Big changes to the U.S. tax base
for the following year became even more inevitable when Democrat Barack
Obama was re-elected for a second
presidential term. Cost cutting and tax raising in the United States is
likely to shook portfolio of investors and the world's largest economy will return
to recession.
One of the biggest headaches for investors has been a slow but firmly in
a debt quagmire running U.S.
economy. This is due not only to the country's excessive desire to spend a lot
of money for the fight against terrorism, but also temporary tax relief, which
was for a decade.
For these reasons, in 2009 the U.S.
recorded a far 10% of the budget deficit and for the first time in U.S. history solvency risk has gained not only
theoretical but also practical value - investors realized that the United States
may actually go bankrupt.
However, debt increasing and spending a lot can be stopped at least in 2013,
when the law will enter into force for
country to raise taxes, cut spending and
reducing the budget deficit.
Two evils
Just over a decade alarmingly from 32% to nearly 70% bloated U.S. debt to
gross domestic product (GDP) requires
action, because in the long run public debt can become out of control. To deal
with that it was brought the fiscal
discipline against the abolition of tax relief in 2013, 1st of
January, and it is welcome and may possibly contribute to what investors had
not seen since the presidency of Bill Clinton's era - U.S.
non-deficit budget. However, it will certainly have dire economic consequences
so this change in the tax base would be baptized fiscal cliff and a result of
that it means the end of the tax relief and spending cuts mix. Fiscal cliff
threat can be easily imagined when we
realize that every working person's income tax rate jumps by 4-5 percent points (depending on the level of income),
capital gains taxes will grow by 5 percent points and the costs of defense
programs will be reduced by almost 10% - and that's just beginning a long
painful list. These increased taxes only through 2013 would collect additional
350 billion USD (939 billion. £) and would up almost 3% of the U.S. total
annual GDP. The belt tightening would make a damage for U.S economy, which has not already
recovered. It is calculated that if it would be such a scenario, the economy
will stand back about 0.5%, while unemployment will back to the 9.1% level. So
on one hand we have a growing unmanageable debt, on the other - the recession. To sum up, for which of these evils American policy is shifting and what
American investors should expect from it ?
Respublicans scenario
Usually half of the investors ideologically
is closer to the Republican position, which is more favorable to investors than
the Democrats position. Economy does not achieve required acceleration and as a
result of that former presidential candidate Mitt Romney insisted his party
position to extend tax relief futher at least for a while. It is obvious that
greatest achievement for investors would
be a delay of unpopular and difficult decision
at the stock market. In the short term this would have a positive impact
on the consumption targeted sectors and would let to banks to have a possibility
to improve home loaning sector.
Democrats scenario
Not so many days ago it became clear that
the president will continue to be Democrat Barack Obama and as result of that
it must be considered that at least for the time being him a president the initiative
of addressing the generated problems will be exactly in the hands of Democrats
party, what means that it will be considered to cut expenses and to introduce
bigger taxes. Everyone recognizes that the country need to save now and the
only question is what areas will suffer from it the most. The best way to save
money would be cutting of war industry market. Moreover, it could be introduced
progressive taxes and as a result of that richer society would get more money
to government.
While the options are still debated, we can
be almost certain that in 2013 U.S expenses are likely to start cutting and taxes will increase for
everyone despite people’s level of
living. To conclude, it is clear that dreamland isn’t as powerful as it was a few
decades ago.
Jevgenij Polonis
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário