Market Implications of Trump’s Agenda - Thoughts on the Market

Summary4 min read

Podcast Title: Thoughts on the Market
Host/Author: Morgan Stanley
Episode: Market Implications of Trump’s Agenda
Release Date: January 8, 2025

Introduction

In the January 8, 2025 episode of Thoughts on the Market, Michael Zezas, Morgan Stanley's Global Head of Fixed Income and Public Policy Research, delves into the anticipated economic and market ramifications of Donald Trump's impending second term as President of the United States. With less than two weeks remaining until Trump's inauguration, Zezas examines the potential policy directions and their implications for investors.

Legislative Strategy: Consolidated vs. Fragmented Approach

Zezas begins by addressing the ongoing debate within the Republican Party regarding the legislative strategy to advance President Trump's policy priorities. The central question is whether to bundle multiple policy areas—such as taxes, immigration, and regulation—into a single comprehensive bill or to tackle them separately.

“Creating one big bill may seem faster, but we're reminded of the saying nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.”
— Michael Zezas [01:45]

He explains that a consolidated approach might expedite the process but risks stalling due to disagreements on contentious issues. Alternatively, a fragmented strategy, starting with immigration reforms to capitalize on existing consensus within the slim Republican majority, could allow for incremental progress. Subsequent legislation on tax cuts and extensions would then follow, albeit likely requiring more time to negotiate.

Zezas concludes that for investors, the choice between these approaches is less critical than the timing and magnitude of the fiscal impacts resulting from tax policy changes.

Tax Policy: Extensions and Fiscal Expansion

The discussion shifts to tax policy, where Zezas highlights a consensus within Morgan Stanley that most of the tax cuts expiring at the end of 2025 are likely to be extended. Additionally, he mentions the possibility of introducing new incentives, such as a domestic manufacturing tax credit.

“There should be some fiscal expansion in 2026. A few hundred billion dollars in our view, but this is meaningfully different than the trillions of dollars that the media cites.”
— Michael Zezas [02:30]

He emphasizes that while the media may portray the fiscal impact of tax policies as being in the trillions, Morgan Stanley anticipates a more measured expansion of a few hundred billion dollars. This perspective underscores a more controlled and incremental approach to fiscal policy changes.

Tariff Strategy: Specificity Over Blanket Measures

Zezas addresses recent discussions surrounding tariffs, noting that media reports suggest a potential shift from broad import tariffs to more targeted measures focusing on specific products. He references a denial from Trump via social media regarding such plans but maintains that the feasibility of swiftly implementing targeted tariffs remains uncertain.

“Our view remains that new tariffs will likely be enacted but through executive authority, which means a phased in focus on China and Europe in 2025 and any new authorities developed via existing laws might not be enactable until 2026.”
— Michael Zezas [03:15]

He explains that executing a specific tariff plan would require either leveraging existing executive powers or passing new legislation, both of which face significant hurdles, including Democratic opposition and procedural constraints like budget reconciliation.

Market Implications: Timing and Size of Fiscal Impacts

Bringing together the discussions on legislative strategy, tax policy, and tariffs, Zezas outlines the broader implications for investors. He posits that while substantial policy changes are on the horizon, their implementation is likely to be gradual.

“Healthy fundamentals of the US economy should help drive risk markets, namely US equities and corporate credit, to outperform.”
— Michael Zezas [03:40]

He anticipates that the steady rollout of fiscal measures, coupled with the underlying strength of the US economy, will support the performance of risk assets such as equities and corporate bonds in early 2025. However, he warns that unexpected accelerations in policy implementations, such as rapid and sizable tariff impositions, could shift the investment landscape in favor of safer assets like government bonds.

Conclusion: Steady Pace Amid Policy Uncertainty

Zezas concludes that while Trump's policy agenda presents significant opportunities and risks, the expected slow pace of implementation provides a degree of predictability for investors. The overarching message is one of cautious optimism, with an emphasis on the resilience of the US economic fundamentals supporting market performance amidst evolving policy landscapes.

