Monetary Policy Report

For use at 11:00 a.m. EST February 19, 2021 M P r onetary olicy ePort February 19, 2021 Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System L t etter of ransmittaL Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System Washington, D.C., February 19, 2021 The President of the Senate The Speaker of the House of Representatives The Board of Governors is pleased to submit its Monetary Policy Report pursuant to section 2B of the Federal Reserve Act. Sincerely, Jerome H. Powell, Chair S L -r g m P S tatement on onger un oaLS and onetary oLicy trategy Adopted effective January 24, 2012; as amended effective January 26, 2021 The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) is firmly committed to fulfilling its statutory mandate from the Congress of promoting maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates. The Committee seeks to explain its monetary policy decisions to the public as clearly as possible. Such clarity facilitates well-informed decisionmaking by households and businesses, reduces economic and financial uncertainty, increases the effectiveness of monetary policy, and enhances transparency and accountability, which are essential in a democratic society. Employment, inflation, and long-term interest rates fluctuate over time in response to economic and financial disturbances. Monetary policy plays an important role in stabilizing the economy in response to these disturbances. The Committee’s primary means of adjusting the stance of monetary policy is through changes in the target range for the federal funds rate. The Committee judges that the level of the federal funds rate consistent with maximum employment and price stability over the longer run has declined relative to its historical average. Therefore, the federal funds rate is likely to be constrained by its effective lower bound more frequently than in the past. Owing in part to the proximity of interest rates to the effective lower bound, the Committee judges that downward risks to employment and inflation have increased. The Committee is prepared to use its full range of tools to achieve its maximum employment and price stability goals. The maximum level of employment is a broad-based and inclusive goal that is not directly measurable and changes over time owing largely to nonmonetary factors that affect the structure and dynamics of the labor market. Consequently, it would not be appropriate to specify a fixed goal for employment; rather, the Committee’s policy decisions must be informed by assessments of the shortfalls of employment from its maximum level, recognizing that such assessments are necessarily uncertain and subject to revision. The Committee considers a wide range of indicators in making these assessments. The inflation rate over the longer run is primarily determined by monetary policy, and hence the Committee has the ability to specify a longer-run goal for inflation. The Committee reaffirms its judgment that inflation at the rate of 2 percent, as measured by the annual change in the price index for personal consumption expenditures, is most consistent over the longer run with the Federal Reserve’s statutory mandate. The Committee judges that longer-term inflation expectations that are well anchored at 2 percent foster price stability and moderate long-term interest rates and enhance the Committee’s ability to promote maximum employment in the face of significant economic disturbances. In order to anchor longer-term inflation expectations at this level, the Committee seeks to achieve inflation that averages 2 percent over time, and therefore judges that, following periods when inflation has been running persistently below 2 percent, appropriate monetary policy will likely aim to achieve inflation moderately above 2 percent for some time. Monetary policy actions tend to influence economic activity, employment, and prices with a lag. In setting monetary policy, the Committee seeks over time to mitigate shortfalls of employment from the Committee’s assessment of its maximum level and deviations of inflation from its longer-run goal. Moreover, sustainably achieving maximum employment and price stability depends on a stable financial system. Therefore, the Committee’s policy decisions reflect its longer-run goals, its medium-term outlook, and its assessments of the balance of risks, including risks to the financial system that could impede the attainment of the Committee’s goals. The Committee’s employment and inflation objectives are generally complementary. However, under circumstances in which the Committee judges that the objectives are not complementary, it takes into account the employment shortfalls and inflation deviations and the potentially different time horizons over which employment and inflation are projected to return to levels judged consistent with its mandate. The Committee intends to review these principles and to make adjustments as appropriate at its annual organizational meeting each January, and to undertake roughly every 5 years a thorough public review of its monetary policy strategy, tools, and communication practices. C ontents Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Economic and Financial Developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Monetary Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Special Topics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Part 1: Recent Economic and Financial Developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Domestic Developments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Financial Developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 International Developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Part 2: Monetary Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Part 3: Summary of Economic Projections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67 List of Boxes Monitoring Economic Activity with Nontraditional High-Frequency Indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Disparities in Job Loss during the Pandemic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Developments Related to Financial Stability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 The FOMC’s Revised Statement on Longer-Run Goals and Monetary Policy Strategy . . . . . . 