Monday, August 27, 2012

The Fed and Fiscal Responsibility


If the US goes off the fiscal cliff – that is, if tax increases and spending cuts go into effect in 2013 as currently scheduled – can monetary policy actions offset the macroeconomic impact?  Ben Bernanke doesn’t think so – indeed he’s certain they can’t – and he has said as much.

But on some level he must be wrong.  True, it’s hard to think of any feasible monetary policy action that would both be strong enough and have a sufficiently quick impact to offset the fiscal cliff directly.  But what matters more for monetary policy is not the direct effect but the effect on expectations.  Surely the Fed could alter expectations of future monetary policy in such a way that the resulting increase in private spending would be enough to offset the decreased spending due to fiscal tightening.  Just think, for example, if the Fed were to increase its long-run inflation target.  If nothing else, a sufficiently large increase in long-run US inflation expectations would make the dollar sufficiently unattractive to result in an export boom that would offset the fiscal tightening.  More important, perhaps, it would make currency and Treasury securities less attractive to Americans and encourage them to do other things with their wealth, such as buying houses and durable goods and investing in productive capacity.

Of course that isn’t going to happen.  To get the Fed to do something as drastic as increasing its long-run inflation target, we’d need more than a fiscal cliff; we’d probably need something like a repeat of the 1930’s.  But at this point the Fed has substantial amount of flexibility even within the confines of its long-run target, because it hasn’t specified how that target would best be implemented.  It hasn’t said, for example, whether the target should be interpreted as a growth rate target – where policy constantly begins with a clean slate, ignoring previous missed targets – or a level path target – where policy always attempts to compensate for earlier misses and regain the original target path.  If the latter case prevails, the Fed hasn’t said whether the target path would be retroactive and if so how far back it would be retroactive (for example, choosing 2007 as a base year for the target path instead of 2012).  Moreover, while the Fed has affirmed its commitment to its dual mandate, it hasn’t said how its inflation targeting approach would interact with its employment mandate.

One way to implement the long-run inflation target would be as follows.  First, estimate the economy’s potential output path that was, as of 2007, consistent with maximum employment.  Then add to this a 2% inflation path starting from the 2007 price level.  Express the result as a target path for nominal GDP, and project that path into the future at the estimated future growth rate of potential output plus 2%.  Pursue this path as a level path target.

Because nominal GDP has fallen so far below the path that would, in 2007, have been consistent with 2% inflation at estimated potential output, this approach implies a very dramatic period of catch-up.  Essentially, the Fed would be committing to follow a very aggressive pro-growth, pro-inflation policy over the medium run as soon as it is able to get some traction on the economy.  But it would be doing so in a way that is consistent with its 2% long-run inflation target.

The effect on expectations would be quick and dramatic.  By promising either growth or inflation or both, the Fed would make hoarding cash (or other safe assets) look like a clearly losing proposition.  Depending on whether you expect inflation or growth, either your money will lose its purchasing power, or you will miss out on a lot of profits as real assets recover.  My guess is that, with this change in the medium-run outlook, the resulting increase in private spending over the short run would more than offset the fiscal cliff.  Your guess may be different, but in any case we’re talking about an impact considerably larger than what can be accomplished with the kind of changes in its balance sheet that the Fed typically contemplates now when it thinks about trying to stimulate the economy.  If Ben Bernanke were contemplating anything like what I am suggesting, he clearly wouldn’t be justified in being certain of his inability to offset the fiscal cliff.

OK, this isn’t going to happen either.  At least it’s highly unlikely.  Ben Bernanke isn’t going to have his “Volcker moment,” as Christina Romer called it, just in time to offset a huge tightening in fiscal policy.  And, with any luck, the tightening in fiscal policy won’t be as huge as current law prescribes:  after the election, hopefully, either one party will be in power, or Democrats and Republicans will be able to come to enough of an agreement to prevent disaster.

But the sad thing is that preventing disaster almost certainly means putting the US back on an unsustainable fiscal path – because there’s very little chance that Congress will be able to agree on a credible long-run fiscal plan at the same time that it agrees on a way to avoid going over the cliff in the short run.  Assuming that we do go over the cliff and that the Fed doesn’t offset the impact, the long-run fiscal results may not be much better, because the growth impact of the fiscal shock – allowing for hysteresis effects – will undo at least part of the improvement in the budget.  For those whose primary concern is fiscal sustainability, the best-case scenario would be that we do go over the cliff and that the Fed acts aggressively to offset the macroeconomic impact.

Again, it isn’t going to happen.  And that’s kind of sad.  The Fed’s timidity is creating a situation where the only realistic choices – for the moment anyhow – are economic disaster and fiscal irresponsibility.  Doesn’t that mean that the Fed bears some responsibility for the fiscal problems that are eventually likely to emerge?

