Saturday , June 6 2020
Home / Joseph E. Gagnon

Joseph E. Gagnon

International macroeconomist at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. Formerly worked at the Federal Reserve Board and US Treasury.

Articles by Joseph E. Gagnon

The 2020 US private saving boom: An unexpected result of COVID-19

19 days ago

Federal cash transfers in the COVID-19 pandemic are going to millions of American families who cannot or will not spend all of that money in the current fraught environment. As a result, the US net private saving rate in 2020 will be the highest since World War II. The economic significance of this large amount of savings is unclear. But it could mean that, as restrictions on business and personal activities are relaxed in coming months, aggregate demand will rise, accelerating economic recovery but causing a temporary uptick in inflation to the extent that demand exceeds aggregate supply.
Any rise in inflation likely would be mild and would be welcome in light of persistent shortfalls of inflation below target in recent years. It might even provide a good opportunity for the Federal

Read More »

The Fed Expands Emergency Lending by $2 Trillion

April 10, 2020

The unprecedented nature of the coronavirus-induced shutdown of the economy calls for unprecedented steps to keep firms and state and local governments alive and ready to resume normal operations as soon as it is safe to do so. The latest action to that end came on April 9 when the Federal Reserve, in partnership with the Treasury Department, set up new emergency facilities and expanded existing ones with a combined lending capacity of $2.3 trillion, more than 10 percent of US GDP. The facilities can extend credit to businesses of all sizes plus hard-pressed states and localities, leveraging funds appropriated by the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act.
The April 9 action was the latest and largest of several Fed actions since March 2020 to reduce interest rates at

Read More »

New US fiscal action should avert closures but not a recession

March 27, 2020

The sweeping $2 trillion package of COVID-19 rescue measures nearing Congressional approval will not prevent a sharp recession in the next few months. But  it will replace a large share of income lost by laid off workers and should enable many businesses to avoid permanent closures. Avoiding bankruptcy and liquidation is critical to enabling a rapid economic recovery as soon as health officials deem it safe to return to work.
The package’s grants, loans, and other features represent roughly 10 percent of US GDP in 2019, and this measure comes on top of two earlier bills with a combined value of less than $100 billion. Given the haste with which the bill was written, further steps may need to be taken, especially if the COVID-related business closures last more than about three months.

Read More »

The Fed expands its emergency lending facilities again

March 23, 2020

Faced with mounting dangers to the US economy, the Federal Reserve announced several new steps on March 23, 2020, to ensure adequate flows of credit through the financial system. These steps add to measures announced a week earlier by expanding the sectors of the economy to which the Fed is providing credit, going even further than the measures taken in the Great Recession of 2008–09. The initial size of the new facilities is only $300 billion, an amount too small given the magnitude of the problem. But the Fed rescue will most likely be expanded as Congress authorizes more funds for the Treasury Department to backstop the Fed. For now, it’s important to get these facilities up and running.
First, the Fed removed limits on its purchases of longer-term Treasury securities and agency

Read More »

The Fed’s big guns are welcome, but the United States needs more fiscal action

March 16, 2020

The Federal Reserve’s move on March 15 to drop the federal funds rate another percentage point to essentially zero, along with other steps to support credit markets and the economy, represents a substantial and appropriate easing of monetary policy at a time of health crisis. The announcement at an unusual weekend conference call underscored the urgency of the situation. But no amount of monetary easing can prevent a sharp decline in economic activity in the near term owing to measures taken to slow the spread of the novel coronavirus.
As Fed Chair Jerome Powell mentioned several times during the press conference after the March 15 meeting, fiscal policy is needed to help those most affected by the ongoing slowdown. As welcome as the latest Fed actions are, they will not by themselves undo

Read More »

The Fed Is on Hold for a While

December 12, 2019

The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC or Fed) left the target range for the federal funds rate unchanged at 1.50 to 1.75 percent at its December 2019 meeting, as nearly all analysts anticipated. Fed Chair Jerome Powell made clear in the subsequent press conference that it will take a significant surprise in the economy for the Fed to either cut or raise rates over the next year. Stock prices were little changed, and bond yields fell slightly after the Fed’s announcement.
In light of the strong labor market report for November, Chair Powell’s enthusiasm for the benefits of a tight labor market sounded rather dovish, which probably explains the bond market reaction. However, the dovishness clearly had limits. When asked why the Fed has ruled out raising the inflation target to 4 percent

