Tag Archives: Inflation

Excerpt from Kohn’s speech

Posted on by

My expectations for moderating inflation and limited spillover effects from commodity price increases depend critically on the continued stability of inflation expectations.

The FOMC has never wavered on this all important aspect of monetary policy – they firmly believe inflation expectations are what causes a relative value story to turn into an inflation story.

In that regard, year-ahead inflation expectations of households have increased this year in response to the jump in headline inflation. Of greater concern, some measures of longer-term inflation expectations appear to have edged up. If longer-term inflation expectations were to become unmoored–whether because of a protracted period of elevated headline inflation or because the public misinterpreted the recent substantial policy easing as suggesting that monetary policy makers had a greater tolerance for inflation than previously thought–then I believe that we would be facing a more serious situation.

If inflation expectations come unmoored for any reason, inflation is thought to follow.

And here he expresses concern that inflation expectations may be rising due to a public perception that the Fed easings mean the Fed has a greater inflation tolerance.

Governor Kohn is clearly concerned that the Fed’s actions since August may be causing inflation expectations to elevate, and his statement further implies that it will take actual ‘action’ on the part of the Fed to dispel the notion that they are more tolerant of inflation.

Markets will not believe the Fed will take action on inflation until after they actually do it, but that the Fed will respond to weakness regardless of inflation. This was expressed by today’s price action. With crude hitting $129 EDs a year out are 8 bps lower in yield.

Share

FT: Germany leans towards tax cut

Posted on by


[Skip to the end]

Germany leans towards tax cut

by Bertrand Benoit

(FT) Michael Glos said the government’s budget pledge “should not stand in isolation above all other [goals]”. The minister said he “fully supported” a plan by his Christian Social Union to cut income tax by €28bn ($43bn, £22bn) until 2012 without an equivalent cut in spending. The government last week slashed its tax revenue estimate by more than €5bn for this year and next, yet advocates of fiscal rectitude are becoming a minority as the CSU, the CDU – its sister party headed by Chancellor Angela Merkel – and the Social Democratic party, its partner in the ruling alliance, seek to please voters ahead of next year’s election.

While this would increase employment and output, it would also add nominal aggregate demand as well as add to the ‘funding pressure’ of the national government. In the current environment, this would add support to nominal prices as well as undermine the credit quality of the government.

What’s happening is much of the mainstream believes inflation is a function of monetary policy and not fiscal policy, so they see this as a way to support the economy without inflation.

Same happened in the US with Bernanke pushing Congress for the fiscal package that’s now kicking in and adding to price pressures. In general, the FOMC holds the mainstream belief that ‘true inflation’ is a function of only monetary policy.


[top]

Share

Fed Speak: Yellen the Dove

Posted on by


[Skip to the end]

There have been a lot of Fed speakers; so, I’ve selected a few comments on Yellen’s speech, as she has been deemed the most dovish Fed bank president.

Note the shift in rhetoric from ‘market functioning’ to inflation.

Of course, the FOMC’s idea of getting tough and fighting inflation has been to only cut 25 basis points.

Data dependent, this seems to be changing.

It could be the signs of passthrough from headline to core CPI or signs inflation expectations are elevating (as per their recent comments).

They also seem to have lost confidence in their inflation forecasts and may not be giving their future inflation indicators the same weight as in the past 6 months.

Fed’s Yellen: Funds rate been cut enough for now

by Ros Krasny

(Reuters) – San Francisco Federal Reserve Bank President Janet Yellen said on Wednesday that the federal funds rate has been lowered far enough for now after months of aggressive central bank rate cuts.

The Fed’s key monetary policy tool ‘has come way down,’ Yellen said while critiquing presentations on the economy at a symposium for college students organized by the San Francisco Fed and the Pacific Northwest Regional Economic Conference.

Yellen said the Fed continues to grapple with difficult policy choices but restated that high inflation was a worry. ‘The 1970s were a horrible period. If there’s one thing that has to be very high priority, we don’t want to go back to a period that is anything like that,’ she said.