  


DISCLOSURE: Through my investment and management role in a Treasury directional pooled investment vehicle and through my role as Chief Economist at Atlantic Asset Management, which generally manages fixed income portfolios for its clients, I have direct or indirect interests in various fixed income instruments, which may be impacted by the issues discussed herein. The views expressed herein are entirely my own opinions and may not represent the views of Atlantic Asset Management. This article should not be construed as investment advice, and is not an offer to participate in any investment strategy or product

30 comments:

JW Mason said...

Surely the Fed could alter expectations of future monetary policy in such a way that the resulting increase in private spending would be enough to offset the decreased spending due to fiscal tightening. Just think, for example, if the Fed were to increase its long-run inflation target.

I don't think this is sure at all. The Fed can announce whatever inflation target it wants; that only affects behavior insofar as (1) it is expected to still try to hit that target under changed conditions; (2) it actually has the capacity to hit the target; and (3) the private agents who would like to increase their spending assuming the believe (1) and (2), don't face balance-sheet or credit constraints that prevent them from doing so.

Set aside the first (familiar from in the form of time inconsistency and all that) and the third, though they are both important; it seems to me that nobody in the market-monetarist orbit has a good answer to the second. I assume that you or I cannot announce an inflation target and thereby change inflation or unemployment levels, right? The expectations channel only works to the extent that the central bank possesses tools *other than expectations* to achieve its target, otherwise there is no reason for anyone to expect its target to be achieved.

The Fed has been missing its targets for inflation and unemployment for some time now; it's not clear why giving it another target to miss is supposed to be a panacea.

Andy Harless said...

JW Mason:

"The expectations channel only works to the extent that the central bank possesses tools *other than expectations* to achieve its target"

And it does possess such tools: conventional OMO's and the federal funds rate target, which it can keep at zero for 10 years (or 15 or 20) instead of 5 (or 2 or 3) if it takes that long to hit the NGDP or price level target path. As long as we are expected eventually (within some finite time) to exit the liquidity trap, the Fed has the tools it needs to eventually hit the target. (And note that, in the case of Japan's severe liquidity trap, it actually exited twice, but the BoJ did not take those opportunities to move toward a better target. Presumably if it had had a target, it would have moved toward that target instead of tightening each time the depression started to lift.)

And since (assuming the liquidity trap eventually ends) the Fed can hit the target in the longer run, it is not so terribly hard to do so in the short-to-medium run, because agents will anticipate the eventual target hit and act accordingly, causing the liquidity trap to exit sooner.

I think your point (1) is actually a better one, but I think the time inconsistency problem would overcome itself if the Fed announced a regime change. It's hard enough to imagine that the Fed would announce such a regime change, but if it did so, it's almost impossible to imagine that it would subsequently reverse the regime change, barring very unusual circumstances. Surely the Fed cares about its institutional credibility: it's painfully difficult now for it to give up any of its "hard won" anti-inflation credibility; it would also be very difficult to give up anti-deflation credibility if it had that. And it doesn't need perfect credibility; it only needs to convince a sufficient number of agents to stop hoarding cash and Treasuries.

Regarding (3), surely not all relevant private sector agents are liquidity constrained. You don't need everyone to spend more, just enough people to spend enough.

JW Mason said...

DeLong today is good on this.

And it does possess such tools: conventional OMO's and the federal funds rate target, which it can keep at zero for 10 years (or 15 or 20) instead of 5 (or 2 or 3) if it takes that long to hit the NGDP or price level target path. As long as we are expected eventually (within some finite time) to exit the liquidity trap, the Fed has the tools it needs to eventually hit the target.

But no, it doesn't possess those tools. Yes, it can, of course, keep the Fed Funds rate at zero for many years. But it cannot commit to doing so, and therefore it cannot significantly change expectations about whether it will actually do so.

You can write a model where the central bank is committed to whatever you like. But the human beings who make up actual central banks cannot commit to anything 15 or 20 years from now. (If they could, they still couldn't, since they'd be subject to the binding commitments of Feds past.) Strictly speaking, they can't bind future policy at all, and they certainly cannot bind policy made by other appointees of other future administrations. Policy at a horizon of more than a few years simply isn't available to mortal beings -- at least not monetary policy. Put another way, long-term monetary policy is set by everyone who has a reasonable prospect of influencing the political process over the next generation -- which means it isn't really set by anyone.

The thing about a regime change, from where I'm sitting, is that is precisely something you cannot announce. Anyone who can make a regime change, can reverse it; credible regime changes happen only when they're compelled by outside forces that are plausibly believed to be very unlikely to recur.

Andy Harless said...

"...it cannot commit to doing so, and therefore it cannot significantly change expectations about whether it will actually do so."

The premise is only sort of true, and the conclusion doesn't follow from the premise. The future, including the future of Fed policy, is of course subject to uncertainty and will always be so, but there are many things the Fed can do, both verbally and in terms of "concrete steppes" that alter the environment faced by future policymakers, to change the subjective distribution of future policy actions.

