Search

Begin New Search Topic Federal Reserve Political Geography North America

1. Good Policy or Good Luck? Why Inflation Fell Without a Recession

Author:
Thomas Ferguson and Servaas Storm
Publication Date:
09-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute for New Economic Thinking (INET)
Abstract:
This paper analyzes claims that the Federal Reserve is principally responsible for the decline of inflation in the U.S. We compare several different quantitative approaches. These show that at most the Fed could plausibly claim credit for somewhere between twenty and forty percent of the decline. The paper then examines claims by central bankers and their supporters that a steadfast Fed commitment to keeping inflationary expectations anchored played a key role in the process. The paper shows that it did not. The Fed’s own surveys show that low-income Americans did not believe assurances from the Fed or anyone else that inflation was anchored. Instead, what does explain much of the decline is the simple fact that most workers nowadays cannot protect themselves by bargaining for higher wages. The paper then takes up the obvious question of why steep rises in interest rates have not so far led to big rises in unemployment. We show that recent arguments by Benigno and Eggertson that shifts in vacancy rates can explain this are inconsistent with the evidence. The biggest factor in accounting for the strength in the economy is the continuing importance of the wealth effect in sustaining consumption by the affluent. This arises, as we have emphasized in several papers, from the Fed’s quantitative easing policies. Absent sharp declines in wealth, the continuing importance of this factor is likely to feed service sector inflation in particular.
Topic:
Economics, Monetary Policy, Federal Reserve, Inflation, and Macroeconomics
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

2. Was Something Structurally Wrong at the FOMC?

Author:
Alan S. Blinder
Publication Date:
10-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE)
Abstract:
There is little doubt that the Federal Reserve was late to start raising interest rates as inflation rose in 2021–22. The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) made a substantial, though perhaps understandable, error in failing to raise interest rates until March 2022. Much of that policy error can be attributed to faulty forecasts of inflation, which the Federal Reserve shared with many other forecasters. It was not an outlier. But the error was not quite as consequential as the Fed’s sharpest critics allege. Even if the FOMC had started to hike rates earlier, the econometric evidence suggests that the effects on peak inflation would likely have been small. Supply constraints, not excess demand, ruled the roost. They came, driving inflation higher; and then they went, pulling inflation down. Blinder says that the FOMC’s August 2020 framework shoulders more of the blame for the inflationary surge than it should—probably because the new wording revised both of the Fed’s goals, low inflation and high employment, in dovish directions. For that reason alone, the framework will almost certainly be changed in 2025, given the high inflation since. But how? Blinder suggests that the August 2020 change in the employment goal, from symmetry to “shortfalls,” is sensible and probably not too important anyway. But the change in the inflation goal, from a 2 percent point target to flexible average inflation targeting (FAIT), was probably consequential. It may have made the FOMC slow on the draw as inflation gathered steam, and it may have kept monetary policy too tight for too long in 2024. In both directions, Blinder argues, a 1.5 to 2.5 percent target range would be a better choice. To answer the question in the title of this Policy Brief, that may be the structural flaw the Fed should fix.
Topic:
Economics, Monetary Policy, Federal Reserve, Interest Rates, and Supply
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

3. Precedents, Instruments and Targets that the Fed Has Used to Create and Support a Postcrisis Global Safety Net

Author:
Edward J. Kane
Publication Date:
09-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute for New Economic Thinking (INET)
Abstract:
Much has been made of the Global Safety Net that has been put into place since the Great Financial Crisis but the distributional effects of some of the Fed’s strategies are still shrouded in mystery. In supplying bailout funds at below-market terms to uninsured creditors of firms and governments that were economically insolvent, the Fed reinforced the implicit expectation that megabanks are free to take on high levels of risk and benefit from the upside while being protected from any serious downside. An important example of this is the role of currency swaps. By extending its “temporary” dollar swap lines with other central banks, including the European Central Bank, “until further notice” the Fed broadcasted its intention to act as the financial world’s “liquidity provider” of last resort. The “liquidity” support provided by the Fed to megabanks through cross-border lending in fact acted as subsidies, the costs of which were borne by ordinary US citizens. This is just one piece of an unacknowledged game plan of building global strategies of crisis prevention and crisis management based on misdirection and piles of bullsh*t.
Topic:
Economics, Monetary Policy, Federal Reserve, Central Bank, and Safety Net
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

