WEBVTT - Yellen Prepared For Victory Lap Before Congress: Moss, Wilson

0:00:05.800 --> 0:00:08.360
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to the Bloomberg P and L Podcast. I'm Pim

0:00:08.400 --> 0:00:11.200
<v Speaker 1>Fox along with my co host Lisa A. Bramowitz. Each

0:00:11.240 --> 0:00:14.440
<v Speaker 1>day we bring you the most important, noteworthy, and useful

0:00:14.480 --> 0:00:17.079
<v Speaker 1>interviews for you and your money, whether you're at the

0:00:17.120 --> 0:00:20.360
<v Speaker 1>grocery store or the trading floor. Find the Bloomberg P

0:00:20.520 --> 0:00:31.479
<v Speaker 1>M L Podcast on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, and Bloomberg dot com.

0:00:31.480 --> 0:00:34.760
<v Speaker 1>And with us this morning as we await testimony from

0:00:34.800 --> 0:00:38.440
<v Speaker 1>a current FED chair, Janet Yellen is Dan Moss. He

0:00:38.560 --> 0:00:41.760
<v Speaker 1>is economics editor and columnist for Bloomberg View, as well

0:00:41.800 --> 0:00:45.120
<v Speaker 1>as Dave Wilson, who is our permanent bitcoin watcher and

0:00:45.280 --> 0:00:49.160
<v Speaker 1>is watching the price sword. We've got a few other

0:00:49.400 --> 0:00:52.720
<v Speaker 1>bitcoin watchers. I do have a bitcoin chart of the

0:00:52.840 --> 0:00:54.760
<v Speaker 1>day out today. All right, we'll get to that in

0:00:54.840 --> 0:00:56.320
<v Speaker 1>a second. Dan, I want to start with you, and

0:00:56.360 --> 0:00:59.480
<v Speaker 1>I want to talk about Jannet Yellen with the gloves off.

0:00:59.520 --> 0:01:02.000
<v Speaker 1>She has no longer going to be FED chair come

0:01:02.040 --> 0:01:04.320
<v Speaker 1>early next year. Do you think that she's going to

0:01:04.400 --> 0:01:07.119
<v Speaker 1>get kind of feisty and say things that are sort

0:01:07.120 --> 0:01:12.880
<v Speaker 1>of controversial today? She's not a particularly feisty person. Having

0:01:13.040 --> 0:01:16.360
<v Speaker 1>listened to her in her role as vice chair, her

0:01:16.480 --> 0:01:19.280
<v Speaker 1>role as chair before that in the Clinton administration when

0:01:19.280 --> 0:01:21.480
<v Speaker 1>she was chair of the c A. She's not a

0:01:21.600 --> 0:01:25.520
<v Speaker 1>boastful person, very humble person. But look, she wouldn't be

0:01:25.600 --> 0:01:28.080
<v Speaker 1>human if she didn't think, here's my chance to do

0:01:28.120 --> 0:01:30.040
<v Speaker 1>a victory lack all right, So what's she going to do?

0:01:30.120 --> 0:01:32.039
<v Speaker 1>Is she just basically going to go over the progress

0:01:32.120 --> 0:01:37.360
<v Speaker 1>the FED did made under her control? Or is they're

0:01:37.480 --> 0:01:42.160
<v Speaker 1>going to be possibly more of something more here? It

0:01:42.200 --> 0:01:44.880
<v Speaker 1>depends what she's asked. I mean, there will certainly be

0:01:44.959 --> 0:01:47.640
<v Speaker 1>an element of recapping where we've been, where we are nout.

0:01:47.640 --> 0:01:51.720
<v Speaker 1>Don't forget she's still chair at this point until early February.

0:01:51.840 --> 0:01:54.520
<v Speaker 1>She will be running the f O m C meeting

0:01:54.560 --> 0:01:59.840
<v Speaker 1>next month. J Powell yesterday tipped the committee's hands somewhat

0:01:59.840 --> 0:02:02.720
<v Speaker 1>by saying the case was coming together not such a surprise.

0:02:02.760 --> 0:02:08.000
<v Speaker 1>The famous Dots last published in September projected that. But look,

0:02:08.040 --> 0:02:10.399
<v Speaker 1>there's a number of things that he didn't say that

0:02:10.480 --> 0:02:15.280
<v Speaker 1>she may now feel free to address, Like what happens

0:02:15.600 --> 0:02:19.760
<v Speaker 1>if we're here this time next year they've had their

0:02:19.800 --> 0:02:23.800
<v Speaker 1>three rate increases that the Dots projected, and inflation still

0:02:23.919 --> 0:02:27.280
<v Speaker 1>is not close to two percent. What happens then now

0:02:27.320 --> 0:02:32.120
<v Speaker 1>she's already observed that expectations of inflation might be starting

0:02:32.160 --> 0:02:35.600
<v Speaker 1>to drift a little. So does the committee keep going

0:02:36.840 --> 0:02:39.880
<v Speaker 1>even if inflation doesn't get back to target. Everything is

0:02:39.919 --> 0:02:45.200
<v Speaker 1>predicated on inflation ultimately getting back to target. The other

0:02:45.240 --> 0:02:48.240
<v Speaker 1>thing she could address is the other side of the mandate.

