Donald Trump’s economic policy has not been as bad as expected

AS IT became clear that Donald Trump would win the presidential election, in the early hours of 9th November 2016, Asian financial markets tanked. But within hours of his victory investors changed course. A Trump presidency, they reasoned, would mean tax cuts, deregulation and infrastructure spending—in other words, more growth. A year after Mr Trump took office, it looks like the rethink was justified. Little of what was feared about Mr Trump’s economic policy has come to pass. To some, rising economic growth, which exceeded 3% in the second and third quarters of 2017, combined with accelerating blue-collar wages, suggest that Mr Trump has delivered on his promise to invigorate the economy.

In truth, Mr Trump has benefited from a global economic surge that has lifted confidence—and stockmarkets—across the rich world. His timing with regard to the labour market was particularly fortunate. He came to office with unemployment at 4.8% and falling (it is now 4.1%). Pockets of strong wage growth, and high consumer confidence, are the natural result.

However, Mr Trump has at least not disrupted the economic recovery. His worst ideas, particularly with regard to trade, remain on the shelf. There have been no across-the-board tariffs on Chinese or Mexican imports, as he threatened. In April the president supposedly came close to pulling out of the North American Free-Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which would have been cataclysmic for many firms. But he stepped back from the brink; the deal is instead being renegotiated. Similarly, Mr Trump’s threats to withdraw from a trade agreement with South Korea now look like bravado. Talks to amend that deal, and in particular its clauses regarding cars, began on January 5th.

Other areas of trade policy have shifted, but not wrenchingly so. America has blocked judicial appointments to the World Trade Organisation’s appellate body, which, though disruptive, is hardly the wholesale attack on the international trade order that some had feared. Some change is cosmetic. The White House has drawn an unusual amount of attention to trade disputes that would have been considered dull in the past.

It is not just trade policy that has been more moderate than expected. The tax cuts that Mr Trump signed into law in December were restrained compared with what he promised on the campaign trail. Their cost (in revenue lost) is estimated at around $1.5trn over a decade, before accounting for their effect on economic growth. Mr Trump’s final campaign proposals would have been more than four times as pricey, according to the Tax Policy Centre, a think-tank. Among other things, the president relented on his demand for a 15% corporate tax rate. It fell to 21% instead.

The tax cuts are still poorly timed, because the economy does not need fiscal stimulus at the moment. Yet they should boost growth somewhat, depending on how much the Federal Reserve tightens monetary policy in response. That may depend on Jerome Powell, Mr Trump’s nominee to chair the Fed, from February. (Mr Powell’s nomination was an example of moderation. He is widely expected to continue the approach of Janet Yellen, the incumbent whom Mr Trump fiercely condemned while running for office.)

On regulation Mr Trump has stayed much closer to his campaign rhetoric. Government agencies have all but stopped writing new rules. The clean power plan, President Barack Obama’s flagship environmental regulation, is being unwound. The Federal Communications Commission has voted to repeal net neutrality rules. The administration let Mr Obama’s proposed rule on overtime pay die in court and delayed new regulations governing retirement advice. Numerous smaller rules have been postponed or weakened, too. At a minimum, deregulation has made business owners swoon.

There is still time for Trumponomics to go wrong. NAFTA renegotiation is supposed to be concluded before the Mexican electoral cycle accelerates in mid-February, but America’s demands have been ill received. Legal deadlines are approaching in a disputes over steel (see article). And Mr Trump may also soon put tariffs on Chinese consumer electronics, as punishment for theft of American intellectual property.

But if a trade calamity can be avoided, the prospects for the economy in 2018 are good. There are few threats emanating from outside Washington. The administration may even make some badly needed infrastructure investments. Pessimists who were wrong about 2017 must be careful not to repeat the error.