The US Federal Reserve has begun a process with vast implications for the global economy: rethinking the framework by which it sets the interest rates that influence prices and lending in the US and just about everywhere else.
To get it right, the Fed first needs to recognize what’s wrong.
At the January meeting of the policy-making Federal Open Market Committee, central bankers emphasized that the new framework must be “robust to a wide range of circumstances.” This is a step in the right direction, given that the current framework, established in 2020, certainly wasn’t robust to the Covid pandemic and its aftermath.
Developed at a time when inflation was consistently falling below the Fed’s 2% target, the 2020 framework committed to aiming for above-target inflation to compensate for prior shortfalls. Specifically, the Fed pledged to keep short-term interest rates near zero until three conditions were met: The economy had reached maximum sustainable employment, inflation had reached 2%, and inflation was expected to stay above 2% for some time. Moreover, the “lift-off” from zero couldn’t happen until the central bank had completed the asset-purchase program known as quantitative easing – a long process that wouldn’t even begin until substantial progress toward the three conditions had been made.
As a result, the Fed was very late in responding to a strong economy, a tight labor market and soaring inflation. By the time lift-off happened, in March 2022, real output was rising rapidly, the unemployment rate was below the level officials considered sustainable and the Fed’s preferred measure of inflation had exceeded 5%.
Despite this compelling evidence, there’s still debate about whether the Fed’s policy framework was at fault. Some say the central bank just made a forecasting error, for which it later had to compensate by tightening monetary policy aggressively. Chair Jerome Powell has leaned into this explanation, saying that the framework “was more irrelevant than anything else.” I don’t buy it: If the Fed had ignored the framework and paid more attention to the policy rules it typically follows, it would have started raising short-term rates about a year earlier.
Some argue that the surge in inflation, which happened everywhere, was beyond the Fed’s control. Yet it was US demand for goods, supported by a powerful fiscal stimulus, that helped drive global prices upwards. Also, many other countries experienced a spike in energy prices, which played a much smaller role in the US.
A third argument is that the Biden administration’s $1.9 trillion fiscal stimulus package was just too large. While it undoubtedly contributed to the economy’s overheating, that didn’t prevent the Fed from taking its impact into account and responding with tighter monetary policy.
Properly identifying mistakes matters. Otherwise, how can one be confident that the Fed won’t repeat them? Credibility is crucial: Without it, central bankers’ ability to influence financial markets and the economy will be impaired.
To that end, the Fed must recognize and remedy the 2020 framework’s flaws and omissions. It should scrap the regime that kept rates too low for too long. It should apply greater rigor to quantitative easing and quantitative tightening: Was QE, for example, worth the $500 billion to $1 trillion that it cost the US Treasury, or did it merely stoke inflation? It should stop targeting an interest rate — the federal funds rate — that is increasingly obsolete. Relying exclusively on the rate paid on bank reserves would be considerably simpler.
The framework review will take several months to complete. May the Fed use the time well. There’s plenty of room for improvement.
Credit: Bloomberg
Discover the latest Business News, Sensex, and Nifty updates. Obtain Personal Finance insights, tax queries, and expert opinions on Moneycontrol or download the Moneycontrol App to stay updated!