Notable Quotes Summary

Legislative Strategy:
“Creating one big bill may seem faster, but we're reminded of the saying nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.” — Michael Zezas [01:45]
Tax Policy:
“There should be some fiscal expansion in 2026. A few hundred billion dollars in our view, but this is meaningfully different than the trillions of dollars that the media cites.” — Michael Zezas [02:30]
Tariff Strategy:
“Our view remains that new tariffs will likely be enacted but through executive authority, which means a phased in focus on China and Europe in 2025 and any new authorities developed via existing laws might not be enactable until 2026.” — Michael Zezas [03:15]
Market Implications:
“Healthy fundamentals of the US economy should help drive risk markets, namely US equities and corporate credit, to outperform.” — Michael Zezas [03:40]

This comprehensive summary encapsulates the key discussions and insights presented by Michael Zezas in the episode, providing listeners with a clear understanding of the potential market implications of President Trump's policy agenda as of early 2025.

Loading summary

Transcript2 lines

[00:01]
A
Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Michael Zezas, Morgan Stanley's global head of fixed income and public policy research. Today on the podcast, I'll be talking about what investors need to know about recent U.S. policy developments. It's Wednesday, January 8th at 2:30pm in New York. In less than two weeks, Donald Trump will again become the sitting President of the United States. The economic and market consequences of the policies he might enact, either on his own or in concert with the Congress, continue to be an important debate for investors. Our view has been that the sequencing and severity of policy choices across tariffs, taxes, immigration and regulation would be very meaningful to the market's outlook. So have we learned anything from news around the policy discussions inside the incoming administration and congressional leaders? Let's consider it here and level set. First, there's been news about Republicans debating their approach to legislating some of President Trump's top policy priorities. That debate centers around whether to create one big bill around taxes, immigration and host of other issues, or to break it into multiple bills leading with immigration reforms, where there may be more consensus within Republicans slim congressional majority and then following it up with tax cuts and extensions, which may take more time to negotiate given myriad interests. While investors have asked us about this debate quite a bit, the distinction between the approaches may not make much of a difference to investors. At the end of the day, what should matter most to markets is the timing and size of the fiscal impact driven by tax changes. Going with one big bill may seem faster, but we're reminded of the saying nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. In other words, that one big bill would probably only pass as fast as Republicans could agree on its toughest negotiating points, so likely not very soon. As for the size of fiscal impact, we continue to see consensus around extending most of the tax cuts that expire at the end of 2025 with some new benefits like a domestic manufacturing tax credit. So there should be some fiscal expansion in 2026. A few hundred billion dollars in our view, but this is meaningfully different than the trillions of dollars that the media cites when discussing the whole of the tax policy wish list. There's also been some news on the approach to tariffs, but again it seems more noise than signal. Recent media reports are that Trump might adopt a tariff plan focused on specific products as opposed to a blanket approach on all imports. Trump denied a report via social media, but even if he hadn't, it's unclear that such a plan could be executed quickly through existing executive powers or through legislation where it's far from clear that tariffs could be enacted given Democrats opposition and procedural barriers from budget reconciliation. So our view remains that new tariffs will likely be enacted but through executive authority, which means a phased in focus on China and Europe in 2025 and any new authorities developed via existing laws might not be enactable until 2026. So said. More simply, the impact of tariffs on the economy may be a late 2025 into 2026 story. Putting it together for Investors so far, the news flow hasn't materially changed our view on the US Policy path. Yes, important policy changes are coming, but their implementation may be slow. That should mean that to start 2025, the healthy fundamentals of the US economy should help drive risk markets, namely US equities and corporate credit, to outperform. If we're wrong and for example tariffs are implemented in larger magnitude at a quicker pace, then it may be a year where less risky assets like government bonds outperform. Thanks for listening. If you enjoy the show, please leave us. A Review Wherever you listen to podcasts and share thoughts on the market with a friend or colleague today, the preceding.
[03:49]
B
Content is informational only and based on information available when created. It is not an offer or solicitation, nor is it tax or legal advice. It does not consider your financial circumstances and objectives and may not be suitable for.