40 Monetary Policy Rules and Shortfalls from Maximum Employment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Forecast Uncertainty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 note: This report reflects information that was publicly available as of noon EST on February 17, 2021. Unless otherwise stated, the time series in the figures extend through, for daily data, February 16, 2021; for monthly data, January 2021; and, for quarterly data, 2020:Q4. In bar charts, except as noted, the change for a given period is measured to its final quarter from the final quarter of the preceding period. For figures 15, 33, and 44, note that the S&P/Case-Shiller U.S. National Home Price Index, the S&P 500 Index, and the Dow Jones Bank Index are products of S&P Dow Jones Indices LLC and/or its affiliates and have been licensed for use by the Board. Copyright © 2021 S&P Dow Jones Indices LLC, a division of S&P Global, and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Redistribution, reproduction, and/or photocopying in whole or in part are prohibited without written permission of S&P Dow Jones Indices LLC. For more information on any of S&P Dow Jones Indices LLC’s indices please visit www.spdji.com. S&P® is a registered trademark of Standard & Poor’s Financial Services LLC, and Dow Jones® is a registered trademark of Dow Jones Trademark Holdings LLC. Neither S&P Dow Jones Indices LLC, Dow Jones Trademark Holdings LLC, their affiliates nor their third party licensors make any representation or warranty, express or implied, as to the ability of any index to accurately represent the asset class or market sector that it purports to represent, and neither S&P Dow Jones Indices LLC, Dow Jones Trademark Holdings LLC, their affiliates nor their third party licensors shall have any liability for any errors, omissions, or interruptions of any index or the data included therein. For figure 22, neither DTCC Solutions LLC nor any of its affiliates shall be responsible for any errors or omissions in any DTCC data included in this publication, regardless of the cause, and, in no event, shall DTCC or any of its affiliates be liable for any direct, indirect, special, or consequential damages, costs, expenses, legal fees, or losses (including lost income or lost profit, trading losses, and opportunity costs) in connection with this publication. 1 s ummary The COVID-19 pandemic continues to amid a worsening of the pandemic. All told, weigh heavily on economic activity and labor GDP is currently estimated to have declined markets in the United States and around 2.5 percent over the four quarters of last the world, even as the ongoing vaccination year and payroll employment in January was campaigns offer hope for a return to more almost 10 million jobs below pre-pandemic normal conditions later this year. While levels, while the unemployment rate remained unprecedented fiscal and monetary stimulus elevated at 6.3 percent and the labor force and a relaxation of rigorous social-distancing participation rate was severely depressed. restrictions supported a rapid rebound in the Job losses have been most severe and U.S. labor market last summer, the pace of unemployment remains particularly elevated gains has slowed and employment remains among Hispanics, African Americans, and well below pre-pandemic levels. In addition, other minority groups as well as those who weak aggregate demand and low oil prices hold lower-wage jobs. have held down consumer price inflation. In this challenging environment, the Federal Inflation. After declining sharply as the Open Market Committee (FOMC) has held pandemic struck, consumer price inflation its policy rate near zero and has continued rebounded along with economic activity, but to purchase Treasury securities and agency inflation remains below pre-COVID levels and mortgage-backed securities to support the the FOMC’s longer-run objective of 2 percent. economic recovery. These measures, along The 12-month measure of PCE (personal with the Committee’s strong guidance on consumption expenditures) inflation was interest rates and the balance sheet, will ensure 1.3 percent in December, while the measure that monetary policy will continue to deliver that excludes food and energy items—so-called powerful support to the economy until the core inflation, which is typically less volatile recovery is complete. than total inflation—was 1.5 percent. Both total and core inflation were held down in part Economic and Financial by prices for services adversely affected by Developments the pandemic, and indicators of longer-run inflation expectations are now at similar levels Economic activity and the labor market. The to those seen in recent years. initial wave of COVID-19 infections led to a historic contraction in economic activity as Financial conditions. Financial conditions a result of both mandatory restrictions and have improved notably since the spring of last voluntary changes in behavior by households year and remain generally accommodative. and businesses. The level of gross domestic Low interest rates, the Federal Reserve’s asset product (GDP) fell a cumulative 10 percent purchases, the establishment of emergency over the first half of 2020, and the measured lending facilities, and other extraordinary unemployment rate spiked to a post–World actions, together with fiscal policy, continued War II high of 14.8 percent in April. As to support the flow of credit in the economy mandatory restrictions were subsequently and smooth market functioning. The nominal relaxed and households and firms adapted Treasury yield curve steepened and equity to pandemic conditions, many sectors of the prices continued to increase steadily in the economy recovered rapidly and unemployment second half of last year as concerns over the fell back. Momentum slowed substantially resurgence in COVID-19 cases appeared to in the late fall and early winter, however, as have been outweighed by positive news about spending on many services contracted again vaccine prospects and expectations of further 2 SUMMARy fiscal support. Spreads of yields on corporate adapted to containment measures that have bonds over those on comparable-maturity often been less stringent than earlier. Treasury securities narrowed significantly, partly because the credit quality of firms Despite the resurgence of the pandemic in improved and market functioning remained many economies, financial markets abroad stable. Mortgage rates for households remain have recovered since the spring, buoyed near historical lows. However, financing by continued strong fiscal and monetary conditions remain relatively tight for policy support and the start of vaccination households with low credit scores and for small campaigns in many countries. With the businesses. abatement of financial stress, the broad dollar has depreciated, more than reversing its Financial stability. While some financial appreciation at the onset of the pandemic. On vulnerabilities have increased since the start balance, global equity prices have recovered of the pandemic, the institutions at the core and sovereign credit spreads in emerging of the financial system remain resilient. market economies and in the European Asset valuation pressures have returned to periphery have narrowed. In major advanced or exceeded pre-pandemic levels in most economies, sovereign yields remained near markets, including in equity, corporate bond, historical low levels amid continued monetary and residential real estate markets. Although policy accommodation. government programs have supported business and household incomes, some businesses and Monetary Policy households have become more vulnerable to shocks, as earnings have fallen and borrowing Review of the strategic framework for monetary has risen. Strong capital positions before the policy. The Federal Reserve concluded the pandemic helped banks absorb large losses review of its strategic framework for monetary related to the pandemic. Financial institutions, policy in the second half of 2020. The review