Could higher tariffs reverse the Fed's easing course?

Stephanie Aliaga

Global Market Strategist

Published: 11/20/2024
Listen now
00:00

Hello, my name is Stephanie Aliaga, Global Market Strategist here at J.P. Morgan Asset Management. Just when inflation was starting to get (dare I say) boring again, the potential for higher tariffs, a central element of the incoming Trump administration’s agenda, has reignited concerns about inflation. With the much-anticipated Federal Reserve easing cycle just underway, markets must now consider the potential consequences for monetary policy if disinflationary trends were to reverse.

We can look to Trump’s previous term for insight into the Fed’s approach to inflationary pressures from tariffs. In September 2018, the Fed modeled a scenario involving a 15% tariff on all non-oil imports with foreign economies responding in-kind. If the Fed reacted to the resulting inflation spike by raising rates, they projected a mild recession. Conversely, if the Fed looked through the rise in import prices, growth slowed to a mere 0.5% but a recession could be avoided. The Fed concluded that this “see through” response would be most appropriate. However, if inflation expectations rose, which would be more likely in a very tight labor market, then the preferred response could be to hike interest rates.

More recently, Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank President Neel Kashkari shared a similar perspective, describing tariffs as a one-time increase in prices that is not inherently inflationary in the long term. However, he warned that a “tit-for-tat” trade war could exacerbate inflationary pressures, sending prices higher.

Today’s economic environment differs meaningfully from 2018—while the inflation heatwave is mostly past us, its embers are still alive. 

·         Recent events have reminded companies of their pricing power, and workers are now more attuned to cost-of-living increases in wage negotiations.

·         Although market-based long-term inflation expectations are anchored around 2.0%, consumer expectations have hovered around 3% since May 2021, half a %-point higher than their range in 2018-19.[2]

·         The recent experience of being slow to respond to “transitory” pandemic-related inflation may prompt FOMC members to adopt a more cautious approach to rate cuts next year, especially in the context of resilient economic growth.

Additionally, several other trade war effects could influence the economy, such as slowing global growth, declining productivity and policy uncertainty weighing on business investment, all of which add complexity to any tariff projections. Investors should also be wary of placing too much emphasis on any specific cabinet appointments. Regardless of whether the incoming administration is staffed with tariff “hawks”, the former President has a track record of initiating trade negotiations with large, ambitious demands that are ultimately whittled down, and look significantly different, to the final agreements.

While it may be premature for the Fed to incorporate tariff implications into monetary policy decisions, current data on resilient growth, healthy labor markets and other factors suggest that the Fed's path will be gradual, possibly settling at a higher level than their latest projections indicate. For bond markets, this, along with the impact of higher deficits, could keep long-term yields elevated in the year ahead.

While it may be premature for the Fed to incorporate tariff implications into monetary policy decisions, current data on resilient growth, healthy labor markets and other factors suggest that the Fed's path will be gradual, possibly settling at a higher level than their latest projections indicate.

Just when inflation was starting to get (dare I say) boring again, the potential for higher tariffs, a central element of the incoming Trump administration’s agenda, has reignited concerns about inflation. With the much-anticipated Federal Reserve easing cycle just underway, markets must now consider the potential consequences for monetary policy if disinflationary trends were to reverse.

We can look to Trump’s previous term for insight into the Fed’s approach to inflationary pressures from tariffs. In September 2018, the Fed modeled a scenario involving a 15% tariff on all non-oil imports with foreign economies responding in-kind. If the Fed reacted to the resulting inflation spike by raising rates, they projected a mild recession. Conversely, if the Fed looked through the rise in import prices, growth slowed to a mere 0.5% but a recession could be avoided. The Fed concluded that this “see through” response would be most appropriate. However, if inflation expectations rose, which would be more likely in a very tight labor market, then the preferred response could be to hike interest rates.1

More recently, Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank President Neel Kashkari shared a similar perspective, describing tariffs as a one-time increase in prices that is not inherently inflationary in the long term. However, he warned that a “tit-for-tat” trade war could exacerbate inflationary pressures, sending prices higher.

Today’s economic environment also differs meaningfully from 2018—while the inflation heatwave is mostly past us, its embers are still alive.