0:02:48.520 --> 0:02:51.480
<v Speaker 1>You know, GDP has been bumping along give or take two,

0:02:51.919 --> 0:02:54.520
<v Speaker 1>for the better part of the last eight years. But

0:02:54.560 --> 0:02:58.120
<v Speaker 1>if there's one thing that's consistently surprised, it's the strength

0:02:58.200 --> 0:03:02.000
<v Speaker 1>of the labor market. The unemployed element right just continues

0:03:02.080 --> 0:03:06.400
<v Speaker 1>to grind lower. It's not inconceivable that in a year's

0:03:06.400 --> 0:03:08.960
<v Speaker 1>time the unemployment right in the United States, for all

0:03:09.000 --> 0:03:12.919
<v Speaker 1>its flaws, could be around three point five. Is that

0:03:13.000 --> 0:03:18.359
<v Speaker 1>the point at which Phillips starts curving? The models all

0:03:18.400 --> 0:03:20.880
<v Speaker 1>tell them it's bound to happen at some point. What

0:03:21.120 --> 0:03:23.880
<v Speaker 1>is that point? Dave Wilson, I want to bring you

0:03:23.919 --> 0:03:26.280
<v Speaker 1>into the conversation just to get your thoughts on what's

0:03:26.320 --> 0:03:28.520
<v Speaker 1>going on in the markets right now. Looking at the

0:03:28.760 --> 0:03:32.120
<v Speaker 1>SMP five hundred, we've got some winners Macy's, for example,

0:03:32.160 --> 0:03:36.520
<v Speaker 1>Advanced Auto Parts, Nordstrom, Coal's viacom or moving higher. But

0:03:37.240 --> 0:03:39.720
<v Speaker 1>Dow just seems to want to move up, and it

0:03:39.800 --> 0:03:41.560
<v Speaker 1>is up more than a hundred points, right. I mean,

0:03:41.560 --> 0:03:44.400
<v Speaker 1>there are plenty of winners today, no question, But one

0:03:44.440 --> 0:03:47.120
<v Speaker 1>thing that's interesting here. We are in the midst of

0:03:47.160 --> 0:03:50.640
<v Speaker 1>a transition in terms of who's going to be running

0:03:50.640 --> 0:03:56.160
<v Speaker 1>the world's most important central bank, and you've got financial

0:03:56.240 --> 0:03:59.480
<v Speaker 1>stocks on its hair. They're higher for the second day,

0:03:59.480 --> 0:04:02.160
<v Speaker 1>and the S and P five hundred, you're looking at

0:04:02.280 --> 0:04:04.960
<v Speaker 1>a four and a half percent gain in the SMP

0:04:05.000 --> 0:04:09.440
<v Speaker 1>five hundred Financials index, biggest for that indicator in a year.

0:04:10.040 --> 0:04:13.080
<v Speaker 1>So people were really worried about where things were going

0:04:13.120 --> 0:04:15.680
<v Speaker 1>to be headed from here. You wouldn't see that kind

0:04:15.720 --> 0:04:17.400
<v Speaker 1>of a move. I don't think. Let's get this in

0:04:17.480 --> 0:04:19.359
<v Speaker 1>a perspective, And Dan, I wanted to bring you in

0:04:19.400 --> 0:04:22.279
<v Speaker 1>on this, I mean J. Powell. Jerome Powell yesterday, uh,

0:04:22.440 --> 0:04:26.200
<v Speaker 1>the upcoming likely FED chair come early next year, was

0:04:26.320 --> 0:04:28.840
<v Speaker 1>very specific about the fact that he did not think

0:04:28.880 --> 0:04:31.080
<v Speaker 1>that there were any too big to fail banks anymore

0:04:31.400 --> 0:04:34.280
<v Speaker 1>in the US and the thought that regulations had been

0:04:34.760 --> 0:04:36.960
<v Speaker 1>had gone a little too far and seemed to really

0:04:37.120 --> 0:04:39.680
<v Speaker 1>note a de regulatory push. I mean, is that what

0:04:39.720 --> 0:04:44.240
<v Speaker 1>we're seeing in the market today, Dan, look he comes

0:04:44.279 --> 0:04:48.559
<v Speaker 1>down on the deregulatory side of the Ledger, but he's

0:04:48.600 --> 0:04:52.000
<v Speaker 1>not what someone like Elizabeth Warren would call a crazy

0:04:52.200 --> 0:04:59.240
<v Speaker 1>de regulator. Look. J. Pale is from the centrist Republican tradition.