[top]

Share

US – State Tax Reveues Stuggling

Posted on by


[Skip to the end]

Preliminary data for Jan – Mar quarter shows sales tax at -0.1% YY, first decline since 2002 Q1. 21 states out of 36 reporting so far saw declines. Inflation adjusted sales tax declined in at least 27 states. Income tax was +4.7% YY thus no notable deterioration yet.

Here are the sales tax data from largest states:

Califonia -0.9
Texas +6.7
NY +4.2
Florida -6.0
Illinois +0.1
Penn -1.0
Ohio +0.5
Michigan -0.7
Georgia -3.0
North Carolina -7.6

Separately, Tennessee says sales tax dropped 5.5% in April.

The key to aggregate demand is net state spending.

If taxes fall but spending is sustained, that’s a demand add, for example.

Gross spending/taxing also has a multiplier greater than 1.

This includes states ‘borrowing to spend’ for ‘investment’ accounts.

GDP tables showed that states have cut back, reducing the size of their add to aggregate demand.

But Federal government has more than made up for it.


[top]

Share

Wed am recap

Posted on by

Mainstream economics says:

Get inflation right and that ‘automatically’ optimizes long-term growth and employment.

Adding to demand with a negative supply shock turns a ‘relative value story’ into an ‘inflation story.’

The ECB is following mainstream theory, while the Fed is not.

why?

The Fed sees looming systemic, deflationary tail risk at the door. At least up to now.

The panic of 1907 and the early 1930s deflationary collapse (both previous examples given by the Fed) were gold standard events.

With a gold standard (and/or other fixed rate regimes) there are direct supply side constraints on the reserve currency. Interest rates are market determined, and during a credit crunch rates spike higher ‘automatically.’ Even the treasury must fund itself and faces the same supply side constraints, thereby limiting fiscal responses. This continues in today’s fixed fx currencies.

With floating fx/non-convertible currency there are inherent no direct supply side constraints on bank lending, deposit creation, and credit in general. Any constraints are on the demand side, including financial capital where constraints are also on the demand side. The CB necessarily directly sets rates, not market forces, and government spending is not constrained by taxing, borrowing, etc., hence fiscal packages are subject only to political choice.

Today’s risks are much the same as previous financial crisis type risks like 1987 and 1998, where the government and its agencies have the open option of ‘writing the check’ as desired, with inflation the price to pay, not government solvency as with fixed fx regimes.

Just like the 1970s, the Saudis are acting the swing producer and setting price and letting quantity they pump adjust. This is also necessarily the case when one is single supplier at the margin with excess capacity. The alternative of pumping flat out and hitting bids in the spot market is not a functional option for any monopolist. Only price setting is.

Russia is also a monopoly supplier at the margin and probably is also acting as a swing producer. So crude prices go to where the higher of the two set them.

Mainstream theory has not yet publicly addressed this kind of negative supply shock.

One option is to match the domestic inflation rates to the price hikes to try to avoid declining real terms of trade.

This is both politically impossible, and it can quickly lead to accelerating inflation.

We have two choices, neither particularly attractive:

  1. Watch our real terms of trade continue to collapse as crude prices are continuously hiked.
  2. Try to inflate to moderate the drop in real terms of trade.

Ironically, we will chose the later as we did in the 1970s because inflation is not a function of interest rates in the direction CBs subscribe to.

Increasing nominal rates increases inflation via the cost and demand channels.

Costs of holding inventory and investment rise with rate hikes.

Governments are net payers of interest to the non-government sectors; so, rate hikes also increase government spending on interest to support incomes in the non-government sectors.

Good luck to us!

Share

Changing Tides

Posted on by

I’ve been thinking that when the Fed turns its attention to inflation it will find itself way behind that curve, which it is by any mainstream standard, and that the curve then gets negative from a year or two out as markets anticipate rate hikes followed by falling inflation and rate cuts.