4. The case for a cautiously optimistic outlook for US inflation

Author:
David Reifschneider and David Wilcox
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE)
Abstract:
The Federal Reserve and most other analysts failed to anticipate the surge in inflation in 2021. Considerable debate now surrounds the question of whether the Fed is too sanguine in anticipating that too-high inflation will mostly take care of itself over the next few years, even as the unemployment rate remains low and monetary policy remains accommodative. This Policy Brief concludes that although the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) was too optimistic in the projections it issued in December 2021, the broad contour of its baseline inflation outlook for 2022 and beyond remains sensible. The authors find the 2021 surge in inflation resulted mainly from COVID-19-related sectoral developments rather than the classic situation of aggregate demand outstripping the overall economy's long-run productive potential. The statistical analysis in this Policy Brief was conducted before Russia invaded Ukraine. As a result of the war, the inflation situation will probably get worse before it gets better, and could do so in dramatic manner if Russian energy exports are banned altogether. Nonetheless, if the key considerations identified in this Policy Brief remain in place, and if monetary policymakers respond to evolving circumstances in a sensible manner, the inflation picture should look considerably better in the next one to three years.
Topic:
Federal Reserve, Economy, and Inflation
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

5. Lessons for the Fed from the Pandemic

Author:
John A. Allison
Publication Date:
06-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Cato Journal
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
The Covid‐​19 pandemic greatly increased the scope and power of the Federal Reserve. The Fed created a number of new emergency lending facilities, which allowed it to make off‐​balance sheet loans and buy the debt of corporations and municipalities through special purpose vehicles backstopped by the Treasury under the CARES Act. Meanwhile, the Fed’s large‐​scale asset purchase program, known as quantitative easing (QE), was put on steroids after the pandemic struck in March 2020. The Fed has been purchasing longer‐​term Treasuries and mortgage‐​backed securities amounting to $120 billion per month, pushing the size of its balance sheet to an astonishing $7 trillion.
Topic:
Economics, Monetary Policy, Federal Reserve, Pandemic, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

6. Reflections on Monetary Policy and Its Future

Author:
Jeb Hensarling, Phil Gramm, and John B. Taylor
Publication Date:
06-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Cato Journal
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
The Fed’s huge balance sheet allows it to engage in credit policy (the composition of the balance sheet is by definition credit policy), which inherently auto‐​resides in fiscal policy — but should auto‐​reside with Congress. This discussion, moderated by John B. Taylor, took place at the Cato Institute’s 38th Annual Monetary Conference on November 19, 2020. The transcript has been edited for publication.
Topic:
Economics, Monetary Policy, Federal Reserve, and Credit
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

7. Another reason to raise the Fed's inflation target: An employment and output boom

Author:
David Reifschneider and David Wilcox
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE)
Abstract:
In 2012, the Federal Reserve formally adopted an inflation target and set it at 2 percent, in line with the level chosen by many other central banks. In hindsight, this setting left policymakers with too little room to cut interest rates when they want to fight recessions. Many researchers have noted that if central banks raised their inflation targets—either individually or in concert—they could do a better job in the long run of keeping inflation near its target and the workforce fully employed. Reifschneider and Wilcox highlight an additional and less-noted consequence of raising the inflation target modestly: The economy could enjoy a temporary but substantial boom in employment and output as it adjusted to the increase in the target. Critical to generating this favorable outcome would be decisive action by monetary policymakers to ensure that the higher inflation target is achieved in a reasonably timely manner. In light of substantial transition benefits, as well as the long-run improvement in economic performance, the authors recommend that the Federal Reserve raise its inflation target to 3 percent as part of its next framework review.
Topic:
Federal Reserve, Employment, Economy, and Inflation
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

