Economics

The Dodd-Frank law, enacted in 2010 following the financial crisis of 2007-08, was named for two of its chief architects, Senator Chris Dodd, Democrat of Connecticut, and Representative Barney Frank, Democrat of Massachusetts. It's ironic that both had been involved, politically or personally, in exactly what had caused the financial crisis in the first place. In the 1930s, only about 10 percent of American non-farm families owned their own homes. But that began to change with the New Deal. The Federal Housing Administration was established in 1934 to guarantee mortgages, making banks much more willing to initiate them.

Election aftermaths are always an opportunity for taking stock. Since the 2022 midterms, we’ve heard prominent Republicans stressing the need to revisit questions ranging from electoral strategy to how to engage the culture wars. What desperately needs discussion on the American right, however, is conservatism’s approach to economic policy. Since 2015, American conservatives have been deeply divided over economics. Conservative skepticism about markets predates Donald Trump, but there’s little question that Trump shattered the favorable views of free markets that had prevailed since Ronald Reagan’s presidency.

It’s been a great year for those of us who didn’t have the nerve to invest in crypto. The value of Bitcoin, Ethereum and Luna crashed in May. Now, crypto giant FTX has gone bankrupt amid serious allegations of criminal misconduct. At last! For years, we kicked ourselves for not investing in Bitcoin, ETH, et cetera, when we had the chance. We heard tales of people who went from bums to millionaires, while we grinded in our offices and fretted about debts. Suddenly, we can reframe our risk aversion as foresight! Of course we knew that this would happen! Of course we did! Really, I shouldn’t joke about this crypto craziness. A lot of people have lost a lot of money. People will lose businesses, homes, and families. Some might even commit suicide.

Now that the final curtain has fallen on Liz Truss’s brief and tumultuous premiership, it is time for reflection. A chance to set the record straight and also to own up to mistakes – especially for those of us who tried to advise her. What went wrong? Yes, the tipping point was Kwasi Kwarteng’s mini-Budget. But three problems were by then already brewing. First, the leadership campaign over the summer had become very focused on tax cuts. Even Rishi Sunak ended up saying he would cut the basic rate of income tax from 20 per cent to 16 per cent by the end of the next parliament, while Jeremy Hunt (now Chancellor) would not settle for cancelling the planned increase in corporation tax to 25 per cent, but instead wanted it cut to 15 per cent.

Next week we will have a new prime minister (again), but the economic problems facing the country will remain the same. This morning’s update from the Office of National Statistics shows public sector net borrowing was  £20 billion last month: the second-highest borrowing September record and significantly higher than the Office for Budget Responsibility’s last forecast, which put the figure close to £15 billion. It’s this rapid rise in borrowing that the markets have turned on in recent weeks Economists thought borrowing would rise, but even the consensus (roughly £17 billion) was lower than what the government borrowed in practice.

The mini-Budget was a spending spree. The ‘medium-term fiscal plan’ was meant to explain the funding. But what exactly is going to be in it?  Liz Truss and Kwasi Kwarteng were thought to have (finally) come to terms with the need to address the need for some restraint, after their mini-Budget led to market chaos which is yet to settle. Their fiscal statement – in other words, how they would fund their tax cuts – was moved forward by almost a month, to 31 October. Its contents were thought to include some major spending cuts, in a bid to convince markets that fiscal discipline still guides the Tory party.

Tonight the International Monetary Fund has weighed in on the UK’s mini-Budget, offering a direct rebuke of Liz Truss and Kwasi Kwarteng’s tax cuts. ‘We are closely monitoring recent economic developments in the UK and are engaged with the authorities,’ its spokesperson said, in reference to the fluctuating pound and rising borrowing costs. ‘Given elevated inflation pressures in many countries, including the UK, we do not recommend large and untargeted fiscal packages at this juncture' – suggesting some concern that the measures could be inflationary.

It has dawned on the government that last week’s mini-Budget might have been a bit too one-sided: £70 billion worth of extra borrowing and not a single mention of spending cuts or efficiency gains has seen borrowing costs spike (up by 0.3 per cent just today). As James Forsyth reports on Coffee House, this afternoon’s announcement that a ‘medium term fiscal plan’ will be announced next month is an attempt by the Treasury to reassure markets – and convince them that fiscal responsibility has not totally disappeared from this government’s agenda. Emphasis is being placed on previous promises to make sure debt falls as a percentage of GDP in the coming years. But what about the other side of the coin?

How are markets responding to Kwasi Kwarteng’s mini-Budget? A sharp fall in the pound today has plenty of critics arguing that the tax-slashing announcements have already proved a failure. Sterling fell this afternoon to $1.09, bringing the currency to another 37-year low against the dollar. This is more than a 3 per cent dip in just one day. The euro took a hit too, but a smaller one at 1.5 per cent. It’s difficult to separate this new record low from today’s announcements – but also near impossible to draw direct correlation, as the pound and euro have both been in freefall against the dollar for weeks now.

It was only a few weeks ago that Liz Truss was talking about holding an ‘emergency’ fiscal event towards the end of September, mainly to address rising energy bills and how the government would support people through the winter. This targeted approach helped to justify the speed at which her new government would announce some major policy, and even more importantly was used to justify not commissioning analysis from the Office for Budget Responsibility to go alongside it. Energy bills were too time sensitive for the government to wait for the OBR to run all the numbers and produce forecasts, Team Truss’s argument went.

Gordon Brown is demanding Parliament be recalled for an emergency budget. By October, he says, quoting a study he commissioned from the University of Loughborough, half the population could be living in fuel poverty. ‘Not enough thinking is being done about the major social crisis,’ he told Radio Four’s The World at One on Monday. The former Chancellor and Prime Minister does, of course, have every right to make what representations he wishes to the government, and no-one can call him a hypocrite for wanting the Chancellor and MPs to sacrifice their summer holidays for an emergency budget. His first holiday as PM, in 2007, famously lasted half a day before he found an excuse – a minor outbreak of foot and mouth – to return to Downing Street.