however, may experience additional losses as was motivated by changes in the U.S. economy a result of rising defaults in the coming years, that affect monetary policy, including the and long-standing vulnerabilities at money global decline in the general level of interest market mutual funds and open-end investment rates and the reduced sensitivity of inflation funds remain unaddressed. Although some to labor market tightness. In August, the facilities established by the Federal Reserve in FOMC issued a revised Statement on Longer- the wake of the pandemic have expired, those Run Goals and Monetary Policy Strategy.1 remaining continue to serve as important The revised statement acknowledges the backstops against further stress. (See the box changes in the economy over recent decades “Developments Related to Financial Stability” and articulates how policymakers are taking in Part 1.) these changes into account in conducting monetary policy. In the revised statement, International developments. Mirroring the the Committee indicates that it aims to attain United States, economic activity abroad its statutory goals by seeking to eliminate bounced back last summer after the spread shortfalls from maximum employment—a of the virus moderated and restrictions eased. broad-based and inclusive goal—and achieve Subsequent infections and renewed restrictions inflation that averages 2 percent over time. have again depressed economic activity, Achieving inflation that averages 2 percent however. Relative to the spring, the current slowdown in economic activity has been 1. The statement, revised in August 2020, was less dramatic. Fiscal and monetary policies unanimously reaffirmed at the FOMC’s January 2021 continue to be supportive, and people have meeting. MONETARy POLICy REPORT: FEBRUARy 2021 3 over time helps ensure that longer-term supporting the flow of credit to households inflation expectations remain well anchored at and businesses. The Committee expects these the FOMC’s longer-run 2 percent objective. purchases to continue at least at this pace until Hence, following periods when inflation has substantial further progress has been made been running persistently below 2 percent, toward its maximum-employment and price- appropriate monetary policy will likely aim to stability goals. achieve inflation moderately above 2 percent for some time. (See the box “The FOMC’s In assessing the appropriate stance of Revised Statement on Longer-Run Goals and monetary policy, the Committee will continue Monetary Policy Strategy” in Part 2.) to monitor the implications of incoming information for the economic outlook. The In addition, in December the FOMC Committee is prepared to adjust the stance of introduced two changes to the Summary monetary policy as appropriate if risks emerge of Economic Projections (SEP) intended that could impede the attainment of the to enhance the information provided to the Committee’s goals. public. First, the release of the full set of SEP exhibits was accelerated by three weeks, from Special Topics the publication of the minutes three weeks after the end of an FOMC meeting to the Disparities in job loss. The COVID-19 crisis day of the policy decision, the second day of has exacerbated pre-existing disparities in an FOMC meeting. Second, new charts were labor market outcomes across job types and included that display how FOMC participants’ demographic groups. Job losses last spring assessments of uncertainties and risks have were disproportionately severe among lower- evolved over time. wage workers, less-educated workers, and racial and ethnic minorities, as in previous Interest rate policy. In light of the effects of the recessions, but also among women, in contrast continuing public health crisis on the economy to previous recessions. While all groups and the associated risks to the outlook, the have experienced at least a partial recovery FOMC has maintained the target range for the in employment rates since April 2020, the federal funds rate at 0 to ¼ percent since last shortfall in employment remains especially March. In pursuing the strategy outlined in its large for lower-wage workers and for revised statement, the Committee noted that it Hispanics, African Americans, and other expects it will be appropriate to maintain this minority groups, and the additional childcare target range until labor market conditions have burdens resulting from school closures have reached levels consistent with the Committee’s weighed more heavily on women’s labor assessments of maximum employment and force participation than on men’s labor force inflation has risen to 2 percent and is on track participation. (See the box “Disparities in Job to moderately exceed 2 percent for some time. Loss during the Pandemic” in Part 1.) Balance sheet policy. With the federal funds rate near zero, the Federal Reserve has also High-frequency indicators. The unprecedented continued to undertake asset purchases to magnitude, speed, and nature of the increase its holdings of Treasury securities COVID-19 shock to the economy rendered by $80 billion per month and its holdings traditional statistics insufficient for monitoring of agency mortgage-backed securities by economic activity in a timely manner. As a $40 billion per month. These purchases result, policymakers turned to nontraditional help foster smooth market functioning and high-frequency indicators of activity, accommodative financial conditions, thereby especially for the labor market and consumer 4 SUMMARy spending. These indicators presented a more can provide useful guidance to policymakers. timely and granular picture of the drop and This discussion presents the policy rate subsequent rebound in economic activity last prescriptions from a number of rules that have spring. The most recent readings obtained received attention in the research literature, from those indicators suggest that economic many of which mechanically prescribe raising activity began to edge up again in January, the federal funds rate as employment rises likely reflecting in part the disbursement of above estimates of its longer-run level. A rule additional stimulus payments to households. that instead responds only to shortfalls of (See the box “Monitoring Economic Activity employment from assessments of its maximum with Nontraditional High-Frequency level is featured to illustrate one aspect of Indicators” in Part 1.) the FOMC’s revised approach to policy, as described in the revised Statement on Longer- Monetary policy rules. Simple monetary policy Run Goals and Monetary Policy Strategy. (See rules, which relate a policy interest rate to a the box “Monetary Policy Rules and Shortfalls small number of other economic variables, from Maximum Employment” in Part 2.) 5 P 1 art r e f d eCent ConomiC and inanCiaL eveLoPments Domestic Developments The labor market has partially recovered 1. Nonfarm payroll employment from the pandemic-induced collapse, Monthly Millions of jobs but the pace of improvement slowed substantially toward the end of last year . . . 