0:04:59.320 --> 0:05:03.880
<v Speaker 1>He was original a George H. W. Bush Treasury of Pointe.

0:05:04.480 --> 0:05:08.440
<v Speaker 1>This is not someone who's out there, you know, in

0:05:08.480 --> 0:05:12.320
<v Speaker 1>the constellation where many House Republicans might find themselves in

0:05:12.320 --> 0:05:15.320
<v Speaker 1>the regulatory environment. And just to get back to Dave's point,

0:05:15.680 --> 0:05:17.800
<v Speaker 1>I mean, no one is saying the economy is in

0:05:17.880 --> 0:05:21.440
<v Speaker 1>poor shape. Probably one of the great stories of this

0:05:21.520 --> 0:05:24.000
<v Speaker 1>year when we look back on it is twelve months

0:05:24.000 --> 0:05:31.280
<v Speaker 1>ago people saying, ah yeah, new normal, mediocre global growth. Now,

0:05:31.320 --> 0:05:34.880
<v Speaker 1>this term synchronized upswing appears to be everywhere, and we've

0:05:34.880 --> 0:05:40.400
<v Speaker 1>heard this, but oddly we're not. We haven't heard that before. Well,

0:05:40.960 --> 0:05:43.160
<v Speaker 1>but I want to ask you how much. Also, this

0:05:43.200 --> 0:05:45.719
<v Speaker 1>has to do with the tax plan, and I'm wondering

0:05:45.960 --> 0:05:48.320
<v Speaker 1>what other sectors are going to be benefiting the most

0:05:48.400 --> 0:05:50.040
<v Speaker 1>from the tax plan, which looks like it has a

0:05:50.080 --> 0:05:53.320
<v Speaker 1>better chance of passing the GOP right now, given the

0:05:53.360 --> 0:05:55.839
<v Speaker 1>fact that it would unleash a lot of money for

0:05:55.880 --> 0:05:58.039
<v Speaker 1>these companies for them to buy back shares. Is that

0:05:58.080 --> 0:05:59.960
<v Speaker 1>what we're seeing in some of these stymes. Well, there's

0:06:00.080 --> 0:06:02.760
<v Speaker 1>no doubt that's part of the mix. That there are

0:06:02.800 --> 0:06:06.520
<v Speaker 1>a couple of points though. I remember reading somebody's commentaries

0:06:06.560 --> 0:06:08.800
<v Speaker 1>like how many times can stocks rally on the same

0:06:08.839 --> 0:06:13.320
<v Speaker 1>tax plan? That's one piece of it. Another one another

0:06:13.400 --> 0:06:17.800
<v Speaker 1>one is you know you're comment about stock repurchases. You know,

0:06:17.839 --> 0:06:22.400
<v Speaker 1>we're seeing companies increasingly move away from buy backs and

0:06:22.480 --> 0:06:27.160
<v Speaker 1>towards things like capital spending because business is picking up.

0:06:27.240 --> 0:06:30.080
<v Speaker 1>So you know, you have to wonder, you know, if

0:06:30.160 --> 0:06:33.599
<v Speaker 1>indeed it all does come down and you have the

0:06:33.680 --> 0:06:37.240
<v Speaker 1>tax plan place and lower rates and you name it. Uh,

0:06:37.920 --> 0:06:41.560
<v Speaker 1>you know, money coming in from overseas, potentially, where is

0:06:41.600 --> 0:06:43.280
<v Speaker 1>it going to go? Is it going to go into

0:06:43.320 --> 0:06:47.120
<v Speaker 1>shareholders pockets? Has happened a decade or so ago in

0:06:47.279 --> 0:06:51.240
<v Speaker 1>large measure when there was a tax holiday, or is

0:06:51.279 --> 0:06:54.960
<v Speaker 1>it going to be? Dare I say it different this time?

0:06:55.400 --> 0:06:57.440
<v Speaker 1>Let me just also mentioned that, of course we're waiting

0:06:57.440 --> 0:06:59.840
<v Speaker 1>for Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yelling to begin her t

0:07:00.040 --> 0:07:04.040
<v Speaker 1>stimony before the Joint Economic Committee in Washington. And just

0:07:04.080 --> 0:07:06.400
<v Speaker 1>to come back to your point, Dave, about banks and

0:07:06.440 --> 0:07:09.440
<v Speaker 1>specifically regional banks, and then your thoughts as well. John

0:07:09.520 --> 0:07:14.360
<v Speaker 1>Kennedy yesterday, Republican senator from Louisiana questioning Jerome Pale specifically

0:07:14.760 --> 0:07:17.640
<v Speaker 1>about whether there was going to be some segmentation in

0:07:17.760 --> 0:07:21.520
<v Speaker 1>terms of oversight, whether banks that are not huge, let's

0:07:21.520 --> 0:07:23.720
<v Speaker 1>say money center banks, all that term maybe out of

