Bottom-line: 중앙은행이 가장 중요한 척도 중 하나로 사용하는 지표(개인이 소비한 물품 가격들의 평균 물가 상승 정도)가 가장 느린 속도의 증가폭을 보였고, 소비 지출 또한 둔화 되면서 중앙은행이 금리인상 강도를 더 약하게 해야 할 당위성을 줌.
The Federal Reserve’s preferred inflation measures eased in December to the slowest annual paces in over a year while consumer spending fell, affirming expectations for policymakers to further downshift the pace of interest-rate hikes. The personal consumption expenditures core price index, which excludes food and energy, rose 4.4% in December from a year earlier, Commerce Department data showed Friday. The overall gauge climbed 5% year-over-year, still well above the Fed’s 2% goal but both were the slowest paces since late 2021. From a month earlier, the core gauge — which Fed Chair Jerome Powell has stressed is a more accurate measure of where inflation is heading — was up 0.3%. The overall PCE price index increased 0.1%.
The Federal Reserve’s preferred inflation measures eased in December to the slowest annual paces in over a year while consumer spending fell, affirming expectations for policymakers to further downshift the pace of interest-rate hikes. The personal consumption expenditures core price index, which excludes food and energy, rose 4.4% in December from a year earlier, Commerce Department data showed Friday. The overall gauge climbed 5% year-over-year, still well above the Fed’s 2% goal but both were the slowest paces since late 2021. From a month earlier, the core gauge — which Fed Chair Jerome Powell has stressed is a more accurate measure of where inflation is heading — was up 0.3%. The overall PCE price index increased 0.1%.
Market Reaction: 먼저 발표 된 경제성장률 세부사항에서 짐작할 수 있는 부분이었기에 새로운 정보로써 시장에 영향을 주진 못함.
Meanwhile, personal spending was in line with expectations on a monthly basis, though there was a downward revision to prior data -- of course, all of this was implicit in yesterday’s GDP figure, so there isn’t really any new news here.
Meanwhile, personal spending was in line with expectations on a monthly basis, though there was a downward revision to prior data -- of course, all of this was implicit in yesterday’s GDP figure, so there isn’t really any new news here.
Bottom-line: 파월 의장은 아서 번스나 폴 볼커 그 누구도 닮지 않고 스스로의 역사를 개척코자 하는 것으로 보임. 1970년대 아서 번스는 인플레이션을 완전히 통제하기 전 금리를 인하하며 실패한 정책의 대표로 조롱을 받고, 폴 볼커는 1980년대 두 자릿수 인플레이션을 통제한 것으로 유명하지만 값비싼 희생을 감수했음. 파월의 경우 아서 번스처럼 일찍 정책의 고삐를 늦추지도, 폴 볼커처럼 의도적으로 침체를 야기하지도 않으며 인플레이션을 통제한 사람으로 남고 싶은 듯 함. 이를 위해 무시했던 인플레이션을 진압하기 위해 큰 폭의 금리인상을 매우 빠르게 했고, 침체 위험을 피하기 위해 이젠 금리인상폭을 25bp로 낮출 것으로 보임. 동시에 이 정책이 성공했단 확신을 얻기 전까지 현재 금리를 유지할 것이라 말할 것임. 이 하이브리드 전략은 중국경제 재개에 따른 인플레이션, 예상보다 높은 실업률에 직면할 위험을 내포하지만, 최근 정책 입안자들 사이에선 인플레이션과 실업률 양 쪽에 희망을 가지는 것으로 보임. 그들은 물가 지표 외에 임금 지표에서도 안도할 수 있길 바라고 있어보임.
Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell is trying to avoid emulating both the derided Arthur Burns and the celebrated Paul Volcker as he confronts intense pressure to rein in inflation and sidestep a recession. Ex-Fed chief Burns let inflation get out of control in the 1970s by failing to keep monetary policy tight enough for long enough to permanently beat back price pressures. Volcker then conquered double-digit inflation in the 1980s, but the victory came at an enormous expense: A painfully deep economic downturn that pushed unemployment above 10%. “Powell wants to write his own page in the history books as someone who, unlike Burns, did not blink and reverse too soon, and, unlike Volcker, did not intentionally cause a recession,” said Vincent Reinhart, chief economist at Dreyfus and Mellon who previously spent a quarter century working at the Fed. The result: After aggressively raising interest rates last year to catch up with a price surge they initially dismissed, policymakers are expected to downshift to a quarter-percentage-point hike this week as they probe for a policy stance tight enough to tame inflation without a recession. Powell is likely to accompany that with a promise to keep rates elevated for some time and not ease policy before the Fed is certain it has price pressures in check. There’s a lot that could go wrong with this hybrid strategy. Oil prices and inflation could flare anew — a distinct possibility now that China is reopening the world’s second-largest economy — forcing the Fed to revisit rate hikes later in the year. Conversely, unemployment could rise by more than the modest amount policymakers expect as they hew to a tight policy stance to combat inflation. Fed officials from both sides of the policy spectrum have recently sounded more optimistic about the central bank’s chances of engineering a soft landing that moderates price gains without crunching the economy. Behind the optimism: A fall in inflation. The personal consumption expenditures price index – the Fed’s favorite gauge – rose 5% in December from a year earlier, down from 7% in June though still well above the central bank’s 2% goal. Fed officials have also been heartened by signs of a slowdown in rapid wage growth, which they’re hoping will be confirmed by the release of the latest employment cost index, a broad measure of compensation, at the start of their two-day policy meeting Tuesday.
Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell is trying to avoid emulating both the derided Arthur Burns and the celebrated Paul Volcker as he confronts intense pressure to rein in inflation and sidestep a recession. Ex-Fed chief Burns let inflation get out of control in the 1970s by failing to keep monetary policy tight enough for long enough to permanently beat back price pressures. Volcker then conquered double-digit inflation in the 1980s, but the victory came at an enormous expense: A painfully deep economic downturn that pushed unemployment above 10%. “Powell wants to write his own page in the history books as someone who, unlike Burns, did not blink and reverse too soon, and, unlike Volcker, did not intentionally cause a recession,” said Vincent Reinhart, chief economist at Dreyfus and Mellon who previously spent a quarter century working at the Fed. The result: After aggressively raising interest rates last year to catch up with a price surge they initially dismissed, policymakers are expected to downshift to a quarter-percentage-point hike this week as they probe for a policy stance tight enough to tame inflation without a recession. Powell is likely to accompany that with a promise to keep rates elevated for some time and not ease policy before the Fed is certain it has price pressures in check. There’s a lot that could go wrong with this hybrid strategy. Oil prices and inflation could flare anew — a distinct possibility now that China is reopening the world’s second-largest economy — forcing the Fed to revisit rate hikes later in the year. Conversely, unemployment could rise by more than the modest amount policymakers expect as they hew to a tight policy stance to combat inflation. Fed officials from both sides of the policy spectrum have recently sounded more optimistic about the central bank’s chances of engineering a soft landing that moderates price gains without crunching the economy. Behind the optimism: A fall in inflation. The personal consumption expenditures price index – the Fed’s favorite gauge – rose 5% in December from a year earlier, down from 7% in June though still well above the central bank’s 2% goal. Fed officials have also been heartened by signs of a slowdown in rapid wage growth, which they’re hoping will be confirmed by the release of the latest employment cost index, a broad measure of compensation, at the start of their two-day policy meeting Tuesday.
Docent: 통화정책회의를 앞두고 금융환경지수가 자주 언급되고 있어 그에 대한 도슨트며, 골드만삭스의 자료를 인용함. 시장 참여자들은 현재 금융환경지수가 통화정책의 긴축적인 시기가 끝나지 않았음에도 불구하고 완화되고 있는데 중앙은행이 불편함을 가질 것이라 여기고 있음. 작년 잭슨홀 때를 떠올리면 당연한 일이지만, 실제 금융환경지수는 중앙은행의 정책 이후가 아니라 정책 이전에 '기대'를 더욱 반영함. 때문에 2022년도 중앙은행의 금리인상을 앞서서 더욱 '긴축' 상태로 이동했음. 덧붙여, 통화정책이 경제성장률에 영향을 미치는 기간을 지나치게 오랜 기간으로 오해하고 있는데, 밀턴 프리드먼의 본래 이론을 보면 국내총생산의 '수준'과 국내총생산의 '성장률'을 구분해서 봐야 함. 그는 분명히 통화정책이 국내총생산의 수준에 미치는 영향의 정점이 12개월~16개월이라 했지만, 성장에 미치는 영향은 2개 분기에 불과함. 시장은 금융환경지수의 긴축적 환경이 더욱 오래 될 것이며, 경제성장률이 떨어질 것이라 오해하는 것과 달리 골드만삭스는 이러한 이유로 2023년은 통화정책이 성장을 억누르는 지대한 역할을 하지 않을 것(Short lags mean less drag in 2023)으로 봄.
