The quandary facing the Federal Reserve
this summer is the same as it was back in the spring, and winter, and
last fall: By traditional guideposts like the unemployment rate, it
looks as if it is time for the Fed to be raising interest rates. Yet the
global economy seems to be locked in a low-growth, low-inflation world
in which raising interest rates is at best unnecessary and at worst
dangerous.
That
tension was on display Wednesday in the minutes of the Fed’s last
policy meeting, which raised the possibility of rate increases as early
as September.
As
is the Fed’s standard practice, the description of the meeting was
stripped of names and summarized in bloodless language. But reading
between the lines, it is clear there was a rich debate over what factors
the Fed should be weighing, and how, in making its next move.
Some
policy makers saw evidence that the labor market was getting tighter,
the result of which should be higher wages and prices. Others “saw
little evidence that inflation was responding much” to the low jobless
rate. With inflation low, “many judged it was appropriate to wait for
additional information” before considering raising rates.
“Several”
suggested there would be plenty of time to react if inflation did rise
and so wanted to defer raising rates until it was clear inflation was
holding near its desired target of 2 percent. “Some other participants”
viewed the economy as already being near full employment, meaning that
another rate increase “was or would soon be” warranted.
The
result of all that debate at the July 26-27 meeting was affirming the
status quo — agreement that “it was prudent to accumulate more data in
order to gauge the underlying momentum in the labor market and economic
activity” and that “members judged it appropriate to continue to leave
their policy options open and maintain the flexibility to adjust the
stance of policy based on incoming information.”
That
continues a volatile year for market perceptions of when, and how much,
the Fed might make the shift toward tighter money. At the start of
2016, it seemed nearly certain the Fed would follow up its interest rate
increase in December with more of them this year.
Weak
growth in the United States and abroad, combined with a volatile first
half of the year in financial markets, drove the odds of a rate increase
down to 12 percent by July 1, based on prices in futures markets. That
had gone back up to 53 percent by Tuesday. (It edged down very slightly,
to 51 percent, after the release of the minutes Wednesday.)
In
public comments this week, Fed officials have suggested that markets
are underrating the possibility of a September rate increase.
“We’re
edging closer toward the point in time where it will be appropriate, I
think, to raise interest rates further,” the New York Fed president,
William C. Dudley, told Fox Business on Tuesday. The Atlanta Fed
president, Dennis Lockhart, told reporters
that one or two rate increases are possible this year and that economic
data would suggest strong consideration of raising rates next month.
The
Fed faces a profound question: Is the basic framework it has used over
the last generation to set monetary policy the correct one in this
moment, or has something fundamental shifted in the global economy that
calls for a new one?
If
this is just a standard economic expansion that has been slowed by some
bad luck, then the central bank’s usual rules apply. That rule book
involves examining how close the economy is to functioning at its full
potential, and trying to move up and down to keep on that steady path so
as not to let inflation get out of control.
By
that standard, it is past time to be raising interest rates. The
unemployment rate is 4.9 percent, around the level the Fed believes is
sustainable in the longer term, and job growth is strong. Inflation was
1.4 percent over the last year, according to the index the Fed watches
most closely, not too far below the 2 percent the Fed aims for. And
mainstream economic models project it should rise in the years ahead
given the relatively tight job market.
But
there is plenty of evidence — and a vocal contingent of officials
inside the central bank — that the usual way of thinking isn’t quite
working.
For
one thing, the rest of the world is growing so slowly that it is
creating a steady downdraft on inflation and growth that may mean the
usual worries about inflation don’t apply. Rising wages for American
workers over the last year or so have been counteracted by other forces
preventing inflation from taking off, including falling energy prices
and slack demand for goods and services from overseas.
Moreover,
any step the Fed takes toward tightening the United States money supply
seems to be offset by an opposite reaction elsewhere. With other
countries easing monetary policy with ultralow interest rates and quantitative easing,
small moves to tighten American policies have created outsize rallies
in the dollar, which disadvantages American exporters and creates ripple
effects through the global credit system.
That
has led Fed officials to steadily mark down both their expectations for
how quickly to raise short-term interest rate and where those rates
will settle in the longer run — meaning they think that low rates may be
more a new normal than a short-term aberration.
The
San Francisco Fed president, John Williams, raised the possibility this
week of more significant change in how the Fed thinks about its goals,
even raising the possibility
of increasing the Fed’s 2 percent target for inflation, or of the Fed’s
replacing its inflation target with a goal for nominal gross domestic
product.
The
Fed chairwoman, Janet L. Yellen, will have a prime opportunity to
elaborate on her own views in this debate next week, in a scheduled
speech at the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City’s annual economic
symposium in Jackson Hole, Wyo.
But
for now, Fed officials are openly discussing the need to approach
policy choices differently, and holding off from interest rate increases
as a result, but not quite concluding that the old rules no longer
apply and embracing an alternate approach.
It’s
an awkward place for a central bank to be, but until Ms. Yellen and her
colleagues can find consensus around what the new framework for
monetary policy ought to be — or conclude that the old models still have
some usefulness — the uncertainty evident in the July minutes won’t
change.
No comments:
Post a Comment