An American recession: Donald Trump’s tariffs have rekindled possibilities of a US economic downturn

Shares on Wall Street slumped on Monday to record one of the worst trading days since 2022, driven by concerns about the impact of President Donald Trump’s trade policies on the US economy. Investors are now worried that a trade war could push the world’s biggest economy into a possible recession, with Trump appearing not to rule out that possibility. Speaking to Fox News on Sunday, Trump parried a question on whether the US is headed into a recession with an uncharacteristically ambivalent response: “I hate to predict things like that. There is a period of transition, because what we’re doing is very big. We’re bringing wealth back to America, that’s a big thing. And there are always periods (where) it takes a little time.” This came days after Trump said his measures could lead to some pain in the “short term”.

This seems to be a markedly different outlook from Trump in his first term, where he was much more responsive to stock market patterns. Incidentally, in Monday’s selloff, while the tech-heavy NASDAQ was down over 4 per cent, Elon Musk-promoted Tesla was one of the stocks that fell the most, down more than 10 per cent and sharply lower than its peak back in December.

Recession talk

There are three issues that analysts are pointing to amid the renewed “recession” talk. One, that Wall Street is perhaps now overreacting to the fact that it did not really believe Trump would follow through on this threat of tariffs that he made throughout his election campaign. So, when last week, the tariffs came into effect on Canada, Mexico and China, and more tariffs are likely on steel and aluminum products, the stock markets are perhaps responding to the fact that Trump is now walking his talk. There is also the broader uncertainty that this rapid back-and-forth on tariffs by his administration has triggered.

Secondly, bond yields – or the return a bond investor expects to receive each year over its term to maturity – are perhaps a better indicator of whether a recession is in the making. The American 10-year bond yield eased by 11 basis points Monday as demand for safe-haven assets increased after Trump declined to rule out a recession as a result of his tariff policies. When bond yields are going down, it means that the return an investor can expect from holding a bond is decreasing, which is typically caused by the price of the bond rising in the market (yields and prices of bonds have an inverse relationship). Lower yields potentially indicates a shift towards a more risk-averse sentiment among investors, often associated with economic uncertainty.

Thirdly, though the broader economic data at this time is not indicating an impending American recession, there are some clear pointers to a growth slowdown. Job market data is holding up so far based on the February jobs report that came out Friday, but consumer confidence is down, and business surveys cite uncertainty as a reason for being cautious about capital investment. Fourth-quarter US gross domestic (GDP) growth for 2024 came in at a strong 2.3 per cent, driven primarily by consumer spending. However, the early data for this year suggest a slowdown could be on the cards.

The various Federal Reserve Bank surveys have shown more caution among businesses, with the Philadelphia Federal Reserve’s Manufacturing Business Outlook Survey results showing that new orders and hiring are down, while prices are up. Comments from businesses across the country focus on the uncertainty surrounding tariffs and the potential negative impact on orders, adding to the pessimism. But Trump has, so far, shown that his administration is willing to tolerate this to achieve his broader ambitions, including rebalancing trade, his plans for deregulation, including promised tax cuts later in the year.

And while Trump appears to be equivocal on the recession prospects, his commerce secretary Howard Lutnick, and the main cheerleader of reciprocal tariffs within the new administration, was a lot less ambivalent at a press briefing. “There’s going to be no recession in America. What there’s going to be is global tariffs are going to come down because President Trump has said, you want to charge us 100 per cent, we’re going to charge you 100 per cent! You know what they say? They say, No, no… don’t charge us 100 per cent, we’ll bring ours down… We’ll unleash America out to the world, grow our economy in a way we’ve never grown before. You are going to see, over the next two years, the greatest set of growth coming from America… I would never bet on recession. No chance.”

Problems with Washington’s high tariffs plan

Lutnick’s bluster aside, there is a reason why the high tariff threats by the US are not likely to sustain. The structural issues with the American economy is one key reason. The US economy relies heavily on trade, and that’s part of its structural construct in the post-World War-II era. This is because the American economy consumes more goods than it produces domestically at full employment. As a result, its imports are almost always higher than its exports, resulting in a trade deficit.