Why do other forecasters assume longer lags between monetary policy tightening and growth than we do? One, we believe that a tightening in financial conditions begins to affect the economy when financial markets react to expected policy changes rather than when rate hikes are actually delivered. Market pricing of the Fed funds rate increased and financial conditions tightened well before rate hikes were delivered in 2022, which suggests that the drag on growth from tighter policy likely started earlier than the Fed funds rate would suggest on its own. Two, many economic commentators and forecasters confuse lags from monetary policy to GDP growth with lags to GDP levels. In fact, Milton Friedman's assessment that monetary policy acts with “long and variable lags” clearly referred to the time until the peak impact on the level of GDP. Correctly interpreted, Friedman’s 12-16 month estimate of the time until changes in policy have their peak impact on the level of GDP is consistent with our estimate of a peak drag on the GDP level after six quarters, but on GDP growth after two quarters. The commonly held view that monetary policy changes have a very lagged impact on economic growth therefore seems to largely reflect a misinterpretation of Friedman’s original comments.
Why do other forecasters assume longer lags between monetary policy tightening and growth than we do? One, we believe that a tightening in financial conditions begins to affect the economy when financial markets react to expected policy changes rather than when rate hikes are actually delivered. Market pricing of the Fed funds rate increased and financial conditions tightened well before rate hikes were delivered in 2022, which suggests that the drag on growth from tighter policy likely started earlier than the Fed funds rate would suggest on its own. Two, many economic commentators and forecasters confuse lags from monetary policy to GDP growth with lags to GDP levels. In fact, Milton Friedman's assessment that monetary policy acts with “long and variable lags” clearly referred to the time until the peak impact on the level of GDP. Correctly interpreted, Friedman’s 12-16 month estimate of the time until changes in policy have their peak impact on the level of GDP is consistent with our estimate of a peak drag on the GDP level after six quarters, but on GDP growth after two quarters. The commonly held view that monetary policy changes have a very lagged impact on economic growth therefore seems to largely reflect a misinterpretation of Friedman’s original comments.
Bottom-line: 20개국의 유럽 연합이 지난 4분기 경기 수축이란 예상과 달리 확장을 하면서 침체를 피해가는 경로 위에 섰음. 유럽 지역 4분기 경제성장률이 전분기 대비 +0.1% 성장했으며, 독일과 이탈리아는 수축, 프랑스와 스페인은 확장했음. 이 지역은 작년 한 해 전쟁 및 두 자릿수 이상의 인플레이션에도 불구 예상을 뛰어넘는 성장을 보였음. 이런 성장은 가계와 기업에 대한 정부 보조 및 생각보다 따듯했던 겨울이 기여한 부분이 있음.
The euro area is on course to avoid a recession after unexpectedly growing at the end of 2022, despite double-digit inflation and the war in Ukraine. Gross domestic product edged up by 0.1% in the final quarter, Eurostat said Tuesday, defying economist estimates for a contraction of 0.1%. While German and Italian output shrank, France and Spain recorded expansion. There was also stronger-than-anticipated data on Monday from Ireland. The euro region, which expanded to 20 countries when Croatia joined on Jan. 1, has struggled with record spike in prices sparked by the war-induced surge in energy costs. Governments have sought to offset the damage for households and firms, however, dispensing billions of euros in aid. A mild winter has also helped to calm energy markets.
The euro area is on course to avoid a recession after unexpectedly growing at the end of 2022, despite double-digit inflation and the war in Ukraine. Gross domestic product edged up by 0.1% in the final quarter, Eurostat said Tuesday, defying economist estimates for a contraction of 0.1%. While German and Italian output shrank, France and Spain recorded expansion. There was also stronger-than-anticipated data on Monday from Ireland. The euro region, which expanded to 20 countries when Croatia joined on Jan. 1, has struggled with record spike in prices sparked by the war-induced surge in energy costs. Governments have sought to offset the damage for households and firms, however, dispensing billions of euros in aid. A mild winter has also helped to calm energy markets.
Market Reaction: 노동비용이 예상을 하회하며 시장은 임금과 고용의 수요 우위가 중앙은행으로 하여금 시장에 강한 메시지를 줄 것이란 우려를 완화시킴. 다만, 1%의 비용 증가 자체도 여전히 높아 금리 경로를 탈선시킬 파급은 아님.
US employment costs rose at a slower-than-expected pace in the closing months of 2022, but probably not enough to derail the Federal Reserve from raising interest rates further and keeping them higher for longer to reduce inflation.
US employment costs rose at a slower-than-expected pace in the closing months of 2022, but probably not enough to derail the Federal Reserve from raising interest rates further and keeping them higher for longer to reduce inflation.
Policymakers lifted the Fed’s target for its benchmark rate by a quarter percentage point to a range of 4.5% to 4.75%.