It’s been a challenging few years for the US economy in recent years, after it took a huge hit from the global coronavirus pandemic, sending growth and unemployment deep into the negative.

Then, as the economy and employment grew at the end of lockdowns, restrictions were lifted and the world reopened for business, inflation sent prices soaring, squeezing Americans’ incomes hard.

So it’s no wonder that polls ahead of the 2024 election by both Gallup and Pew found that the economy — and the desire for a stronger one — was at the forefront of American voters’ minds.

Harris’ economic plan pledges to cut taxes on middle-class families, lift homebuilding to lower rents and increase ownership, fight inflation with a “federal price gouging ban” and help startups -s by expanding tax deductions for expenses.

Trump’s economic platform promises to “stop inflation,” “stop outsourcing” and protect American manufacturing with import tariffs, raise energy production by reducing environmental regulations, cut taxes on workers, such as no tax on tips , and extend its 2017 tax cuts.

As voters head to the polls, headline metrics suggest the economy is steadily doing well. According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the economy grew by 2.8 percent in the third quarter of the year. And inflation stabilized, reaching 2.4% in September.

But the unemployment rate is rising, reaching 4.1 percent in October, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, compared with 3.8 percent a year earlier.

So whose plan is better for the US economy between Trump and Harris? Newsweek ask economists for their opinions. Here’s what they said.

Mark Zandi, Chief Economist, Moody’s Analytics

The US economy will perform better and working Americans will be better off if Vice President Harris wins the presidency because economic policy will remain largely unchanged.

As president, Harris will almost certainly be dealing with a divided party Congress which will severely limit any change in economic policy.

The first two years of the administration will be characterized by the status quo of politics. This suggests that current tax cuts for individuals that expire at the end of next year will be extended, as well as the Affordable Care Act’s enhanced subsidies.

There may also be some smaller changes to tax law, which include research and development tax credits and accelerated depreciation for businesses, something republicans The favor also expanded the child tax credit and the earned income tax credit for working households, something Harris and Democrats favor.

There is an outside chance of comprehensive immigration reform, given bipartisan support for such legislation earlier this year that would stem the flow of unauthorized immigrants at the southern border but allow more legal immigration of those with the necessary skills for the workforce.

Former President Trump will likely impose higher tariffs and engage in immigration deportations because he will be doing so by executive order, and therefore it does not matter whether Congress is Republican-controlled or divided. These policies will result in a combination of higher inflation and interest rates and slower economic growth.

If the Republicans sweep the election, then there will likely be even more tax cuts, including for corporations, which will be deficit-financed to a significant degree. Deficit-financed tax cuts in a full employment economy like today are also inflationary and would lead to higher interest rates and slower growth than would otherwise be the case.

The US is currently strong and resilient and should therefore be able to weather most storms in the coming year, including the presidential election and its outcome.

Of course, this assumes that the election is not so contentious as to lead to significant social unrest, and that the next president and Congress can agree on a timely increase or suspension of the Treasury debt limit before the Treasury runs out of cash and defaults next summer.

Brett Ryan, Senior US Economist, Deutsche Bank

Our analysis suggests a modest boost to growth at best from the candidates’ economic plans.

Our base case assumes the full extension of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, and relative to this baseline, Trump’s additional tax cuts would boost growth by about 0.4% to 0.5% in the next two years.

For Harris, her requests to expand the child tax credit and the earned income credit could be worth 0.2 percent to 0.4 percent over the next two years.

The caveat with assessing Trump’s plans is the tariffs. In our view, a global tariff of 10% would act as a consumption tax that detracts from growth and could reduce business spending in the short term.

We project that a full trade war would negate any positive impact on growth from Trump’s other policies and reduce growth from our baseline.

Unfortunately, the candidates’ proposals also fail to address the unsustainable trajectory of federal deficits and debt.

Surprisingly, they ignore the looming cuts to Social Security that would have to happen if the trust fund runs out over the next ten years, as currently projected.

In short, the winner of the 2028 presidential election will have to be the one to push to shore up Social Security, given that neither party seems willing to take the issue seriously.

Claudia Sahm, Chief Economist, New Century Advisors

With inflation-adjusted growth well above the pre-pandemic trend and unemployment near historic lows, the US economy will enter the new administration from a strong place.

Even so, the past four and a half years have highlighted economic issues such as the lack of affordable housing. Vice President Harris’ proposal to support the construction of millions of new housing units would be an important correction. The federal government typically doesn’t lead in housing construction, so there are obstacles to success.

Higher productivity growth is the “Holy Grail” of economic prosperity. Labor productivity growth has increased considerably in recent years.

Policies that can support new technologies, more inclusive jobs and business training are essential to scale up higher productivity growth. There is no single policy to turn to. Details will matter. Implementation will matter.

The US economy is nearly $30 trillion. No one, including the president, controls economic outcomes. The US will enter the new administration from a position of strength, but we should not take that for granted.

Recent growth is no guarantee of future growth, and sweeping new policies such as mass deportation would almost certainly reduce growth.