  • Recent events have reminded companies of their pricing power, and workers are now more attuned to cost-of-living increases in wage negotiations.
  • Although market-based long-term inflation expectations are anchored around 2.0%, consumer expectations have hovered around 3% since May 2021, half a %-point higher than their range in 2018-19.2
  •  The recent experience of being slow to respond to “transitory” pandemic-related inflation may prompt FOMC members to adopt a more cautious approach to rate cuts next year, especially in the context of resilient economic growth.

Additionally, several other trade war effects could influence the economy, such as slowing global growth, declining productivity and policy uncertainty weighing on business investment, all of which add complexity to any tariff projections. Investors should also be wary of placing too much emphasis on any specific cabinet appointments. Regardless of whether the incoming administration is staffed with tariff “hawks”, the former President has a track record of initiating trade negotiations with large, ambitious demands that are ultimately whittled down, and look significantly different, to the final agreements.

While it may be premature for the Fed to incorporate tariff implications into monetary policy decisions, current data on resilient growth, healthy labor markets and other factors suggest that the Fed's path will be gradual, possibly settling at a higher level than their latest projections indicate. For bond markets, this, along with the impact of higher deficits, could keep long-term yields elevated in the year ahead.

A tariff inflation spike will depend on the degree of retaliation.

Potential change in inflation from an additional 10% universal tariff and 60% tariff on Chinese imports

Cumulative change on CPI, 2025-28, percentage points

Cumulative change on CPI, 2025-28, percentage points

Source: McKibbin, Warwick, Megan Hogan, and Marcus Noland. "The International Economic Implications of a Second Trump Presidency." Peterson Institute for International Economics, September 2024. Please note that while this visual helps illustrate the potential effects of retaliation in accentuating first-round inflationary effect of U.S. tariffs, it should not be interpreted as a comprehensive projection of inflation pathways. Please see the source paper for full details on model projections. Given the inherent uncertainties and risks associated with forecasts, projections or other forward-looking statements, actual events, results or performance may differ materially from those reflected or contemplated. Data are as of November 19, 2024. 

1See “Report to the FOMC on Economic Conditions and Monetary Policy,” Federal Reserve, September 14, 2018, pages 90-92.
2See Guide to the Markets – On the Bench, page 27 “Inflation expectations.”
09pi242011155317
Stephanie Aliaga

Global Market Strategist

Published: 11/20/2024
Listen now
00:00

Hello, my name is Stephanie Aliaga, Global Market Strategist here at J.P. Morgan Asset Management. Just when inflation was starting to get (dare I say) boring again, the potential for higher tariffs, a central element of the incoming Trump administration’s agenda, has reignited concerns about inflation. With the much-anticipated Federal Reserve easing cycle just underway, markets must now consider the potential consequences for monetary policy if disinflationary trends were to reverse.

We can look to Trump’s previous term for insight into the Fed’s approach to inflationary pressures from tariffs. In September 2018, the Fed modeled a scenario involving a 15% tariff on all non-oil imports with foreign economies responding in-kind. If the Fed reacted to the resulting inflation spike by raising rates, they projected a mild recession. Conversely, if the Fed looked through the rise in import prices, growth slowed to a mere 0.5% but a recession could be avoided. The Fed concluded that this “see through” response would be most appropriate. However, if inflation expectations rose, which would be more likely in a very tight labor market, then the preferred response could be to hike interest rates.

More recently, Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank President Neel Kashkari shared a similar perspective, describing tariffs as a one-time increase in prices that is not inherently inflationary in the long term. However, he warned that a “tit-for-tat” trade war could exacerbate inflationary pressures, sending prices higher.

Today’s economic environment differs meaningfully from 2018—while the inflation heatwave is mostly past us, its embers are still alive. 

·         Recent events have reminded companies of their pricing power, and workers are now more attuned to cost-of-living increases in wage negotiations.

·         Although market-based long-term inflation expectations are anchored around 2.0%, consumer expectations have hovered around 3% since May 2021, half a %-point higher than their range in 2018-19.[2]

·         The recent experience of being slow to respond to “transitory” pandemic-related inflation may prompt FOMC members to adopt a more cautious approach to rate cuts next year, especially in the context of resilient economic growth.