Didn’t know exactly how it would get from here to there, how long it would take or exactly when it would happen.

I never thought the Fed would let it go this far. Especially Governor Kohn, who has been through this before in the 1970s with Burns, Miller, and Volcker. This FOMCs inflation tolerance lasted a lot longer than I expected, even with a weak economy and perceived systemic risk.

Won’t be long before the mainstream comes down hard on this FOMC for letting the inflation cat out of the bag with a high risk, untested, counter theory strategy of aggressively cutting into a triple negative supply shock. The mainstream will see it as a ‘hail Mary’ move. If it works, fine, if not it was a foolish error with a major price to pay to fix it.

Maybe they just got what will turn out to be overconfident in their inflation fighting ability. Kind of a ‘we know how to do that and can do it anytime’ attitude.

Wrong. They will soon find out it is not so easy.

Maybe they got confused and saw the tail risk as that of the gold standard era when there were real supply side constraints to money to deal with.

Also, they probably blamed the whole 1970’s thing on labor unions; so, maybe they got blind sided this time because they thought without unions wages would be ‘well contained’ and therefore there would be no inflation.

Wrong on that score as well. It was about oil before, and it is about oil now.

And the fact is, they have no tools for fighting inflation. They think they do (hiking rates), but higher rates just make it worse by raising costs and jacking up rentier incomes. (Incomes of savers who do not work or produce = more demand and no supply)

The inflation broke in the early 80’s only because of a supply response of about 15 million barrels of crude per day that buried OPEC and caused prices to collapse for almost 20 years. (And even during the 20 years of low oil prices and falling imported prices inflation still averaged around 3%.)

That kind of supply response is not going to happen in the near future. I expect the Saudis to keep hiking and inflation to keep getting worse no matter what the Fed does. It is payback time for them from being humiliated in the 1980s, and they are also at ideological war with us whether we know it or not.

Markets might have a false start or two with the interest rate response and flattening curve, just to not make it too easy.

Also, as before, there could be an equity pullback when it is sensed the Fed is going to seriously fight inflation with hikes designed to keep a sufficient output gap to bring inflation increases down.

And along the way everything goes up, including housing prices, during a major cost push inflation. Even with low demand. Just look at all the weak emerging market nations that have had major inflations with weak demand, high rates, etc. etc.

Share

Yellen the Dove on inflation

Posted on by

“Inflation is a problem,” she said. Yet the problem isn’t excessive demand, rising wages, or a tight labor market, but “negative supply shocks.” Once the shocks wear off, the inflation rate can’t be sustained in the long run without a pick-up in wage growth, she said.

“There’s no textbook answer to what monetary policy should be doing at this time,” Yellen added.

Yes, there is – the mainstream says quite clearly ‘don’t add to demand during a negative supply shock. Or a triple negative supply shock. That will monetize the price increases and turn a relative value story into an inflation story.’

The FF rate is now below the year over year headline and core CPI; so, it’s easy for the Fed to now make the case the ‘real rate’ is negative and cutting it any could adversely alter long term employment and growth given the balance of risks between market functioning, inflation, and the output gap.

They also think they know that if markets are expecting a 25 basis point cut they need to do less than that to get a positive inflation response.

And, as before, they need to set a rate for the TAF and accept any bank legal collateral to be able to more effectively target LIBOR as desired.

Share

Answer to the USD question

Posted on by

Ed says:

Warren,

Isn’t it also true that the US export boom is less a result of the weaker dollar, so much as it is the cause? Foreigners using the trade surplus dollars they were previously content to save, are now spending them, and the shopping list is sizable. In this sense, all the dollars we have been exporting for years are coming home to roost, and that explains a good chunk of the inflation we are seeing.

Ed

I agree the cause is foreigners switching as a sector from wanting to accumulate USD to not wanting to accumulate them, and therefore spending them.