This trade deficit is a point of contention for Trump, which he’s used as the trigger for the imposition of tariffs on countries around the world. But what this simplistic assumption glosses over is the fact that till the time America consumes more than it produces, it will have a deficit with a lot of countries. This is also triggered by the fact that the labour costs in America are high, and so it does not merit economic logic for US workers to be producing this efficiently in the country, like say garments or low-end consumer goods. So, other countries that have relative efficiencies in these sectors, primarily due to labour or raw material advantages, are more effective at producing these goods and shipping them to the US. The evolving labour productivity issue, and a shift of comparative advantage to developing nations explain the loss in manufacturing jobs in the US, and tariffs are unlikely to fix that fundamental issue.

Also, Trump has consistently insisted that tariffs are paid for by foreign countries. This hardsell, has resonated within his base, but is blatantly false. It is, in fact, US importers — American companies or representatives of foreign companies in the US — that end up paying tariffs when these goods come in, and this money goes to the American Treasury. These companies, in turn, generally pass their higher costs on to their customers in the form of higher retail prices.

A study by economists at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Harvard University, the University of Zurich and the World Bank concluded that Trump’s tariffs in his last term neither raised or lowered US employment. Despite Trump’s 2018 taxes on imported steel, for instance, the number of jobs at American steel plants was barely impacted. On the other hand, the retaliatory taxes imposed by China and other nations on US goods had “negative employment impacts,’’ especially for farmers, the study found. These retaliatory tariffs were only partly offset by government aid that Trump was forced to dole out to farmers, partly funded by the incremental revenues raised by the tariffs.

Macroeconomic impact and a likely Fed pivot

The radical economic outlook presented by Trump prior to the elections includes plans to impose a 20 per cent tariff on all imports and more than 200 per cent duty on cars; a proposal to deport millions of irregular immigrants; and to extend tax cuts at a time when the US budget deficit is at record high. Trump, however, realises that he came to power on account of unrest among a section of American consumers about high inflation and their standard of living not having gone up as per expectations. His tariff war could only fuel this fire. In quantum terms, a 10-20 per cent tariff is really high for a country that has a weighted average tariff of only about 2.2 per cent.

Higher tariffs and a trade war would most certainly lead to higher inflation in the US. This, combined with runaway deficits are likely to force the US Federal Reserve — the American central bank — to end its rate-cutting cycle prematurely.

That could have implications for the monetary easing plans of other countries, including India.

Eqwires Research Analyst

Top-notch SEBI registered research analyst

Best SEBI registered Intraday tips provider

info@eqwires.com

Telegram Facebook Instagram

Call: +91 9624421555 / +91 9624461555

www.eqwires.com

‘I am pessimistic…’: Zoho’s Sridhar Vembu flags 6 point concern on software job market ahead of AI takeover

Cloud-based software services major Zoho Corporation’s co-founder Sridhar Vembu, on Tuesday, March 11, raised his concerns about the jobs in the software industry ahead of the upcoming artificial intelligence (AI) revolution, according to his post on the social media platform X.

Citing reasons ranging from “massive over-capacity”, smaller budget crisis for Indian banking clients, and not removing people with inefficiencies, Sridhar Vembu highlighted his stance of pessimism for the software job market before the AI takeover. 

“That is why I am pessimistic about the software job market, even before accounting for AI,” said Sridhar Vembu in his social media post on the platform X. 

Over-capacity concerns

The 57-year-old co-founder focused on a few key concerns looming over the software job market after spending nearly 30 years in the industry and formerly being the CEO of Zoho Corp.

Sridhar Vembu highlighted the current situation of a “massive over-capacity” which has steadily developed in the software companies due to an influx of venture capitalist (VCs), private equity (PE) investors and Indian stock market (IPO) money.

Vembu even highlighted the floods of money into the IT sector, which were unleashed due to the global pandemic, but those reserves are gone as of the current market. 

“Those floods are now history and we have a serious drought,” he said.

FOMO concerns

The former CEO also focused on the second aspect, i.e., the rising budgets of the IT firms and their CIOs or Board members over the emotion of not “lagging” behind their competitors.

“Software vendors applied liberal doses of marketing spending to spread Fear (of missing out) and Uncertainty (‘tech is changing, you need us’) and Doubt (‘are you confused? trust us’) among corporate customers and the result was ever growing IT spending,” said Vembu in his post on X.

Vembu related this with the Western nations and how they have “layers and layers of duplicated IT systems” for which they spend a lot of money to make them work together.

This move contributes to the cost of operations, and these huge “inefficient” IT systems tend to become a permanent resource for which the firms have to spend more human resources and money. 