0:07:23.800 --> 0:07:26.360
<v Speaker 1>date now, banks such as and I'm just picking the

0:07:26.400 --> 0:07:28.840
<v Speaker 1>list of stocks that are moving higher in the SMP

0:07:29.000 --> 0:07:33.640
<v Speaker 1>five hundred, Dave, sun Trust, Citizens, Huntington's Region, Zience, fifth third,

0:07:33.720 --> 0:07:37.640
<v Speaker 1>BB and T Camerica Discover Financial. These are not what

0:07:37.680 --> 0:07:41.000
<v Speaker 1>you would call too big to fail institutions. Will there

0:07:41.040 --> 0:07:45.280
<v Speaker 1>be a lighter regulatory touch for these institutions and as

0:07:45.360 --> 0:07:48.760
<v Speaker 1>a result, will they be able to enjoy the growth

0:07:48.920 --> 0:07:51.240
<v Speaker 1>that they, at least at the moment, have said has

0:07:51.240 --> 0:07:54.640
<v Speaker 1>been constrained because that they have been targeted with the

0:07:54.680 --> 0:07:57.320
<v Speaker 1>same kind of regulations that big banks have have been

0:07:57.400 --> 0:08:00.800
<v Speaker 1>hit with. Oh, Pimmy, Ryan Kennedy's question really stood out

0:08:00.840 --> 0:08:03.240
<v Speaker 1>because a lot of them were trying to bait him

0:08:03.320 --> 0:08:05.720
<v Speaker 1>on tax correct and he was never going to be

0:08:05.760 --> 0:08:09.680
<v Speaker 1>a surprised. Also, Republican from Louisiana, and I thought that

0:08:09.720 --> 0:08:12.840
<v Speaker 1>he was one of the most sort of direct questioners

0:08:12.880 --> 0:08:16.200
<v Speaker 1>about this particular issue, but is specifically community in regional banks.

0:08:16.200 --> 0:08:18.800
<v Speaker 1>That's right, and his questions were quite pointed as well,

0:08:19.000 --> 0:08:21.760
<v Speaker 1>I mean, amidst the plethora of the committee, this was

0:08:21.800 --> 0:08:25.440
<v Speaker 1>not a SoundBite type inquiry he was making. Look and

0:08:25.480 --> 0:08:28.760
<v Speaker 1>Pale was careful not to commit himself. Remember the object

0:08:28.840 --> 0:08:31.800
<v Speaker 1>of a Senate confirmation hearing is don't create a target

0:08:31.840 --> 0:08:34.720
<v Speaker 1>for yourself and get through. Having said that, the mood

0:08:34.840 --> 0:08:40.960
<v Speaker 1>music of Pal's response was pretty sympathetic in greed, yeah,

0:08:41.000 --> 0:08:43.760
<v Speaker 1>I mean it's sympathetic to these banks. Correct that there

0:08:43.760 --> 0:08:46.000
<v Speaker 1>would be some kind of bifurcation that there was. Actually

0:08:46.000 --> 0:08:48.280
<v Speaker 1>what he was saying is if there's something we can

0:08:48.320 --> 0:08:51.240
<v Speaker 1>do that avoids you getting caught up in the net

0:08:52.360 --> 0:08:55.199
<v Speaker 1>that's been placed around the bigger banks, then we're happy

0:08:55.240 --> 0:08:57.600
<v Speaker 1>to look at it. And he really did sound sympathetic.

0:08:57.640 --> 0:09:00.200
<v Speaker 1>But you know, again, the to be shut not a

0:09:00.200 --> 0:09:03.480
<v Speaker 1>lot of meat real quick. We'd be remiss if we

0:09:03.480 --> 0:09:06.240
<v Speaker 1>didn't also mention North Korea and what was going on there,

0:09:06.280 --> 0:09:09.480
<v Speaker 1>just briefly, Dave, markets don't care, do they. Well, it's

0:09:09.520 --> 0:09:12.960
<v Speaker 1>something that you pay attention to, but you don't necessarily

0:09:13.000 --> 0:09:15.200
<v Speaker 1>trade off at day in and day out, until there's

0:09:15.280 --> 0:09:18.880
<v Speaker 1>something more specific that becomes a front and center issue

0:09:18.920 --> 0:09:21.840
<v Speaker 1>for people. It'll be interesting to see whether Jenny Allen

0:09:21.880 --> 0:09:24.760
<v Speaker 1>has asked about the complacency and markets that were currently feeling.

0:09:37.480 --> 0:09:41.000
<v Speaker 1>We've been listening to Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yelling testify

0:09:41.200 --> 0:09:45.240
<v Speaker 1>before the Joint Economic Committee in Washington. We just heard

0:09:45.280 --> 0:09:49.599
<v Speaker 1>from the chairman, pet Tiberry, the congressman from Ohio Republican

0:09:49.600 --> 0:09:53.040
<v Speaker 1>who will be uh leaving Congressmen. Let I just say something.