Read More »

The Fed Cuts and Pauses

October 30, 2019

The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC or Fed) cut the target range for the federal funds rate 0.25 percentage point to 1.50 to 1.75 percent at its October 2019 meeting, as many analysts anticipated. Fed Chair Jerome Powell made clear in the subsequent press conference that future rate cuts are not likely unless the economy performs worse than the Fed expects. President Donald Trump has been pressing the Fed to cut rates dramatically and may be unhappy with the Fed’s reluctance to do more. But in light of continuing solid economic data, it is reasonable for the Fed to pause for now. Stock prices and bond yields did not move much after the Fed’s announcement.
GDP growth slowed a bit to 1.9 percent in the third quarter of 2019, but Chair Powell indicated that this rate is close to what was

Read More »

A Hawkish Rate Cut? No.

September 18, 2019

The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC or Fed) cut the target for the federal funds rate 0.25 percent at its September 18 meeting to a range of 1.75 to 2 percent, as widely expected. However, the newly released median projection of FOMC participants has no further cuts in place this year or next. Financial markets had been hoping for at least one more cut this year and interpreted the median projection as a hawkish sign. The markets have it wrong, however. A correct interpretation of the projection materials shows that at least one more cut this year is likely.
The key point to remember is that not all participants can vote. There are 17 participants but only 10 voters. (Votes rotate each year among the Reserve Bank presidents.)
Of the 17 participants, five said they wanted to keep the

Read More »

The Fed Is Looking for an Excuse to Cut Rates

June 20, 2019

Faced with growing risks to the economy, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) of the Federal Reserve System opted on June 19 not to change the target range for the federal funds rate. But a large majority of participants lowered their projections for the funds rate in late 2019 and late 2020 by around half a percentage point. The median projection of the longer-run, or neutral, federal funds rate fell from 2.75 to 2.5 percent.
It now appears that the Fed regrets the last two rate hikes in 2018 and is looking for any signs of economic weakness to provide cover for rate cuts. The Fed does not want to acknowledge this change of heart, especially in light of President Donald Trump’s public criticism of its policy stance. But it probably would be making the same decision even without

Read More »

The Fed Is Looking for an Excuse to Cut Rates

June 20, 2019

Faced with growing risks to the economy, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) of the Federal Reserve System opted on June 19 not to change the target range for the federal funds rate. But a large majority of participants lowered their projections for the funds rate in late 2019 and late 2020 by around half a percentage point. The median projection of the longer-run, or neutral, federal funds rate fell from 2.75 to 2.5 percent.
It now appears that the Fed regrets the last two rate hikes in 2018 and is looking for any signs of economic weakness to provide cover for rate cuts. The Fed does not want to acknowledge this change of heart, especially in light of President Donald Trump’s public criticism of its policy stance. But it probably would be making the same decision even without

Read More »

The Fed Is on Hold

March 21, 2019

The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC or Fed) left the target for the federal funds rate unchanged at a range of 2.25 to 2.50 percent, as was widely expected. The news in the March 2019 meeting came on two other fronts.
First, the projection for economic growth was marked down slightly, suggesting that the Fed has less reason to tighten further. Indeed, the median projection for the federal funds rate shows no rate increase this year and an increase of only 0.25 percent next year. Second, the FOMC announced that it will begin to slow the pace of running down its balance sheet in May, and it will stabilize the balance sheet by September, a bit earlier than expected. Both of these announcements imply a slightly easier stance of monetary policy over the next two years than markets had

Read More »

The Fed Continues Its Tightening Campaign

December 20, 2018

The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC, or Fed) raised the target for the federal funds rate by 0.25 percentage point to a range of 2.25 to 2.50 percent at its December 2018 meeting, in line with market expectations. The Fed also indicated that it is likely to raise interest rates another 0.50 percentage point in 2019, down 0.25 percentage point from the median of its previous projections in September. Overall, the decision was a finely balanced one, with good arguments for and against raising rates at this meeting. It seems likely that decisions on future rate hikes will remain close calls well into next year.
Market participants overwhelmingly expected the Fed to mark down its projection of future interest rate hikes, but the markdown was on the small side of expectations.  Prior to the