155 The public health crisis spurred by the 150 spread of COVID-19 weighed on economic 145 activity throughout 2020, and patterns 140 in the labor market reflected the ebb and flow of the virus and the actions taken by 135 households, businesses, and governments 130 to combat its spread. During the initial 125 stage of the pandemic in March and April, payroll employment plunged by 22 million 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 jobs, while the measured unemployment rate SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics via Haver Analytics. jumped to 14.8 percent—its highest level since the Great Depression (figures 1 and 2).2 As cases subsided and early lockdowns were 2. Civilian unemployment rate relaxed, payroll employment rebounded rapidly—particularly outside of the service Monthly Percent sectors—and the unemployment rate fell 16 back. Beginning late last year, however, the 14 pace of improvement in the labor market 12 slowed markedly amid another large wave 10 of COVID-19 cases. The unemployment rate declined only 0.4 percentage point from 8 November through January, while payroll 6 gains averaged just 29,000 per month, weighed 4 down by a contraction in the leisure and 2 hospitality sector, which is particularly affected by social distancing and government-mandated 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 restrictions. SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2. Since the beginning of the pandemic, a substantial number of people on temporary layoff, who should be counted as unemployed, have instead been recorded as “employed but on unpaid absence.” The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that, if these workers had been correctly classified, the unemployment rate would have been 5 percentage points higher in April. The misclassification problem has abated since then, and the unemployment rate in January was at most about ½ percentage point lower than it would have been in the absence of misclassification. 6 PART 1: RECENT ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL DEvELOPMENTS All told, the incomplete recovery left the level of employment in January almost 10 million lower than it was a year earlier, while the unemployment rate stood at 6.3 percent— nearly 3 percentage points higher than before the onset of the pandemic. Most recently, high-frequency data—including initial claims for unemployment insurance and weekly employment data from the payroll processor ADP—suggest modest further improvement in the labor market in recent weeks. (For more discussion of what high-frequency indicators are suggesting about the current trajectory of the economy, see the box “Monitoring Economic Activity with Nontraditional High- Frequency Indicators.”) . . . and the harm has been substantial The damage to the labor market has been even more substantial than is indicated by the extent of unemployment alone. The labor 3. Labor force participation rate and force participation rate (LFPR)—the share employment-to-population ratio of the population that is either working or actively looking for work—plunged in March Monthly Percent and April, as many of those who lost their 68 jobs were not seeking work and so were not 66 Labor force participation rate counted among the unemployed. Despite 64 recovering some over the summer, the LFPR 62 Employment-to- remains nearly 2 percentage points below population ratio 60 58 its pre-pandemic level (figure 3). A number 56 of factors appear to have contributed to the 54 continued weakness in the LFPR, including 52 a lack of job opportunities, the effects of 50 school closings and virtual learning on parents’ ability to work, the health concerns 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 of potential workers, and a spate of early NOTE: The labor force participation rate and the employment- to-population ratio are percentages of the population aged 16 and over. retirements triggered by the crisis. All told, SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics via Haver Analytics. the employment-to-population ratio—the share of the population with jobs, regardless of the number seeking work—in January was 3.6 percentage points below the level at the beginning of 2020. Job losses last year fell most heavily on lower-wage workers and on Hispanics, African Americans, and other minority groups. As a result, the rise in unemployment and the decline MONETARy POLICy REPORT: FEBRUARy 2021 7 Monitoring Economic Activity with Nontraditional High-Frequency Indicators The unprecedented magnitude, speed, and nature state of the labor market.1 An important example is of the COvID-19 shock to the economy rendered data from the payroll processor ADP that cover roughly traditional statistics insuffi cient for monitoring 20 percent of private U.S. employment, a sample size economic activity in a timely manner. As a result, similar to the one used by the BLS to construct the CES. policymakers around the world turned to nontraditional Estimates of changes in employment constructed from indicators of activity, both those based on private- ADP data have tracked the offi cial CES data remarkably sector “big data” and those newly developed by offi cial well since the start of the pandemic recession, and statistical agencies. Because some of the most salient the ADP data possess the important benefi ts of being characteristics of these indicators are their timeliness available earlier and at a weekly frequency (fi gure A, and the time span they cover (such as daily or weekly), left panel).2 they are often called “high-frequency indicators.” (continued on next page) An important example of the usefulness of high- frequency indicators is the case of payroll employment. 1. See, for example, Raj Chetty, John N. Friedman, Nathaniel Hendren, Michael Stepner, and the Opportunity The Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (BLS) monthly measure Insights Team (2020), “The Economic Impacts of COvID-19: of payroll employment is one of the most reliable, Evidence from a New Public Database Built Using Private timely, and closely watched business cycle indicators. Sector Data,” NBER Working Paper Series 27431 (Cambridge, However, during the onset of the pandemic in the Mass.: National Bureau of Economic Research, November), https://www.nber.org/papers/w27431; and Alexander W. Bartik, United States, even the BLS Current Employment Marianne Bertrand, Feng Lin, Jesse Rothstein, and Matt Unrath Statistics (CES) data were published with too long of (forthcoming), “Measuring the Labor Market at the Onset of a lag to track the dramatic dislocations in the labor the COvID-19 Crisis,” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity. 2. For further analysis of the ADP employment series, see market in a timely manner. Specifi cally, from the Tomaz Cajner, Leland D. Crane, Ryan A. Decker, John Grigsby, second half of March through early April, the economy Adrian Hamins-Puertolas, Erik Hurst, Christopher Kurz, and was shedding jobs at an unprecedented rate, but Ahu yildirmaz (forthcoming), “The U.S. Labor Market during those employment losses were captured only in the the Beginning of the Pandemic Recession,” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity. Note that the ADP employment series employment situation release issued on May 8, 2020. referenced in this discussion differ from the ADP National Because of this lag, economists looked to various Employment Report, which is published monthly by the ADP private data sources to gain insights about the current Research Institute in close collaboration with Moody’s Analytics. A. Estimates of private payroll employment growth Aggregate payroll employment growth Payroll employment growth in leisure and hospitality Millions of jobs, monthly rate Millions of jobs, monthly rate 10 BLS CES 5 BLS CES 3 + _0 + 5 _0 ADP-FRB, 4-week average 10 ADP-FRB, 4-week average 3 15 20 6 25 ADP-FRB 30 ADP-FRB 9 35 Feb. Apr. June Aug. Oct. Dec. Feb. Feb. Apr. June Aug. Oct. Dec. Feb. 2020 2021 2020 2021 NOTE: ADP data are weekly and extend through February 6, 2021. BLS data are monthly. SOURCE: Federal Reserve Board staff calculations using ADP, Inc., Payroll Processing Data; Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), Current Employment Statistics (CES). 