0:09:53.559 --> 0:09:56.480
<v Speaker 1>This room was almost entirely empty. This is the last

0:09:56.520 --> 0:09:59.520
<v Speaker 1>time that Jenny Allen is going to speak before the

0:09:59.679 --> 0:10:03.520
<v Speaker 1>Joint Economic Committee, and possibly the last time she testifies

0:10:03.600 --> 0:10:06.960
<v Speaker 1>ever as Federal Reserve Chair. And it was an almost

0:10:07.000 --> 0:10:11.000
<v Speaker 1>empty room, a fairly sort of dry sort of overview

0:10:11.280 --> 0:10:15.560
<v Speaker 1>of her tenure, but nothing really, uh particularly that stands out.

0:10:15.559 --> 0:10:17.199
<v Speaker 1>But it was just sort of amazing to me. I mean,

0:10:17.240 --> 0:10:20.000
<v Speaker 1>it sort of highlights how she's being viewed at this

0:10:20.080 --> 0:10:23.200
<v Speaker 1>point as a lame duck in a way. Well, and

0:10:23.360 --> 0:10:26.720
<v Speaker 1>except for her chairing the next f o MC meeting

0:10:27.160 --> 0:10:30.920
<v Speaker 1>in December, this is perhaps one of her last official

0:10:31.520 --> 0:10:33.640
<v Speaker 1>duties that will be at least in the public eye.

0:10:34.000 --> 0:10:38.240
<v Speaker 1>And we heard questioning from Texas Republican Senator Ted Cruz,

0:10:38.360 --> 0:10:42.240
<v Speaker 1>as well as a variety of we had Carolyn Maloney,

0:10:42.480 --> 0:10:45.880
<v Speaker 1>Democratic congresswoman from New York. I just want to point

0:10:45.880 --> 0:10:48.800
<v Speaker 1>out that Pim Fox was really listening and keeping track

0:10:48.840 --> 0:10:51.320
<v Speaker 1>of absolutely everyone, while well, I just thought it was

0:10:51.360 --> 0:10:54.040
<v Speaker 1>interesting only in the sense that, well, you know what,

0:10:54.200 --> 0:10:57.319
<v Speaker 1>let's let's be informed rather than talk about what's interesting.

0:10:57.360 --> 0:11:00.000
<v Speaker 1>Let me bring in Chris Condon, Bloomberg News reporter who

0:11:00.080 --> 0:11:03.679
<v Speaker 1>covers the Federal Reserve. And Chris, thanks for being with us.

0:11:03.920 --> 0:11:05.760
<v Speaker 1>I just wanted to ask you, you know, at the

0:11:05.880 --> 0:11:12.720
<v Speaker 1>very beginning the chairman, Representative Congressman Tiberi. UM, he talked

0:11:12.720 --> 0:11:15.640
<v Speaker 1>about small banks, and that picks up on a theme

0:11:15.760 --> 0:11:20.960
<v Speaker 1>that was mentioned yesterday during the nomination hearings for Jerome

0:11:21.000 --> 0:11:27.560
<v Speaker 1>Powell to succeed Janet Yellen by Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana. Uh.

0:11:27.600 --> 0:11:31.360
<v Speaker 1>And I'm wondering whether this issue of trying to make

0:11:31.480 --> 0:11:35.400
<v Speaker 1>the regulatory environment for small and medium sized banks less

0:11:35.400 --> 0:11:39.000
<v Speaker 1>onerous will will that be something that you believe will

0:11:39.080 --> 0:11:43.440
<v Speaker 1>take take center stage? UM. There certainly is a lot

0:11:43.520 --> 0:11:47.560
<v Speaker 1>of pressure on the FED on that. UM. Yeah, fair

0:11:47.600 --> 0:11:51.720
<v Speaker 1>to say it's in center stage. Whether it's going to happen.

0:11:52.480 --> 0:11:55.760
<v Speaker 1>I have to save him. I've been hearing everyone say

0:11:55.760 --> 0:11:59.160
<v Speaker 1>they're in favor of easing the regulatory burden on community

0:11:59.200 --> 0:12:04.880
<v Speaker 1>banks for years in Washington, Democrats, Republicans, people at the FED,

0:12:05.440 --> 0:12:09.079
<v Speaker 1>people at other regulatory agencies. So what's preventing it from happening.