It is not accurate to view credibility as a dichotomous variable (although this may sometimes be an appropriate first approximation for modeling purposes). From the point of view of some agents, the Fed shifted to a credible high-inflaiton regime in late 2008 and one only has to wait long enough for the (in this case unusually) long and variable lags to kick in. You and I may think these people are wacko, but they are nonetheless presumably part of the reason that the recovery, weak as it is, has continued and that the inflation rate has remained comfortably positive. Now at some point, some series of Fed actions (including but not limited to verbal actions) would convince me that the likelihood of higher inflation over the medium term has risen significantly. You may never be convinced. But the Fed doesn't need to convince you, because if it convinces enough people (like me), you will turn out to be wrong.

MrIlir said...

Alex Gheg has a new framework that will change your views. Quantity, quality, variety and convenience in one equation. A scale for utility? See it to judge http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6tFLGpcOpE

Anonymous said...

I assume that you or I cannot announce an inflation target and thereby change inflation or unemployment levels, right? http://www.braungresham.com/2013/02/cassie-gresham-to-speak-at-hcc-lunch-learn-on-march-28th/

Anonymous said...

These are actually great ideas in regarding blogging. You have touched some pleasant things here. Any way keep up wrinting. Conservation Easement

yakenzu toby said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
yakenzu toby said...

I agree with you. This post is truly inspiring. I like your post and everything you share with us is current and very informative, I want to bookmark the page so I can return here from you that you have done a fantastic job. judi online, agen bola

muzammal khan said...

I agree with you. This post is truly inspiring. I like your post and everything you share with us is current and very informative, I want. WMF Review

salman khan said...

I think you (during the periods you were jobless and not underemployed or out of the work force) would be in the structurally unemployed classification. http://cheapestflights.to/india/

muzammal khan said...

That being said, you did not discuss the impact on the lack of employment variety of individuals like me, who have been. Teamspeak Server

muzammal khan said...

I did not know that every year, 8,000 Africa American children die before attaining their first wedding and that they die at more than twice the rate of white children. check this site out

muzammal khan said...

I did not know that every year, 8,000 Africa American children die before attaining their first wedding and that they die at more tha. rumah

Yasir Khalid said...

So here it looks like a cost range focus on would have created approximately the same outcomes as the Fed’s (unofficial until Jan 2012) rising prices focus on, and whether it would have undershot or overshot relies on when you begin the focus on direction. Sarangbet.org

muzammal khan said...

There are trillions and trillions of dollars debt out there with no assets behind them. Much of this debt can never be paid. discover this info here

salman khan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
salman khan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
salman khan said...

Often it is the awesome deficiency of way of lifestyle of someone near that provides this home; and then the regularity of medical center trips and memorials gradually begins to choose up amount, like a drumbeat in the forests. raccoons in attic

Yasir Khalid said...

The set up chosen Jean-Paul Huchon, Chief professional of Town and Chief professional of Île de Italy Area as Chief professional of FMDV, José Fortunati, mayor of Porto Alegre as Treasurer and Alain Le Saux as Executive Home of FMDV. credit card fraud lawyer

salman khan said...

Remain at the innovative of new technological innovation – create sure you have academic classes and participants presenting believes like geothermal energy, biomass heat energy, etc. WII ISO

muzammal khan said...

Meanwhile, TerraMax, Bloomington, Minn., has been able to improve lifestyle expectancy. professional house cleaning

salman khan said...

I don't know what all those stitches do anyway, and then if I really get into sewing that's cheap enough that I'll upgrade. top 10 quotes

Yasir Khalid said...

I suppose if given a voice most organisms might make the argument that humans are the predominant fouling organisms. But they don’t speak our language, so they get to foul our stuff not the other way around. drug lawyer

salman khan said...

The installation and service of plumbing and heating provides experience that is most easily learned by doing and allows the opportunity for the individual to continue to advance in the field or transition into another role within the industry, utilizing their years of real-world experience. link m88

salman khan said...

According to an intellect evaluation ready by the Legal Undercover Department of the FBI, the requirement for copper from third world countries. christmasstockingscross stitch

Yasir Khalid said...

He says offering details and unable to apply the tasks will be just another way of “making companies in the interaction market rich”. babyscream.com

Yasir Khalid said...

Nice information, valuable and excellent design, as share good stuff with good ideas and concepts, lots of great information and inspiration, both of which I need, thanks to offer such a helpful information here. http://moviesfreedom.com/

Yasir Khalid said...

A handmade canoe used to be THE usual mode of transportation hundreds of years ago, now doubles as a focal point in an art exhibit. Good to see the artistry and muse surrounding this artist's views brought to the attention of others in such a creative, non-traditional way. http://www.thirdway.co/

Yasir Khalid said...

It is our intention to drive the first Electric Van for approximately 90 days and discover all of the nuances that might come with an EV or if there are any design changes we would like to have included with future vans,” said Robichaud. park office