8. A program for strengthening the Federal Reserve's ability to fight the next recession

Author:
David Reifschneider and David Wilcox
Publication Date:
03-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE)
Abstract:
If the Federal Reserve does not decisively change the way it conducts monetary policy, it will probably not be capable of fighting recessions in the future as effectively as it fought them in the past. This reality helped motivate the Fed to undertake the policy framework review in which it is currently engaged. Researchers have suggested many steps the Fed could take to improve its recession-fighting ability; however, no consensus has emerged as to which of these steps would be both practical and maximally effective. This paper aims to fill that gap. It recommends that the Fed commit as soon as possible to a new approach for fighting recessions, involving two key elements. First, the Fed should commit that whenever it runs out of room to cut the federal funds rate further, it will leave the rate at its minimum level until the labor market recovers and inflation returns to 2 percent. Second, the Fed should commit that under the same circumstances, it will begin to purchase longer-term assets in volume and will continue such purchases until the labor market recovers. If the forces driving the next recession are not unusually severe, this framework might allow the Fed to be as effective at fighting that recession as it was in the past. If the next recession is more severe, however, the Fed will probably run out of ammunition even if it takes the two steps recommended here. Therefore, both monetary and fiscal policymakers should consider yet other steps they could take to enhance their ability to fight future recessions.
Topic:
Economics, Monetary Policy, and Federal Reserve
Political Geography:
North America, Global Focus, and United States of America

9. Average Inflation Targeting Would Be a Weak Tool for the Fed to Deal with Recession and Chronic Low Inflation

Author:
David Reifschneider and David Wilcox
Publication Date:
11-2019
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE)
Abstract:
The Federal Reserve faces two important monetary policy challenges: First, since the Great Recession it has struggled to move inflation convincingly up to the 2 percent target level. Second, during the next recession it will struggle to deliver enough support to the economy unless the recession is unusually mild. As a result, the search is on for alternative policy frameworks that might allow the Fed to achieve its monetary policy objectives more effectively. Among the alternatives is average inflation targeting (AIT). The basic idea is simple: Instead of aiming to return inflation over the medium term to the target rate of 2 percent, the Fed would aim to return the average of inflation over some period to the target rate. The crucial innovation of AIT is that when inflation has been running below the target rate, it would have the Fed aim for above-target inflation in the future, in order to bring average inflation up toward the target. Simulations of the Fed’s workhorse econometric model of the US economy (the FRB/US model) suggest that AIT would be a weak addition to the Fed’s policy toolkit for dealing with recessions and persistently low inflation. In addition, simple versions of AIT would sometimes compel the Fed to run an undesirably restrictive monetary policy. AIT is thus not a very appealing alternative to the current framework.
Topic:
Economics, Global Recession, Monetary Policy, and Federal Reserve
Political Geography:
North America, Global Focus, and United States of America

10. Did Quantitative Easing Increase Income Inequality?

Author:
Juan Montecino and Gerald Epstein
Publication Date:
10-2015
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute for New Economic Thinking (INET)
Abstract:
The impact of the post-meltdown Federal Reserve policy of ultra-low interest rates and Quantitative Easing (QE) on income and wealth inequality has become an important policy and political issue. Critics have argued that by raising asset prices, near-zero interest rates and QE have significantly contributed to increases in inequality, while practitioners of central banking, counter that the distributional impact have probably been either neutral or even egalitarian in nature due to its employment impacts. Yet there has been little academic research that addresses empirically this important question. We use data from the Federal Reserve’s Tri-Annual Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF) and look at the evolution of income by quintile between the “Pre- QE period” and the “QE period” analyzing three key impact channels of QE policy on income distribution: 1) the employment channel 2) the asset appreciation and return channel, and 3) the mortgage refinancing channel. Using recentered influence function (RIF) regressions pioneered by Firpo et. al (2007) in conjunction with the well-known Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition technique, we find that while employment changes and mortgage refinancing were equalizing, these impacts were nonetheless swamped by the large dis-equalizing effects of equity price appreciations. Reductions in returns to short term assets added further to dis-equalizing processes between the periods. Bond price appreciations, surprisingly, had little distributional impact. We cannot know precisely how much of these changes are due to QE as opposed to other influences, but to assess potential causal effects we utilize a counter-factual exercise to assess the quantitative range of impacts of QE on the main channels. We conclude that, most likely, QE was modestly dis-equalizing, despite having some positive impacts on employment and mortgage refinancing. The modestly dis-equalizing impacts were due to both policy choices and deep seated structural problems, such as the long-term deterioration in labor market opportunities for many workers due to globalization and legal and political reductions in labor bargaining power that have contributed to long term wage stagnation. Finally, there is no support in our analysis, for the proposition that raising interest rates would be an efficient mechanism for improving income distribution, because of the likely costs in terms of employment and debt refinancing opportunities.
Topic:
Federal Reserve, Inequality, Income Inequality, Fiscal Policy, and Wage Growth
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America