8 PART 1: RECENT ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL DEvELOPMENTS Monitoring Economic Activity (continued) Weekly employment estimates based on ADP data analytics fi rm) on nonfood retail sales captured in real were particularly valuable not only last spring when time the dramatic and sudden drop in consumption in employment plummeted and then quickly rebounded, mid-March; the monthly Census Bureau data recorded but also during the renewed COvID-19 wave that that decline only with a lag (fi gure B, left panel).3 started this past fall. In particular, high-frequency ADP The NPD data also refl ected how the income support employment data indicate that the fall and winter virus payments to families, provided by the Coronavirus Aid, wave had a smaller effect on the labor market than Relief, and Economic Security Act, or CARES Act, was seen last spring, likely because there were fewer rapidly affected consumer spending in mid-April. mandated shutdowns of businesses than in the spring, More recently, the NPD data showed some decline because many businesses implemented adaptations in consumption late last year, followed by a pickup that made it easier for them to continue to operate in January after the passage of the most recent fi scal (for example, curbside pickup), and because many stimulus package. Several nontraditional data sources individuals changed their behavior (for example, by illustrate that services spending remains depressed as wearing masks such that more economic activities are social distancing continues to restrain in-person activity deemed safer now than in the spring). Most recently, (fi gure B, right panel).4 the BLS data show that private payroll employment With rapid changes in the economic environment, remained little changed through its survey week in many statistical agencies also developed high-frequency mid-January, and the ADP data indicate that (continued) employment improved modestly through early 3. Information from the NPD Group, Inc., and its affi liates February. Additionally, the latest ADP data indicate contained in this report is the proprietary and confi dential that the leisure and hospitality sector—which includes property of NPD and was made available for publication hotels, restaurants, and entertainment venues and under a limited license from NPD. Such information may not be republished in any manner, in whole or in part, without the is particularly affected by government-mandated express written consent of NPD. restrictions and social distancing—started adding jobs 4. Services spending accounts for roughly one-half of again in recent weeks after experiencing a temporary aggregate spending, but it is measured with some lag. In downturn at the end of last year (fi gure A, right panel). particular, the services spending information folded into Outside of the labor market, several new high- gross domestic product comes from the revenue information sourced from the Census Bureau’s Quarterly Services Survey frequency indicators have been useful in monitoring (QSS). The advance QSS (early data for a subset of industries the massive effects of the COvID-19 pandemic on found in the full QSS) and full QSS are released two and three consumer spending. Weekly data from NPD (a market months, respectively, after a given quarter ends. B. Indicators of consumption growth Retail goods spending Services spending Percent change from year earlier Daily Year-over-year percent change 30 40 Total, Census 20 20 Food services + 10 Health-care visits _0 + 20 _0 40 Total, NPD 10 Hotel occupancy 60 20 Airport passengers 80 30 100 Feb. Apr. June Aug. Oct. Dec. Feb. Feb. Apr. June Aug. Oct. Dec. Feb. 2020 2021 2020 2021 NOTE: NPD data are weekly and extend through February 6, 2021, NOTE: Year-over-year percent change in 7-day moving average. and Census data are monthly. All series show nominal spending on Health-care visits data extend through February 7, 2021; food services nonfood retail goods. Dashed lines represent the first and second waves data extend through February 15, 2021; and hotel occupancy data extend of stimulus tranche. through February 6, 2021. SOURCE: NPD Group; Census Bureau. SOURCE: SafeGraph, Inc.; Fiserv, Inc.; STR, Inc.; Transportation Security Administration. MONETARy POLICy REPORT: FEBRUARy 2021 9 indicators. For example, the Census Bureau released fi nancial struggles of households (fi gure C, right data on weekly new business applications (fi gure C, panel). These data indicate that the fi nancial stress of left panel). During the initial stage of the pandemic households increased late last year as households were recession, new business applications fell compared becoming less confi dent about being able to make their with previous years, a typical pattern during economic next mortgage or rent payment as well as more likely downturns. However, new business applications started to expect income loss over the next four weeks, but to rebound notably during the summer, and for the year households’ fi nancial expectations improved somewhat as a whole, they were higher than the average over the in January. previous three years, a pattern that differs dramatically Overall, nontraditional high-frequency indicators from previous business cycles.5 The increase in have served several purposes over the past year. applications appears to be concentrated in industries First, they provide timely alternative estimates that that rapidly adapted to the landscape of the pandemic, complement offi cial statistics and can also be used to such as online retail, personal services, information verify movements in offi cial statistics. Second, they are technology, and delivery. It remains unclear, however, often helpful for assessing economic developments whether these business applications will lead to actual more quickly and with greater granularity than what job creation at the same rate as in the past.6 As another can be found in offi cial statistics. Third, high-frequency example, the Census Bureau developed high-frequency indicators without a direct counterpart in offi cial survey statistics that contain information about the statistics give a different perspective and help