Read More »

The Fed’s Policy Implementation Framework

December 3, 2018

The minutes of the November 2018 meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC or Fed) cover a lengthy discussion on possible changes to the policy tools and procedures the Fed uses to control money-market interest rates. The Fed appears to be moving toward the proposal that I made with Brian Sack in a 2014 PIIE Policy Brief. Our proposal would give the Fed firmer control of the most important short-term interest rates in the economy while saving taxpayers money and keeping the payments system safe and liquid.
Our 2014 proposal had four main components:
1. The Fed should operate in a “floor” system in which it provides abundant liquidity by maintaining a large balance sheet and controls market interest rates through the influence of administered interest rates on the liquidity that it

Read More »

When the Next Recession Hits: A User’s Guide for Future QE

November 14, 2018

The global financial crisis of a decade ago pushed economies into deep recessions. To prevent these recessions from becoming depressions, several major central banks made large-scale purchases of long-term bonds and other financial assets to ease financial conditions and support spending.[1] These actions, known as quantitative easing (QE), were hardly without controversy. Critics warned that QE would fuel inflation, undercut creditors, and damage the credibility of central banks themselves. But as I have argued since the crisis, including in my recent Policy Brief with Brian Sack, QE was a success and if anything should have been undertaken more aggressively. The important thing now is to draw on lessons learned to fashion an approach for QE that smoothly and effectively transitions from

Read More »

Has Norway Been Saving Too Much or Too Little? What Intertemporal Accounting Can Tell Us

November 5, 2018

Despite amassing the world’s largest sovereign wealth fund, Norway has still not been saving enough to meet future budget demands from an aging population, according to a recent paper from economists at the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The paper assumes that adhering as closely as possible to the projected future paths of spending and revenues is a desirable goal. Social welfare considerations, however, suggest that reducing future spending relative to revenues is a better objective—and that Norway has, if anything, saved too much.
The Debate
Earlier this year, in a Policy Brief I argued that Norway has saved too much of its oil revenues relative to a benchmark in which the benefits of oil production are shared equally across generations. In response to my study, Ezequiel Cabezon and

Read More »

Treasury Correctly Declines to Label China a Currency Manipulator, For Now

October 24, 2018

The Trump administration is clearly irked by the fact that the recent depreciation in China’s currency partly offsets the tariffs the administration has imposed on US imports from China. “I think China is manipulating their currency, absolutely,” Trump said back in August. His comments and warnings by others had led to considerable speculation in the financial press about whether the US Treasury would name China a currency manipulator for allowing its currency to fall against the dollar.
On October 18, however, the US Treasury released its Foreign Exchange Report, without labeling China or any other country a currency manipulator. But Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin was reported to have said afterwards that he was open to changing the criteria Treasury uses to identify currency

Read More »

Tension Remains at the Heart of the Fed’s Forecast

September 27, 2018

The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC, or Fed) surprised no one at its September meeting by raising the target for the federal funds rate a quarter of a percentage point to a range of 2.00 to 2.25 percent. The FOMC has been tightening monetary conditions very slowly since late 2015. Its dilemma is a classic one for central banks—seeking to keep inflation at its target of 2 percent without causing an abrupt slowdown in growth. The FOMC also released new projections for key economic variables. The tension in the projections between a strong economy, with unemployment below its long-run level, and inflation stable at target remains as great as it was in June. In coming months, it is likely that inflation and inflation projections will rise or else the projection of the long-run rate of

Read More »

QE Skeptics Overstate Their Case

July 5, 2018

Four prominent economists (David Greenlaw, James Hamilton, Ethan Harris, and Kenneth West, or GHHW) attracted much attention earlier this year when they argued that the consensus of previous studies overstates the effects of quantitative easing (QE) on long-term interest rates. However, a careful reading of their paper and the associated data suggests that their conclusion is also overstated. It is true that some studies of the initial round of QE, or QE1, may have found effects on bond yields that were larger than would be expected in noncrisis circumstances. But the evidence suggests that moderately lower estimates, such as those employed by staff at the Federal Reserve in recent years, are reliable measures of the effect of QE in normal times.
GHHW conclude that (1) the lasting effect

