BENGALURU
(Reuters) - The U.S. economic expansion will last at least another two years,
according to a majority of economists polled by Reuters who also forecast
growth will not accelerate the way the Trump administration has predicted.
The recovery
from the devastating 2007-2009 financial crisis has been unusually lengthy. The
latest growth stretch has already lasted 96 months, and if the poll predictions
come true it would mark the longest economic expansion in more than 150 years.
Growth has
still not picked up as quickly as thought recently, leading forecasters to
lower expectations again slightly in the poll of more than 100 economists taken
Aug. 7-10.
Still, the
U.S. expansion has more than two years to go, according to 34 of 57 economists
who answered an additional question on the business cycle. Of those economists,
21 said it would last two to three years and 13 said more than three years.
"Expansions
don't go on forever," said Sam Bullard, senior economist at Wells Fargo,
who said there was another two to three years to go. "Steady, moderate
growth looks like it could stay in place for a while."
The
remaining 23 respondents said the expansion would only last one to two years.
None of the economists, based in the United States, Canada and Europe, expected
it to end within a year.
U.S.
President Donald Trump's administration aims to boost annual growth to 3
percent, mainly through sweeping tax cuts. But with the failure to repeal and
replace the Affordable Care Act, significant fiscal stimulus appears less
likely and the economy has shown no signs of accelerating to meet that target.
Predictions
pointed to continued sluggish average growth in the current economic cycle
compared with previous cycles of this length, based on National Bureau of
Economic Research data. (www.nber.org/cycles.html)
GDP likely
grew at a 2.6 percent annualized pace in the second quarter, down from 2.7
percent in the July poll. But the trend has yet to break away from roughly 2
percent.
The latest
poll suggests 2.1 percent to 2.5 percent growth each quarter to the end of next
year, slightly down from the 2.2 percent to 2.5 percent predicted the previous
month. But growth has not been that steady during this expansion and generally
is not in any economy.
The modest
outlook was still broadly explained by slower spending due to sluggish wage
growth even though the economy is close to full employment. Expectations for
tax cuts from the Trump administration are also fading.
While that
has not deterred U.S. stock markets, which have been setting record highs all year,
it has pushed the dollar down nearly 9 percent against a basket of currencies.
Inflation
forecasts have remained lukewarm, with the Federal Reserve's preferred gauge,
the core PCE price index, not expected to reach the central bank's 2 percent
target until the final quarter of 2018.
Core PCE
inflation was forecast to average 1.5 percent to 1.6 percent each quarter from
here until the end of 2017.
AUTUMN IT IS
Despite that
subdued inflation outlook, the Fed is still expected to announce steps to start
shrinking its more than $4 trillion balance sheet in September, according to 94
of 100 economists in the Reuters poll.
Five
respondents said the announcement would be some time in the final three months
of this year and one said early next year.
The poll
also predicted the Fed would raise interest rates by 25 basis points in October
or December, taking the fed funds rate to a range of 1.25 percent to 1.50
percent. The Fed is expected to follow up with three more rate hikes of the
same amount in 2018.
"What
the Fed is doing right now is saying the healthy economy combined with strong
financial conditions more than make up for the disappointment in
inflation," said Ethan Harris, head of global economics at Bank of America
Merrill Lynch.
"They
are very likely to announce their balance sheet shrinkage in September and see
better-than-even odds they will even hike in December."
When asked
if the Fed should start shrinking its balance sheet before inflation hits its
target, 55 of 62 economists said "yes."
"Yes,
they need to lower the balance sheet given emergency conditions are
absent," said Wells Fargo's Bullard.
But not
everyone agrees. Some economists worry the envisioned pace of Fed tightening
could hurt the economy, especially given the anemic nature of the recovery.
"Clearly
the idea here is to get ready for the end of the (economic) cycle," said
Harris.
"In my
view, hiking now so you can cut later is not the right way to think about it.
You hike late so you can hike more. Because (if) you get inflation higher, then
the hikes aren't that painful to the economy."
0 Comments