Additionally, several other trade war effects could influence the economy, such as slowing global growth, declining productivity and policy uncertainty weighing on business investment, all of which add complexity to any tariff projections. Investors should also be wary of placing too much emphasis on any specific cabinet appointments. Regardless of whether the incoming administration is staffed with tariff “hawks”, the former President has a track record of initiating trade negotiations with large, ambitious demands that are ultimately whittled down, and look significantly different, to the final agreements.

While it may be premature for the Fed to incorporate tariff implications into monetary policy decisions, current data on resilient growth, healthy labor markets and other factors suggest that the Fed's path will be gradual, possibly settling at a higher level than their latest projections indicate. For bond markets, this, along with the impact of higher deficits, could keep long-term yields elevated in the year ahead.

Copyright 2025 JPMorgan Chase & Co. All rights reserved.

This website is a general communication being provided for informational purposes only. It is educational in nature and not designed to be a recommendation for any specific investment product, strategy, plan feature or other purposes. By receiving this communication you agree with the intended purpose described above. Any examples used in this material are generic, hypothetical and for illustration purposes only. None of J.P. Morgan Asset Management, its affiliates or representatives is suggesting that the recipient or any other person take a specific course of action or any action at all. Communications such as this are not impartial and are provided in connection with the advertising and marketing of products and services. Prior to making any investment or financial decisions, an investor should seek individualized advice from personal financial, legal, tax and other professionals that take into account all of the particular facts and circumstances of an investor's own situation.

 

Opinions and statements of financial market trends that are based on current market conditions constitute our judgment and are subject to change without notice. We believe the information provided here is reliable but should not be assumed to be accurate or complete. The views and strategies described may not be suitable for all investors.

 

INFORMATION REGARDING INVESTMENT ADVISORY SERVICES: J.P. Morgan Asset Management is the brand for the asset management business of JPMorgan Chase & Co. and its affiliates worldwide. Investment Advisory Services provided by J.P. Morgan Investment Management Inc.

 

INFORMATION REGARDING MUTUAL FUNDS/ETF: Investors should carefully consider the investment objectives and risks as well as charges and expenses of a mutual fund or ETF before investing. The summary and full prospectuses contain this and other information about the mutual fund or ETF and should be read carefully before investing. To obtain a prospectus for Mutual Funds: Contact JPMorgan Distribution Services, Inc. at 1-800-480-4111 or download it from this site. Exchange Traded Funds: Call 1-844-4JPM-ETF or download it from this site.

 

J.P. Morgan Funds and J.P. Morgan ETFs are distributed by JPMorgan Distribution Services, Inc., which is an affiliate of JPMorgan Chase & Co. Affiliates of JPMorgan Chase & Co. receive fees for providing various services to the funds. JPMorgan Distribution Services, Inc. is a member of  

 

INFORMATION REGARDING COMMINGLED FUNDS: For additional information regarding the Commingled Pension Trust Funds of JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., please contact your J.P. Morgan Asset Management representative.

 

The Commingled Pension Trust Funds of JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A. are collective trust funds established and maintained by JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. under a declaration of trust. The funds are not required to file a prospectus or registration statement with the SEC, and accordingly, neither is available. The funds are available only to certain qualified retirement plans and governmental plans and is not offered to the general public. Units of the funds are not bank deposits and are not insured or guaranteed by any bank, government entity, the FDIC or any other type of deposit insurance. You should carefully consider the investment objectives, risk, charges, and expenses of the fund before investing.

 

INFORMATION FOR ALL SITE USERS: J.P. Morgan Asset Management is the brand name for the asset management business of JPMorgan Chase & Co. and its affiliates worldwide.

 

NOT FDIC INSURED | NO BANK GUARANTEE | MAY LOSE VALUE

 

Telephone calls and electronic communications may be monitored and/or recorded.

 

Personal data will be collected, stored and processed by J.P. Morgan Asset Management in accordance with our privacy policies at https://www.jpmorgan.com/privacy.

 

If you are a person with a disability and need additional support in viewing the material, please call us at 1-800-343-1113 for assistance.

 

READ IMPORTANT LEGAL INFORMATION. CLICK HERE >

 

The value of investments may go down as well as up and investors may not get back the full amount invested.

 

Diversification does not guarantee investment returns and does not eliminate the risk of loss.