Transferring Inefficiency to India

According to Vembu’s post, IT majors in Western nations have solved their “inefficiency” problem. They started outsourcing or transferring those inefficiencies to IT services firms in India, and by the time they arrived, the inefficiencies would multiply 3 to 4 times.

“That ‘multiplied inefficiency’ happened because IT budgets were kept fixed in dollar terms, and more people got hired in India to ‘get more done’,” said Vembu in his post.

Vembu also stated that as a result of this, the large number of IT jobs in the nation became dependent on those “original inefficiencies and the multiplied inefficiencies.” 

Banks’ spending budget

The Zoho co-founder said that banks and financial institutions in India spend far less than those in the United States. This constraint of not having a huge budget to spend made the firms “highly efficient” and equipped to battle the foreign competition.

“Indian firms did not have the budgets to splurge! Necessity made them highly efficient and today India’s financial institutions are able to fend off foreign competition easily,” said Vembu in his post.

Efficiency

Sridhar Vembu also addressed the efficiency factor and called out that a two-person team can “solidly outperform” a team with 20 people in it because of efficiency and talent. 

“This is not just due to talent disparity – even when the large teams have equivalent talented people, they can easily end up being wasted on unproductive projects,” said Vembu in his post. 

Employee Billings 

Highlighting the “zero incentive” for heads to remove the inefficiencies, people are billing by the hour they work or by the staff month (input metrics), which hinders two people from working as efficiently as a team of 20. 

“It is those multiplied inefficiencies in IT, built up over decades, that is facing a reckoning now,” said Vembu. 

On the AI takeover front, Vembu  that now artificial intelligence can eat large amounts of code for breakfast, offering productivity gains of 10 to 20 per cent. 

“Significant but not the 10x or 100x leap yet to destroy jobs on a vast scale,” said the Zoho co-founder, focusing on the AI gains of today look “pale” in comparison with the “multiplied inefficiencies” built up over decades. 

Eqwires Research Analyst

Top-notch SEBI registered research analyst

Best SEBI registered Intraday tips provider

info@eqwires.com

Telegram Facebook Instagram

Call: +91 9624421555 / +91 9624461555

www.eqwires.com

Peak panic on the Nifty is still to come, warns Nuvama – Shares top bets

The Nifty 50 index, after enjoying a record 55-month bull run without a 5% correction, has now fallen for five consecutive months—a first in 29 years. If one looks at the breadth of the correction, it is the worst post-covid.

Surprisingly, all this occurred amid low volatility, indicating that peak panic may still be ahead, said brokerage firm Nuvama Institutional Equities in its research note.

relentless fall since September without a global risk-off is unprecedented. The correction is largely driven by India’s weak earnings amid high valuations.

The index has dropped 15% from its recent peak due to poor earnings and persistent foreign institutional investor (FII) selling. However, with India’s valuation premium to emerging markets (EM) now at its 10-year average, Nuvama believes the India-specific de-rating may be over.

“We think the correction is owing to India’s earnings reconciling with not just weak top-line growth, but also its EM peers. High valuation only added to the misery,” it said.

While the Reserve Bank of India’s easing measures may provide short-term relief, global uncertainties—such as a US growth slowdown and political risks—pose further downside threats.

When do markets bottom?

Historically, equity markets bottom out when earnings recover or when central banks implement deep rate cuts. However, global bond yields remain elevated, limiting the impact of monetary easing so far.

Nuvama suggested that the earnings yield minus bond yield remains a reliable indicator for market turnarounds, which has yet to signal a reversal.

Given rising global uncertainties, the brokerage continues to maintain a defensive bias and prefer large caps over small and mid-cap stocks.

Nuvama has downgraded IT to ‘Underweight’ from its earlier rating of ‘Neutral’, considering high relative valuations and a weakening US outlook. It has raised ‘Overweight’ stance on consumer, given increased policy focus.

Nuvama is ‘Overweight’ on consumer, private banks, insurance, telecom, pharma, cement and chemicals. Its has an ‘Underweight’ stance on industrials, metals, power, IT, autos and PSUs.

Key risks, as per the brokerage, include large easing by Fed or sharp rupee depreciation.

Eqwires Research Analyst

Top-notch SEBI registered research analyst

Best SEBI registered Intraday tips provider

info@eqwires.com

Telegram Facebook Instagram

Call: +91 9624421555 / +91 9624461555

www.eqwires.com