Showing posts with label would. Show all posts
Showing posts with label would. Show all posts

Tuesday, 1 January 2013

Analysis: Economy would dodge bullet for now under fiscal deal

U.S. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (C) departs the senate floor with an aide after a senate vote in the early morning hours at the U.S. Capitol in Washington January 1, 2013. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

U.S. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (C) departs the senate floor with an aide after a senate vote in the early morning hours at the U.S. Capitol in Washington January 1, 2013.

Credit: Reuters/Jonathan Ernst

By Jason Lange

WASHINGTON | Tue Jan 1, 2013 2:52am EST

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A deal worked out by U.S. Senate leaders to avoid the "fiscal cliff," was far from any "grand bargain" of deficit reduction measures.

But if approved by the U.S. House of Representatives, it could help the country steer clear of recession, although enough austerity would remain in place to likely keep the economy growing at a lackluster pace.

The Senate approved a last-minute deal early Tuesday morning to scale back $600 billion in scheduled tax hikes and government spending cuts that economists widely agree would tip the economy into recession.

The deal would hike taxes permanently for household incomes over $450,000 a year, but keep existing lower rates in force for everyone else.

It would make permanent the alternative minimum tax "patch" that was set to expire, protecting middle-income Americans from being taxed as if they were rich.

Scheduled cuts in defense and non-defense spending were simply postponed for two months.

Economists said that if the emerging package were to become law, it would represent at least a temporary reprieve for the economy. "This keeps us out of recession for now," said Menzie Chinn, an economist at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

The contours of the deal suggest that roughly one-third of the scheduled fiscal tightening could still take place, said Brett Ryan, an economist at Deutsche Bank in New York.

That is in line with what many financial firms on Wall Street and around the world have been expecting, suggesting forecasts for economic growth of around 1.9 percent for 2013 would likely hold.

At midnight Monday, low tax rates enacted under then-President George W. Bush in 2001 and 2003 expired. If the House agrees with the Senate - and there remained considerable doubt on that score - the new rates would be extended retroactively.

Otherwise, together with other planned tax hikes, the average household would pay an estimated $3,500 more in taxes, according to the Tax Policy Center, a Washington think tank. Budget experts expect the economy would take a hit as families cut back on spending.

Provisions in the Senate bill would avoid scheduled cuts to jobless benefits and to payments to doctors under a federal health insurance program.

AUSTERITY'S BITE

Like the consensus of economists from Wall Street and beyond, Deutsche Bank has been forecasting enough fiscal drag to hold back growth to roughly 1.9 percent in 2013. Ryan said the details of the deal appeared to support that forecast.

That would be much better than the 0.5 percent contraction predicted by the Congressional Budget Office if the entirety of the fiscal cliff took hold, but it would fall short of what is needed to quickly heal the labor market, which is still smarting from the 2007-09 recession.

"We continue to anticipate a significant economic slowdown at the start of the year in response to fiscal drag and a contentious fiscal debate," economists at Nomura said in a research note.

In particular, analysts say financial markets are likely to remain on tenterhooks until Congress raises the nation's $16.4 trillion debt ceiling, which the U.S. Treasury confirmed had been reached on Monday.

While the Bush tax cuts would be made permanent for many Americans under the budget deal, a two-year-long payroll tax holiday enacted to give the economy an extra boost would expire. The Tax Policy Center estimates this could push the average household tax bill up by about $700 next year.

The suspension of spending cuts sets up a smaller fiscal cliff later in the year which still could be enough to send the economy into recession, said Chinn.

He warned that ongoing worries about the possibility of recession could keep businesses from investing, which would hinder economic growth.

"You retain the uncertainty," Chinn said.

(Reporting by Jason Lange; Editing by Eric Walsh)


View the original article here

Sunday, 30 December 2012

Obama says failure to reach fiscal deal would hurt markets

President Barack Obama delivers remarks at the White House in Washington November 28, 2012. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

President Barack Obama delivers remarks at the White House in Washington November 28, 2012.

Credit: Reuters/Kevin Lamarque

By Jeff Mason

WASHINGTON | Sun Dec 30, 2012 11:49am EST

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Financial markets would be affected adversely if U.S. lawmakers fail to agree on a "fiscal cliff" deal before Tuesday, President Barack Obama said in an interview broadcast on Sunday, while urging Congress to act quickly to extend tax cuts for middle-class Americans.