However, I see the market forces working as follows:

The first desire is ‘not to save’ which drives the USD down either until the $ is somehow low enough where they want to save it again, which doesn’t make sense to me, or until the USD is low enough for them to spend them here, which makes a bit more sense to me.

And the other force is the decreased desire to export to us which is evidenced by higher import prices.

Last, this is all inflationary, and inflation is the other channel for getting rid of a trade gap.

For an extreme example, if there is sufficient inflation for the minimum wage to go to $60 billion per hour, the real trade gap is suddenly down to only an hour of labor, though still nominally at 60 billion.

The combination of rising net exports, falling imports, and inflation are all working together right now to digest the sudden shift from CBs and monetary authorities away from buying USD financial assets.

Fiscal adjustment checks start going out in a couple of weeks.

Rest of govt. spending going up as well.

GDP should muddle through and inflation continue to accelerate.

It may dawn on the Fed that the weak dollar is hurting the financial sector as the consumer is being squeezed by food/energy prices and therefore having trouble making loan payments. That’s the price of sticky wages, at least this time around.

Foreign CBs have no option regarding world currency stability but to try to put pressure on the Fed to stop cutting.

Share

Money (USD)

Posted on by

My take on the USD:

It was at a level based on foreigners wanting to accumulate $70 billion per month which also = the US trade gap (accounting identity).

Most of that desire to accumulate came from foreign CBs trying to support their exporters, oil producers accumulating USD financial assets, and foreign portfolios allocating some percentage of assets to USD assets.

Paulson cut off the CBs calling the currency manipulators and outlaws.

Bush cut off the oil producers by being perceived to be conducting a holy war.

Bernanke scared off the portfolio managers with what looks to them like an ‘inflate your way out of debt’ policy.

And US pension funds are diversifying out of USD into passive commodities and foreign securities.  Looks to me like the desire to accumulate USD overseas is falling towards zero rapidly.

This means they sell us less and buy more of our goods, services, and our real assets.

Volumes’ of non oil imports are falling and of oil imports are flat.

The dollar has gotten low enough for the trade gap to fall from over $70 billion to under $60 billion per month (February was an aberration IMHO).

The dollar will ‘adjust’ until it corresponds with a trade gap that = desired foreign accumulation of USD financial assets.

I see no reason to think the trade gap should not go to zero.

The USD probably has not traded down enough to reflect the zero desire to accumulate USD abroad.

The ECB has serious ideological issues regarding buying of USD.  Not the least of which they don’t want to give the impression that the USD is ‘backing’ the euro, which would be the appearance if they collected USD reserves.

The ECB has an inflation problem, and they believe the strong euro has kept it from being much worse.

The policy ‘shift’ might be the process of ending of US rate cuts at the next meeting by cutting less than expected.

This might first mean only a 25 basis point cut when the market prices in 50 basis points, followed by no cut when markets price in 25 basis points, for example.

This would firm the USD and soften the commodities near term, as after the last 75 basis point cut when markets were pricing 100 basis points.

But this does not change the foreign desires to accumulate USD as direct intervention by the ECB would, for example.

So the adjustment process that gets us to a zero trade gap will continue.

And it will continue to drive up headline CPI with core not far behind.

And US GDP will muddle through in the 0% to +2% range with weak private sector consumption being supported by exports, US government consumption, and moderate investment.

Share

Market update

Posted on by

Inflation ripping:
Oil up, grains and commodities up, and dollar down, as continued US demand at higher prices for energy transfers more $US to foreigners who don’t want to accumulate them.

Weakness continues:
Stocks down and credit spreads looking wider, and claims lower but have nonetheless worked their way higher since year end and only rising exports keep GDP at ‘muddling through’ levels.

Interest rates down:
As markets continue to believe Fed won’t even begin to act vs inflation, and will do ‘whatever it takes’ to narrow the output gap to zero, in total contrast to mainstream economic theory.

Share