Read More »

The Fed Signals a Tiny Tightening

June 14, 2018

As was widely expected, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) raised the target for the federal funds rate by 0.25 percentage point to a range of 1¾ to 2 percent at its June meeting. This was the second hike in 2018. The FOMC remains closely divided on whether it is likely to raise rates a total of three or four times this year, and only one participant’s changed projection was enough to push the median from three to four hikes. The committee slightly decreased projected rates of unemployment through 2020, increasing the internal inconsistency of its projections already apparent in a forecast that shows an extended period of unemployment below its long-run level yet no significant rise in inflation.
Chair Jerome Powell described the Fed’s policy dilemma as one of not tightening so fast

Read More »

Still No Inflation Puzzle

June 5, 2018

As the US unemployment rate continues to drift down to levels not seen in decades, many observers point to relatively low wage and price inflation as evidence that the Phillips curve is dead. Yet inflation is behaving exactly as the Phillips curve—which shows the inverse relationship between the inflation rate and the unemployment rate—would predict. The decline in the US unemployment rate is too recent and too small to have caused any significant rise in inflation to date. Inflation is likely to pick up over the course of this year and next, albeit with a considerable degree of uncertainty. This post updates and expands on my post of November 17, 2017.
The Natural Rate of Unemployment
Nowadays, economists tend to express the Phillips curve as a relationship between deviations of

Read More »

The Fed Is Satisfied for Now

May 2, 2018

The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) did not change the stance of US monetary policy at its meeting on May 2. Financial markets were not surprised. The minor changes in its policy statement all reflect improvements in recent economic data, notably a resumption of solid business investment and a return of core inflation close to its 2 percent target. The FOMC is widely expected to raise rates one-quarter of a percentage point at its next meeting in June.
With unemployment low and inflation at target, the United States would appear to be in monetary nirvana, as Fed watcher David Wessel tweeted in response to the FOMC statement. However, the big issue looming (aside from the unpredictable effects of a possible trade war) is the massive fiscal stimulus that is hitting the US economy this

Read More »

Janet Yellen’s Term as Fed Chair Was Uneventful—in a Good Way

February 1, 2018

The last meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) chaired by Janet Yellen, which took place on January 31, did not change the stance of monetary policy or make any meaningful changes from December in the policy statement. Jerome Powell, who has served on the Fed board since 2012, will take over as chair of the next meeting in March. Given that Powell has voted with Yellen at every meeting she chaired, there is little reason to expect much change in Fed policy.
The fact that Yellen’s four-year term as chair was largely uneventful should be counted as a major success. The reason is that the Fed did not screw up a smooth return of the US economy to full employment and price stability. Yellen has been a participant in the FOMC since 2004, first as president of the Federal Reserve

Read More »

Is the Prospect of a Trade Deficit Reduction an Accounting Illusion?

December 21, 2017

Will the new US tax overhaul passed by Congress reverse a longstanding incentive that causes multinational corporations to shift profits away from their US operations into affiliates in low-tax jurisdictions? A story in the Wall Street Journal by Greg Ip raises the possibility that such a shift might shrink the trade deficit by more than $250 billion and boost US GDP by more than 1 percent. But it is not clear whether the new legislation will change profit shifting so dramatically. Even if it does, the accounting changes will have no effect on broader measures of national income and the trade deficit—and no economic effects on firms or workers.
The basis of the story is a research paper circulated by the National Bureau of Economic Research earlier this year. The paper finds that US

Read More »

The Fed’s Inconsistent Numbers

December 14, 2017

As was widely expected, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) raised its short-term interest rate target one-quarter of a percentage point on December 13 to a range of 1.25 to 1.50 percent. The statement accompanying this decision was little changed from the November meeting. The FOMC also released updated projections, which it provides after every other meeting. But the projections for growth, inflation, and unemployment seem to be inconsistent with each other.
The FOMC’s projections for growth, inflation, and unemployment seem to be inconsistent with each other.
The most notable change in the projections is higher economic growth. The median projected GDP growth rate is now higher by an average of 0.2 percentage points for each year from 2017 through 2020. The unemployment rate was