Lawmakers are seeking a last-minute deal that would set aside $600 billion in tax increases and across-the-board government spending cuts that are set to start within days. If Congress does not make that happen, the first bill brought up in the new year would be to reduce taxes for middle-income families, Obama told NBC's "Meet the Press."

"Now I think that over the next 48 hours, my hope is that people recognize that, regardless of partisan differences, our top priority has to be to make sure that taxes on middle-class families do not go up. That would hurt our economy badly," Obama said in the interview taped on Saturday.

"We can get that done. Democrats and Republicans both say they don't want taxes to go up on middle-class families. That's something we all agree on. If we can get that done, that takes a big bite out of the 'fiscal cliff.' It avoids the worst outcomes," Obama added.

Low income tax rates first put in place under Republican former President George W. Bush are due to expire at the end of the day on Monday - the last day of 2012.

Obama said that failing to reach a deal would have a negative impact on financial markets.

"If people start seeing that on January 1st this problem still hasn't been solved, that we haven't seen the kind of deficit reduction that we could have had had the Republicans been willing to take the deal that I gave them ... then obviously that's going to have an adverse reaction in the markets," he said.

RARE SENATE SESSION ON SUNDAY

Obama met with congressional leaders at the White House on Friday and declared himself cautiously optimistic about the chances of an agreement, but he noted in the interview that nothing had materialized since then.

"I was modestly optimistic yesterday, but we don't yet see an agreement. And now the pressure's on Congress to produce," he said.

The Senate is scheduled to hold a rare Sunday session beginning at 1 p.m. EST (1800 GMT), but it was not clear whether the chamber would have fiscal-cliff legislation to act upon.

Obama sketched out what he believed to be the most likely scenarios the end the back-and-forth between both sides. Either the congressional leaders would come up with a deal, or Democrats in the Senate would bring a bill to the floor seeking an up-or-down vote to extend tax cuts for middle income earners.

"And if all else fails, if Republicans do in fact decide to block it, so that taxes on middle class families do in fact go up on January 1st, then we'll come back with a new Congress on January 4th and the first bill that will be introduced on the floor will be to cut taxes on middle class families," he said.

Obama chided Republicans for resisting his call for tax rates to go up for the top two percent of U.S. earners despite what he viewed as significant compromises on his part to cut spending and reform expensive social programs for the poor and elderly.

"They say that their biggest priority is making sure that we deal with the deficit in a serious way, but the way they're behaving is that their only priority is making sure that tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans are protected. That seems to be their only overriding, unifying theme," Obama said.

"The offers that I've made to them have been so fair that a lot of Democrats get mad at me. I mean I offered to make some significant changes to our entitlement programs in order to reduce the deficit," he said.

(Reporting by Jeff Mason; Editing by David Brunnstrom)


View the original article here

Thursday, 20 December 2012

Obama would veto Republican "Plan B" on fiscal cliff: White House

U.S. President Barack Obama delivers remarks at the White House in Washington November 28, 2012. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

U.S. President Barack Obama delivers remarks at the White House in Washington November 28, 2012.

Credit: Reuters/Kevin Lamarque

WASHINGTON | Wed Dec 19, 2012 10:39am EST

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama would veto the House Republican "Plan B" tax proposal designed to avert January 1 tax hikes, the White House said on Wednesday, saying the plan does not do enough to balance spending cuts and tax increases.

The veto threat comes less than two weeks before a series of tax hikes and automatic budget cuts that could push the U.S. economy toward a so-called fiscal cliff and trigger another recession.

Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives could vote on Thursday on a "Plan B" tax bill that House Speaker John Boehner said would extend low tax rates, except on income of $1 million and above.

The White House has said Obama would accept a deal that puts the threshold for income tax hikes at $400,000, a higher threshold than his initial offer.

"The President urges the Republican leadership to work with us to resolve remaining differences and find a reasonable solution to this situation today," White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer said in a statement.

(Reporting By Matt Spetalnick, Mark Felsenthal and Roberta Rampton; Editing by Alistair Bell and David Brunnstrom)


View the original article here