0:12:09.600 --> 0:12:11.760
<v Speaker 1>It just seems to well, first of all, if they

0:12:11.800 --> 0:12:17.160
<v Speaker 1>wanted to do it legislatively, UM, they can never seem

0:12:17.200 --> 0:12:20.160
<v Speaker 1>to get their act together. UM. There seemed to be

0:12:20.200 --> 0:12:23.720
<v Speaker 1>a lot of bipartisans support UM a while back when

0:12:23.960 --> 0:12:26.720
<v Speaker 1>UH Shelby Richard Shelby was in charge of the Senate

0:12:26.720 --> 0:12:29.720
<v Speaker 1>Banking Committee, but when he went to make some changes

0:12:29.800 --> 0:12:34.640
<v Speaker 1>to UM legislation, he kind of he kind of reached

0:12:34.679 --> 0:12:37.160
<v Speaker 1>too far to the point where Democrats would not get

0:12:37.200 --> 0:12:40.440
<v Speaker 1>on board. So they never kind of carved this area

0:12:40.520 --> 0:12:43.320
<v Speaker 1>out in a piece of legislation and say let's just

0:12:43.600 --> 0:12:47.000
<v Speaker 1>do this for the community banks, which they know everybody

0:12:47.080 --> 0:12:49.760
<v Speaker 1>is in favor of. There's always somebody trying to chuck

0:12:49.880 --> 0:12:53.680
<v Speaker 1>something else into the legislation. Now on the agency sides,

0:12:54.440 --> 0:12:58.240
<v Speaker 1>you know, I I I'm not entirely an expert into

0:12:58.320 --> 0:13:02.120
<v Speaker 1>in terms of the inter agents, the dynamic but there

0:13:02.160 --> 0:13:06.120
<v Speaker 1>seems to be just a sort of dereacratic slowness to this.

0:13:06.240 --> 0:13:10.400
<v Speaker 1>It does take a long time to agree to things. Um. Now,

0:13:10.760 --> 0:13:14.040
<v Speaker 1>Randy Quarrels is the new vice chair for Supervision at

0:13:14.040 --> 0:13:18.480
<v Speaker 1>the FED. J. Powell will be the new chairman. The

0:13:18.559 --> 0:13:21.080
<v Speaker 1>two of those guys are very close, and maybe they'll

0:13:21.080 --> 0:13:23.079
<v Speaker 1>have a chance to speed things up, to put a

0:13:23.120 --> 0:13:26.920
<v Speaker 1>little new energy into that that area where everyone seems

0:13:26.960 --> 0:13:29.960
<v Speaker 1>to already agree. Yeah, well, I guess that we will see. Chris,

0:13:30.040 --> 0:13:31.880
<v Speaker 1>thank you so much for joining us. Chris cond and

0:13:31.920 --> 0:13:37.440
<v Speaker 1>Federal Reserve reporter for Bloomberg. One thing that Chair Yellen

0:13:37.679 --> 0:13:41.760
<v Speaker 1>was asked about was the tax plan currently uh sort

0:13:41.800 --> 0:13:45.720
<v Speaker 1>of careening toward being passed by the GOP and joining

0:13:45.800 --> 0:13:48.400
<v Speaker 1>us now is to lou Alrinapa, he's a White House

0:13:48.400 --> 0:13:51.400
<v Speaker 1>correspondent for Bloomberg, and you wrote a story that I

0:13:51.400 --> 0:13:54.360
<v Speaker 1>thought was really compelling. Uh. And Tolu, why don't you

0:13:54.480 --> 0:13:57.360
<v Speaker 1>just lay it out for us regarding what you found

0:13:57.760 --> 0:13:59.880
<v Speaker 1>when you looked at companies and what they might do

0:14:00.040 --> 0:14:02.000
<v Speaker 1>the extra cash that they that would be freed up

0:14:02.040 --> 0:14:04.880
<v Speaker 1>from the tax cuts. Yeah. One of the most compelling

0:14:04.960 --> 0:14:06.800
<v Speaker 1>arguments of the White House has tried to make about

0:14:06.880 --> 0:14:09.000
<v Speaker 1>this tax bill on the corporate tax cut, is that

0:14:09.640 --> 0:14:12.600
<v Speaker 1>basically the companies would take all of this extra money

0:14:12.640 --> 0:14:15.120
<v Speaker 1>that they're going to get from lower taxes and plow

0:14:15.200 --> 0:14:18.319
<v Speaker 1>it directly into higher wages and new jobs. They even

0:14:18.320 --> 0:14:20.680
<v Speaker 1>put out a report saying that there would be an

0:14:20.680 --> 0:14:23.800
<v Speaker 1>average wage increase of four thousand to nine thousand dollars.

0:14:23.800 --> 0:14:26.080
<v Speaker 1>So what we did was look at what the CEOs

0:14:26.120 --> 0:14:28.360
<v Speaker 1>of these companies are telling their investors, and we're hearing

0:14:28.360 --> 0:14:31.680
<v Speaker 1>a very different message. They're telling their shareholders that a

0:14:31.680 --> 0:14:33.760
<v Speaker 1>lot of this money is going to go directly into

0:14:33.800 --> 0:14:38.000
<v Speaker 1>share by backs and paying for dividends and uh, you know,

0:14:38.040 --> 0:14:42.360
<v Speaker 1>sort of rewarding their investors, not necessarily paying for higher

0:14:42.400 --> 0:14:46.200
<v Speaker 1>wages and rewarding their workers with higher wages and better jobs.