Read More »

There Is No Inflation Puzzle—Japan Edition

December 8, 2017

A previous post showed that current low inflation in the United States does not contradict a standard Phillips curve model adapted to accommodate downward wage and price rigidity. Some readers may wonder whether the Japanese experience also is consistent with such a Phillips curve. It is often argued that the Bank of Japan (BOJ) has pursued extraordinarily easy monetary policy since 2013 with little to show in the way of higher inflation. As in the United States, however, Japan is only now beginning to exceed potential employment, so the real test of the Phillips curve is yet to happen.
The upper panel of figure 1 displays consumer price inflation in Japan since 1983, excluding food, energy, and consumption taxes. Core inflation has fluctuated around zero since 1995. The lower panel of

Read More »

There Is No Inflation Puzzle

November 17, 2017

Some economists are puzzled over why US inflation has remained low while the economy has reached, or even exceeded, potential employment. Commentators have argued that central banks are wrong to place too much faith in the Phillips curve model, in which inflation responds to deviations from potential employment, but the policy conclusions they draw are diametrically opposed. Some say there is no need for the Federal Reserve to tighten monetary policy, whereas others say the Fed should tighten faster.[1]
Yet inflation is behaving exactly as the Phillips curve would predict. The decline in the US unemployment rate is too recent and too small to have caused any significant rise in inflation to date. Inflation is likely to pick up a bit next year, which supports the Fed’s tightening path,

Read More »

No News Today (Fed Version)

November 1, 2017

The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) held its short-term interest rate steady on November 1 and made only minimal changes to its regular policy statement. These actions were widely expected. The FOMC continues to believe that “gradual increases in the federal funds rate” are likely to be needed but that the extent and timing of such increases will depend on how the economy evolves.
A key puzzle remains the unexpected drop in core measures of inflation earlier this year despite solid economic growth and a strong job market. It is not clear to what extent the decline reflects factors such as the drop in mobile phone charges that may not recur. The core personal consumption expenditure (PCE) price index rose 1.3 percent at an annual rate in the most recent (third) quarter from one quarter

Read More »

The Fed Buys into Secular Stagnation

September 20, 2017

As was widely expected, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) held its short-term interest rate steady on September 20 and announced that starting next month the Fed will gradually shrink its $4.5 trillion balance sheet, which it built up in response to the Great Recession to support the economy. The unexpected development was a further reduction in the median view of FOMC participants about where the short-term interest rate will settle in the long run. The Fed apparently endorses the view, promoted by research of some of its own staff, that the slowdowns in the growth rates of productivity and the working-age population have persistently lowered both the economy’s potential growth rate and the rate of return on investment.
The FOMC’s estimate of the so-called neutral federal funds

Read More »

The Fed Takes a Summer Vacation

July 26, 2017

The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) met today and decided to keep policy on hold. This decision was largely expected. The statement was nearly identical to that issued in June. The Fed is happy with the pace of economic growth and job creation but is mildly concerned about an inflation rate that continues to be a bit below its target of 2 percent.
In one of the few changes to the statement, the FOMC said that it expects to begin a gradual reduction in the size of its balance sheet "relatively soon." In June, the FOMC had said that reduction in the balance sheet was likely to start "this year." Barring any unexpected economic developments, the FOMC is likely to start reducing its balance sheet after the September meeting. The next interest rate hike will probably wait until

Read More »

Mobile Phones and Monetary Policy

June 14, 2017

By the standards of recent Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meetings, today’s meeting and press conference were packed with interesting news. The main policy action was a widely expected increase in the federal funds rate by 0.25 percent to a range of 1.00 to 1.25 percent. Three other items were less expected.
First, Chair Janet Yellen pointed to "one-off" price reductions in mobile phone service plans in March as the main reason the FOMC’s preferred measure of inflation has moved away from its 2 percent target to 1.5 percent as of April.1 She also mentioned declines in pharmaceutical prices. Is the FOMC revisiting the bad old days of the 1970s, when it tried to explain away inflation that was too high by pointing to a seemingly endless stream of one-off factors? The Fed’s preferred

Read More »