particularly if the Federal Reserve does indeed cut interest rates to mitigate the effects of the recession.
What will be the long-term impact on global trade and economic growth if Trump's policies continue to escalate, and how will this affect the world economy as a whole?
The Trump administration's decision to disband two expert panels on economic data has raised concerns about the quality of statistical information produced by federal agencies, potentially hindering the government's ability to accurately assess the nation's economic performance. The Federal Economic Statistics Advisory Committee and the Bureau of Economic Analysis Advisory Committee had been instrumental in providing expert guidance and advice on economic data, but their disbandment may lead to a decline in data accuracy and reliability. This could have far-reaching consequences for policymakers seeking to inform their decisions with reliable data.
The disbanding of these panels highlights the challenges of maintaining expertise and quality control within government agencies, particularly when faced with shifting priorities and resource constraints.
How will the loss of expert guidance on economic data impact the accuracy and reliability of GDP calculations in the years to come?