0:14:46.760 --> 0:14:49.320
<v Speaker 1>So that that disconnected something that we looked at, and

0:14:49.480 --> 0:14:51.920
<v Speaker 1>it's sort of undercuts the message that the President has

0:14:52.040 --> 0:14:54.280
<v Speaker 1>has been putting out as he's trying to try to

0:14:54.320 --> 0:14:57.280
<v Speaker 1>campaign for this tax cut, saying that this is the

0:14:57.320 --> 0:15:00.680
<v Speaker 1>way to create jobs and create wages. Instead, it does

0:15:00.720 --> 0:15:02.400
<v Speaker 1>appear that a lot of these companies are going to

0:15:02.520 --> 0:15:05.600
<v Speaker 1>use this money just to reward their shareholders and not

0:15:05.680 --> 0:15:09.640
<v Speaker 1>necessarily give it directly to their workers or start uh,

0:15:09.960 --> 0:15:13.280
<v Speaker 1>you know, creating new jobs and reinvesting in plants. So

0:15:13.400 --> 0:15:15.360
<v Speaker 1>that was sort of what we looked at in the story,

0:15:15.400 --> 0:15:17.840
<v Speaker 1>and we highlight a lot of the commentary that we've

0:15:17.840 --> 0:15:20.600
<v Speaker 1>seen from CEOs from a lot of major companies that

0:15:20.680 --> 0:15:23.160
<v Speaker 1>have a lot of this money either piled piled up

0:15:23.200 --> 0:15:27.880
<v Speaker 1>overseas or currently uh anticipating a very large windfall from

0:15:27.880 --> 0:15:30.960
<v Speaker 1>a lower corporate tax rate, and they're already making plans

0:15:31.000 --> 0:15:32.280
<v Speaker 1>or where they're going to do with the money, and

0:15:32.320 --> 0:15:35.200
<v Speaker 1>it does not sync up with what the White House

0:15:35.280 --> 0:15:37.840
<v Speaker 1>is saying it's going to happen to lou I wanted

0:15:37.840 --> 0:15:40.160
<v Speaker 1>to just throw you something and if it's not in

0:15:40.160 --> 0:15:42.440
<v Speaker 1>your Bailey Wick, you know, please by all means say so.

0:15:42.480 --> 0:15:45.200
<v Speaker 1>But you know, there's been a back and forth debate

0:15:45.280 --> 0:15:48.440
<v Speaker 1>about what happens with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mack, and

0:15:48.520 --> 0:15:53.640
<v Speaker 1>the Federal Housing Finance Agency is in discussions with the

0:15:53.680 --> 0:15:56.680
<v Speaker 1>White House over what to do with more than seven

0:15:56.760 --> 0:15:59.680
<v Speaker 1>billion dollars that is actually owed to the government at

0:15:59.680 --> 0:16:03.040
<v Speaker 1>the the year by Fannie and Freddie. Have you heard

0:16:03.080 --> 0:16:07.520
<v Speaker 1>anything about these negotiations and any information about the sort

0:16:07.560 --> 0:16:10.600
<v Speaker 1>of perspective that the White House has about the future

0:16:10.760 --> 0:16:13.440
<v Speaker 1>of these g s s. Yeah, this is a little

0:16:13.440 --> 0:16:16.040
<v Speaker 1>bit outside of my expertise, but I do know that

0:16:16.320 --> 0:16:19.960
<v Speaker 1>with this current fighting going on with the Consumer Financial

0:16:19.960 --> 0:16:23.040
<v Speaker 1>Protection Bureau, um, that's one of the things that the

0:16:23.040 --> 0:16:25.080
<v Speaker 1>White House is looking at, sort of trying to figure

0:16:25.080 --> 0:16:28.160
<v Speaker 1>out what to do when it comes to Fannie Mae

0:16:28.240 --> 0:16:31.040
<v Speaker 1>and Freddie mac. It does appear that the White House

0:16:31.280 --> 0:16:35.280
<v Speaker 1>has struggled to sort of have a governing coalition that

0:16:35.360 --> 0:16:39.000
<v Speaker 1>looks at, um, some of these major issues, how how

0:16:39.080 --> 0:16:43.000
<v Speaker 1>involved the government should be in the housing market, how

0:16:43.120 --> 0:16:46.720
<v Speaker 1>heavily involved the government should be with regulations. It's not

0:16:46.800 --> 0:16:49.360
<v Speaker 1>something that we've heard the President talk about directly, so

0:16:49.400 --> 0:16:51.440
<v Speaker 1>it's it's somewhat of a mystery to know sort of

0:16:51.480 --> 0:16:53.880
<v Speaker 1>what's going on behind the scenes. Um, But it isn't

0:16:53.880 --> 0:16:56.360
<v Speaker 1>an issue that is going to be on the President's

0:16:56.400 --> 0:16:59.200
<v Speaker 1>desk pretty soon, and we just haven't haven't heard very

0:16:59.280 --> 0:17:01.840
<v Speaker 1>much publicly out what his position is going to be.

