June Fed Minutes

Here are the minutes from the Fed’s June meeting. The FOMC decided to raise interest rates. There was one dissenting vote.

Here’s a key passage:

Several participants indicated that the reduction in policy accommodation arising from the commencement of balance sheet normalization was one basis for believing that, if economic conditions evolved broadly as anticipated, the target range for the federal funds rate would follow a less steep path than it otherwise would. However, some other participants suggested that they did not see the balance sheet normalization program as a factor likely to figure heavily in decisions about the target range for the federal funds rate. A few of these participants judged that the degree of additional policy firming that would result from the balance sheet normalization program was modest.

Participants generally reiterated their support for continuing a gradual approach to raising the federal funds rate. Several participants expressed confidence that a series of further increases in the federal funds rate in coming years, along the lines implied by the medians of the projections for the federal funds rate in the June SEP, would contribute to a stabilization, over the medium term, of the inflation rate around the Committee’s 2 percent objective, especially as this tightening of monetary policy would affect the economy only with a lag and would start from a point at which policy was still accommodative. However, a few participants who supported an increase in the target range at the present meeting indicated that they were less comfortable with the degree of additional policy tightening through the end of 2018 implied by the June SEP median federal funds rate projections. These participants expressed concern that such a path of increases in the policy rate, while gradual, might prove inconsistent with a sustained return of inflation to 2 percent.

Several participants endorsed a policy approach, such as that embedded in many participants’ projections, in which the unemployment rate would undershoot their current estimates of the longer-term normal rate for a sustained period. They noted that the longer-run normal rate of unemployment is difficult to measure and that recent evidence suggested resource pressures generated only modest responses of nominal wage growth and inflation. Against this backdrop, possible benefits cited by policymakers of a period of tight labor markets included a further rise in nominal wage growth that would bolster inflation expectations and help push the inflation rate closer to the Committee’s 2 percent longer-run goal, as well as a stimulus to labor market participation and business fixed investment. It was also suggested that the symmetry of the Committee’s inflation goal might be underscored if inflation modestly exceeded 2 percent for a time, as such an outcome would follow a long period in which inflation had undershot the 2 percent longer-term objective. Several participants expressed concern that a substantial and sustained unemployment undershooting might make the economy more likely to experience financial instability or could lead to a sharp rise in inflation that would require a rapid policy tightening that, in turn, could raise the risk of an economic downturn. However, other participants noted that if a sharp rise in inflation or inflation expectations did occur, the Committee could readily respond using conventional monetary policy tools. With regard to financial stability, one participant emphasized the importance of remaining vigilant about financial developments but observed that previous episodes of elevated financial imbalances and low unemployment had limited relevance for the present situation, as the current system of financial regulation was likely more robust than that prevailing before the financial crisis.

I know the Fed’s language is dull as dirt but that’s how central bankers write. Basically, the Fed looks to continue with gradual rate hikes. We’ll probably get one more this year.

This issue of contention is the balance sheet. Some folks on the FOMC want to start paring back the Fed’s gigantic balance sheet this year. Others aren’t so sure.

Reading the Fed’s minutes is a study in indefinite pronouns; some said this, others said that while many others said something entirely different.

Posted by on July 5th, 2017 at 2:27 pm


The information in this blog post represents my own opinions and does not contain a recommendation for any particular security or investment. I or my affiliates may hold positions or other interests in securities mentioned in the Blog, please see my Disclaimer page for my full disclaimer.