enhance our understanding of economic developments. These nontraditional indicators are also subject to several 5. For further discussion, see Emin Dinlersoz, Timothy potential limitations, such as systematic biases due to Dunne, John Haltiwanger, and veronika Penciakova nonrepresentativeness of data or small (and possibly (forthcoming), “Business Formation: A Tale of Two Recessions,” nonrandom) samples. Importantly, only time will tell if American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings. such indicators will continue to provide a signal above 6. The link between applications and job creation in the pre-pandemic period is studied in Kimberly Bayard, Emin and beyond traditional indicators as the high-frequency Dinlersoz, Timothy Dunne, John Haltiwanger, Javier Miranda, shocks associated with the pandemic dissipate. Overall, and John Stevens (2018), “Early-Stage Business Formation: however, the use of nontraditional high-frequency An Analysis of Applications for Employer Identifi cation indicators over the past year has amply shown that they Numbers,” Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2018- 015 (Washington: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve can yield large benefi ts, especially when economic System, March), https://dx.doi.org/10.17016/FEDS.2018.015. conditions are changing rapidly. C. High-frequency indicators by official statistical agencies New business applications Houshold expectations Weekly Thousands Weekly Percent of households 600 70 Cumulative 2020 500 60 400 Hig h in c m on a fi k d in e g nce H i i n g h m c a o k n in fi g dence Cumulative next mortgage next rent 50 2017-19 average 300 payment payment 40 Cumulative 200 2021 30 100 Expect loss of + employment _0 n i e n x c t o 4 m w e e i e n ks 20 Feb. Apr. June Aug. Oct. Dec. May June July Aug.Sept. Oct. Nov.Dec. Jan. Feb. 2020 2021 NOTE: The cumulative 2021 data extend through February 6, 2021. NOTE: Data extend through February 1, 2021. Dashed lines represent The data are derived from Employer Identification Number applications pauses in Household Pulse Survey data collection. with planned wages. SOURCE: Household Pulse Survey, Census Bureau via Haver SOURCE: Business Formation Statistics, Census Bureau via Haver Analytics. Analytics. 10 PART 1: RECENT ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL DEvELOPMENTS 4. Unemployment rate, by race and ethnicity Monthly Percent 20 18 Black or African American 16 14 12 Hispanic or Latino 10 White 8 6 Asian 4 2 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 NOTE: Unemployment rate measures total unemployed as a percentage of the labor force. Persons whose ethnicity is identified as Hispanic or Latino may be of any race. Small sample sizes preclude reliable estimates for Native Americans and other groups for which monthly data are not reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics via Haver Analytics. in the employment-to-population ratio were particularly evident among those groups (figure 4). (For more discussion of the pandemic’s effects on the labor market outcomes of various groups, see the box “Disparities in Job Loss during the 5. Measures of change in hourly compensation Pandemic.”) Percent change from year earlier Aggregate wage growth appears to be little changed despite the weakness in the 10 labor market 8 Co b m u p si e n n e s s a s t i s o e n ct o p r er hour, Wa A g t e l a G n r t o a w F t e h d T ’s r acker 6 A ge l n th e o ra u l g ly h p w u e ts a k d n o e w ss n w in a t r h d e p l r a e b s o su r r m e a o r n k e o t v erall 4 wages, the best available measures suggest 2 that wage growth in 2020 was little changed Employment cost index, + from 2019. Total hourly compensation as private sector _0 Average hourly earnings, measured by the employment cost index, private sector 2 which includes both wages and benefits, rose 2.6 percent during the 12 months ending in 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 December, only slightly below pre-pandemic NOTE: Business-sector compensation is on a 4-quarter percent change basis. For the private-sector employment cost index, change is over the rates (figure 5). Wage growth as computed by 12 months ending in the last month of each quarter; for private-sector average hourly earnings, the data are 12-month percent changes and the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, which begin in March 2007; for the Atlanta Fed’s Wage Growth Tracker, the tracks the median 12-month wage growth data are shown as a 3-month moving average of the 12-month percent change. of individuals responding to the Current SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics; Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, Wage Growth Tracker; all via Haver Analytics. Population Survey, was about 3½ percent MONETARy POLICy REPORT: FEBRUARy 2021 11 during 2020, similar to the growth rate in 2019.3 The continued gains in aggregate wages mask important heterogeneity, however; according to the Atlanta Fed data, workers with lower earnings and nonwhites experienced larger decelerations in wages than other groups last year. 6. Change in the price index for personal consumption expenditures Price inflation remains low despite rebounding since last spring Monthly 12-month percent change As measured by the 12-month change in Trimmed mean 3.0 the price index for personal consumption 2.5 expenditures (PCE), inflation fell from Excluding food and energy 1.6 percent in December 2019 to a low of 2.0 0.5 percent in April, as economic activity 1.5 dropped sharply (figure 6). Since then, 1.0 inflation has partially recovered along with the Total pickup in demand, but it was only 1.3 percent .5 in December—still well below the Federal 0 Open Market Committee’s (FOMC) objective of 2 percent. After excluding consumer food 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 and energy prices, which are often quite NOTE: The data extend through December 2020. SOURCE: For trimmed mean, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas; for all volatile, the 12-month measure of core PCE else, Bureau of Economic Analysis; all via Haver Analytics. inflation was 1.5 percent in December. An alternative way to abstract from transitory influences on measured inflation is provided by the trimmed mean measure of PCE price inflation constructed by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.4 The 12-month change in this measure declined to 1.7 percent in December 3. Some other common wage measures are providing misleading signals at present because they are dominated by compositional effects: Pandemic-related job losses fell most heavily on lower-wage workers, which mechanically increased measures of average wages. For example, average hourly earnings from the payroll survey rose more than 5 percent over the 12 months ending in January. Similarly, the fourth-quarter reading on compensation per hour, which includes both wages and benefits, was 7.7 percent above its year-ago level. Output per hour, or productivity, has also been affected by the same composition effects, rising 2.5 percent over the four quarters of 2020, the fastest pace in a decade. 