0:17:02.440 --> 0:17:04.360
<v Speaker 1>To Luke, can you just give us a sense of

0:17:04.560 --> 0:17:08.560
<v Speaker 1>what's ahead as far as the most controversial portions of

0:17:08.600 --> 0:17:11.080
<v Speaker 1>the GOP bill that still have to be sold, as

0:17:11.160 --> 0:17:13.680
<v Speaker 1>well as well as just sort of the schedule going

0:17:13.720 --> 0:17:17.399
<v Speaker 1>forward of passing the bill. Yeah, probably right now. What

0:17:17.880 --> 0:17:20.840
<v Speaker 1>has emerged as the most controversial portion is this idea

0:17:20.920 --> 0:17:23.600
<v Speaker 1>of a trigger in order to get a couple of

0:17:23.640 --> 0:17:26.240
<v Speaker 1>the holdouts to vote for this, uh, this tax bill.

0:17:26.680 --> 0:17:29.480
<v Speaker 1>They they're working on some sort of trigger that would

0:17:29.880 --> 0:17:32.919
<v Speaker 1>be sort of a backstop in case the growth project

0:17:33.000 --> 0:17:36.880
<v Speaker 1>projections that have been put forward don't um don't come

0:17:36.880 --> 0:17:40.439
<v Speaker 1>into fruition over time, then we would have some kind

0:17:40.480 --> 0:17:43.000
<v Speaker 1>of trigger to return some of that revenue and make

0:17:43.040 --> 0:17:46.240
<v Speaker 1>sure that the government doesn't end up increasing the federal debt.

0:17:46.800 --> 0:17:49.040
<v Speaker 1>There's a lot of pushback from a number of various

0:17:49.080 --> 0:17:52.280
<v Speaker 1>conservative groups, a number of different senators who don't like

0:17:52.400 --> 0:17:56.399
<v Speaker 1>the idea of automatic tax increases that could happen even

0:17:56.560 --> 0:18:00.320
<v Speaker 1>during a economic downturn. But sort of square ring that

0:18:00.359 --> 0:18:02.919
<v Speaker 1>hole and making sure that you have those senators who

0:18:02.960 --> 0:18:05.479
<v Speaker 1>are concerned about the deficit as well as those senators

0:18:05.520 --> 0:18:08.400
<v Speaker 1>who are concerned about the idea of a trigger being

0:18:08.440 --> 0:18:11.399
<v Speaker 1>able to appease both of those camps is going to

0:18:11.440 --> 0:18:14.080
<v Speaker 1>be very complex, and they're working on that and sort

0:18:14.119 --> 0:18:16.800
<v Speaker 1>of behind the scenes, and if they're able to do that,

0:18:16.880 --> 0:18:19.600
<v Speaker 1>then we could see a vote as quickly as Thursday

0:18:19.600 --> 0:18:21.880
<v Speaker 1>on the Senate floor. Then they would go to conference

0:18:21.920 --> 0:18:24.040
<v Speaker 1>and over the next few days the House in the

0:18:24.119 --> 0:18:25.840
<v Speaker 1>Senate would try to work out even more of the

0:18:26.560 --> 0:18:29.119
<v Speaker 1>issues that they have between the two houses. Some of

0:18:29.160 --> 0:18:30.840
<v Speaker 1>the differences in the bill would have to be worked

0:18:30.840 --> 0:18:33.960
<v Speaker 1>out before a final vote in a bill that would

0:18:34.040 --> 0:18:36.560
<v Speaker 1>make it to the President's desk. Thank you very much

0:18:36.560 --> 0:18:39.440
<v Speaker 1>for being with us. Always a pleasure to lou Alaripa.

0:18:39.560 --> 0:18:43.440
<v Speaker 1>He is our White House correspondent for Bloomberg News and

0:18:43.520 --> 0:18:47.200
<v Speaker 1>thanks for listening. I'm pim Fox my co host Lisa Abramowitz.

0:18:50.160 --> 0:18:52.680
<v Speaker 1>Thanks for listening to the Bloomberg P and L podcast.

0:18:53.040 --> 0:18:56.919
<v Speaker 1>You can subscribe and listen to interviews at Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud,

0:18:57.040 --> 0:19:00.280
<v Speaker 1>or whatever podcast platform you prefer. I'm pim fo Box.

0:19:00.359 --> 0:19:03.640
<v Speaker 1>I'm on Twitter at pim Fox. I'm on Twitter at

0:19:03.760 --> 0:19:06.840
<v Speaker 1>Lisa Abramo wits one Before the podcast, you can always

0:19:06.840 --> 0:19:08.879
<v Speaker 1>catch us worldwide on Bloomberg Radio.