4. The trimmed mean price index excludes whichever prices showed the largest increases or decreases in a given month. Over the past 20 years, changes in the trimmed mean index have averaged ¼ percentage point above core PCE inflation and 0.1 percentage point above total PCE inflation. 12 PART 1: RECENT ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL DEvELOPMENTS Disparities in Job Loss during the Pandemic Although employment has improved substantially A. Changes in private-sector employment, by industry since its trough in April 2020, the labor market Percent change since Feb. 2020 recovery remains far from complete: As of Industry (1) (2) January 2021, the employment-to-population (EPOP) As of Apr. 2020 As of Jan. 2021 ratio, a broad measure that encompasses both 1. Total private ........................... −16.5 −6.6 increased unemployment and decreased labor force 2. Mining and logging ............... −9.9 −11.7 participation, was still 3.6 percentage points below its February 2020 level. All industries, occupations, 3. Manufacturing ....................... −10.8 −4.5 and demographic groups experienced signifi cant 4. Construction .......................... −14.6 −3.3 employment declines at the start of the pandemic, 5. Wholesale trade ..................... −6.9 −4.5 and, over the ensuing months, all groups have 6. Retail trade ............................. −15.2 −2.5 experienced at least some partial recovery. That 7. Transp., warehousing, and −9.1 −2.7 said, employment declines last spring were steeper utilities .................................... for workers with lower earnings and for Hispanics, 8. Information and fi nancial −4.8 −2.8 African Americans, and other minority groups, and activities .................................. the hardest-hit groups still have the most ground left 9. Professional and business −11.1 −3.8 services .................................... to regain. 10. Education and health −11.6 −5.4 Although disparities in labor market outcomes services .................................... generally widen during recessions, certain 11. Leisure and hospitality ......... −48.6 −22.9 factors unique to this episode—in particular, the 12. Other services ........................ −23.7 −7.8 social-distancing measures taken by households, businesses, and governments to limit in-person Note: The data are seasonally adjusted. SourCe: Bureau of Labor Statistics. interactions—have profoundly shaped the incidence of recent job losses in different segments of the labor distancing measures and relatively few workers are able market. Because jobs differ in the degree to which to work from home.2 they involve personal contact and physical proximity, In keeping with the sectoral composition of recent in whether they can be performed remotely, and in job losses, workers in lower-wage jobs have been hit whether they are deemed to serve “essential” functions, especially hard. Figure B uses data from the payroll social-distancing measures have had disparate effects processor ADP to plot employment indexes for four across industries and occupations. To illustrate this job tiers defi ned by hourly wages. Between February point, fi gure A reports net changes in employment in and April of last year, employment fell most sharply for 11 broad industry categories, both during the period jobs in the bottom quartile of the pre-pandemic wage of acute job losses last spring (column 1) and over the distribution. Between April and June, employment longer interval since the start of the pandemic (column rose most quickly for these lowest-paying jobs. In 2). Net job losses through January have been especially subsequent months, job gains moderated substantially severe in the leisure and hospitality industry—in which for all groups, and as of mid-January, employment in employment is still 22.9 percent below pre-pandemic the lowest-paying jobs was about 20 percent below its levels (line 11)—and in other services, a category that includes barber shops and beauty salons (line 12).1 By (continued) contrast, employment in most other broad industries is now 5 percent or less below pre-pandemic levels. Job 2. For instance, in the January 2021 round of the Current losses have thus been disproportionately concentrated Population Survey, 41 percent of those employed in the in lower-wage consumer service industries, in which professional and business services industry reported working business operations are strongly affected by social- from home during the previous four weeks as a result of the pandemic, compared with about 7 percent of those employed in leisure and hospitality. See Bureau of Labor Statistics (2021), 1. Net job losses have also been pronounced in mining “Supplemental Data Measuring the Effects of the Coronavirus and logging (line 2), which is unique among these industries (COvID-19) Pandemic on the Labor Market,” Current in having experienced further contraction in employment Population Survey, January, https://www.bls.gov/cps/effects-of- between April 2020 and January 2021. the-coronavirus-covid-19-pandemic.htm. MONETARy POLICy REPORT: FEBRUARy 2021 13 B. Employment declines for low-, middle-, and C. Change in employment-to-population ratio, by high-wage workers demographic group Weekly Week ending February 15, 2020 = 100 Feb. to Apr. 2020 Feb. 2020 to Jan. 2021 Men 110 Women Top-middle Top 100 Less than a high school diploma High school graduates, no college 90 Some college or associate’s degree Bachelor’s degree and higher 80 16–24 Bottom- 25–54 middle 70 55+ White 60 Black or African American Bottom Asian 50 Hispanic or Latino -20 -15 -10 -5 0 Mar. May July Sept. Nov. Jan. Percentage points 2020 2021 NOTE: The data are seasonally adjusted by the Federal Reserve Board NOTE: The data are seasonally adjusted. Small sample sizes preclude and extend through January 16, 2021. Wage quartiles are defined using reliable estimates for Native Americans and other groups for which the February 2020 wage distribution. monthly data are not reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. SOURCE: Federal Reserve Board staff calculations using ADP, Inc., SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics via Haver Analytics. payroll processing data. pre-pandemic level. In comparison, employment in the experienced the greatest net employment declines to higher-paying job tiers is now about 10 percent or less date, such as leisure and hospitality; these demographic below pre-pandemic levels. groups are also less likely to report being able to work Similar disparities are apparent across demographic from home.4 groups. Figure C shows the change in each group’s (continued on next page) EPOP ratio. Between February 2020 and January 2021, the EPOP ratio fell by a similar amount for both men 4. For more information on the groups with the largest and women; in contrast, during many previous employment declines since February 2020, see Kenneth A. Couch, Robert W. Fairlie, and Huanan Xu (2020), recessions the EPOP ratio declined substantially more “Early Evidence of the Impacts of COvID-19 on Minority for men. (In fact, given that men’s employment rate was Unemployment,” Journal of Public Economics, vol. 192 substantially higher than women’s before the pandemic, (December), pp. 1–11; Guido Matias Cortes and Eliza C. the decline in employment for women as a percentage Forsythe (2020), “The Heterogeneous Labor Market Impacts of pre-recession employment has been larger, which of the Covid-19 Pandemic,” Upjohn Institute Working Paper Series 20-327 (Kalamazoo, Mich.: W.E. Upjohn Institute for contrasts even more starkly with previous recessions.) Employment Research, May), https://research.upjohn.org/cgi/ Since February 2020, the EPOP ratio has fallen more viewcontent.cgi?article=1346&context=up_workingpapers; for people without a bachelor’s degree than for those and Titan Alon, Matthias Doepke, Jane Olmstead-Rumsey, and with at least a bachelor’s degree, more for prime-age Michèle Tertilt (2020), “This Time It’s Different: The Role of Women’s Employment in a Pandemic Recession,” NBER Working individuals than for those under age 25 or over age 55, Paper 27660 (Cambridge, Mass.: National Bureau of Economic and more for Hispanics, African Americans, and Asians Research, August), https://www.nber.org/papers/w27660. than for whites.3 In general, the groups experiencing the Additional details on differences across demographic largest declines in employment since last February are groups in the ability to work from home can be found in the more commonly employed in the industries that have Current Population Survey. For example, in January, around 23 percent of white workers reported working from home in the previous four weeks because of the pandemic, compared with 3. The decline in employment also appears to have been 19 percent of African Americans and 14 percent of Hispanics; relatively large for Native Americans, based on annual average 43 percent of those with a bachelor’s degree or higher reported data for 2020. (Monthly data are not available for this group working from home, compared with 16 percent or less for those because of small sample sizes and are not shown in fi gure C with lower levels of education. See Bureau of Labor Statistics, for that reason.) “Supplemental Data,” in box note 2. 14 PART 1: RECENT ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL DEvELOPMENTS Disparities in Job Loss (continued) Since the start of the pandemic, another important be important for narrowing the disparities that have impediment to individuals’ ability to work or look for widened since the start of the pandemic, as research work has been the absence of in-person education for has consistently shown that strong labor markets many K–12 students.5 Because many working parents especially benefi t lower-wage and disadvantaged are unable to work from home while monitoring their workers.7 The pace of labor market gains will also children’s virtual education (depending on the nature depend on how many unemployed workers have of their jobs and the availability of other caregivers), the opportunity to return to their original jobs. In the widespread lack of K–12 in-person education may January 2021, 2.2 percent of labor force participants also explain some of the differences across groups. (representing 34.6 percent of unemployed workers) For example, among mothers aged 25 to 54 with reported being unemployed because of a permanent children aged 6 to 17, the fraction who said they are job loss, up from 1.3 percent of the labor force not working or looking for work for caregiving reasons (8.8 percent of unemployed workers) in April 2020.8 was 2½ percentage points higher in the three months Research has shown that workers who return to their ending January 2021 than over the year-earlier period, previous employers after a temporary layoff tend to earn compared with a ½ percentage point increase for wages similar to what they were making previously, fathers. Relative to white mothers, the increase was whereas laid-off workers who do not return to their about twice as large for Hispanic mothers and more previous employer experience a longer-lasting decline than twice as large for African American mothers, and it in earnings.9 was also more than twice as large for mothers without any college education as for mothers with more 7. For example, see Stephanie R. Aaronson, Mary C. Daly, education.6 William L. Wascher, and David W. Wilcox (2019), “Okun Revisited: Who Benefi ts Most from a Strong Economy?” As the spread of COvID-19 is contained and Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Spring, pp. 333–75, a growing share of the population is immunized, https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/ some of the unique factors that have exacerbated aaronson_web.pdf; and Tomaz Cajner, Tyler Radler, David disparities since the start of the pandemic will likely Ratner, and Ivan vidangos (2017), “Racial Gaps in Labor Market Outcomes in the Last Four Decades and over ease. For example, as COvID becomes less prevalent, the Business Cycle,” Finance and Economics Discussion businesses offering in-person services (for example, in Series 2017-071 (Washington: Board of Governors of the the leisure and hospitality industry) will move closer Federal Reserve System, June), https://dx.doi.org/10.17016/ to pre-pandemic levels of employment. In addition, as FEDS.2017.071. more schools return to offering in-person education, 8. The data are Federal Reserve Board staff calculations from published Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates. By childcare constraints will become less acute. comparison, the number of permanent job losers peaked Even as labor market impediments specifi c to the at 4.4 percent of labor force participants (representing pandemic subside, however, the speed at which the 44.8 percent of unemployed workers) during the Great Recession. labor market moves toward full employment will 9. See Louis S. Jacobson, Robert J. LaLonde, and Daniel G. Sullivan (1993), “Earnings Losses of Displaced Workers,” American Economic Review, vol. 83 (September), pp. 685– 5. According to the Census Bureau’s Household Pulse 709; Shigeru Fujita and Giuseppe Moscarini (2017), “Recall Survey, 85 percent of parents surveyed in early January and Unemployment,” American Economic Review, vol. 107 reported that their children’s classes for the 2020–21 school (December), pp. 3875–916; and Marta Lachowska, Alexandre year were moved to virtual learning. Mas, and Stephen A. Woodbury (2020), “Sources of Displaced 6. The fi ndings are Federal Reserve Board staff estimates Workers’ Long-Term Earnings Losses,” American Economic based on publicly available Current Population Survey microdata. Review, vol. 110 (October), pp. 3231–66. MONETARy POLICy REPORT: FEBRUARy 2021 15 from 2 percent a year earlier, a similar decrease to those in total and core PCE inflation. The low level of consumer price inflation in 2020 partly reflected the deterioration in economic activity. For example, inflation in tenants’ rent and owners’ equivalent rent, which tend to be sensitive to overall economic conditions, softened in 2020 from the rates observed during the preceding few years. Low inflation also reflected the net effect of a number of pandemic-driven shifts in specific sectors of the economy, such as a decline in gasoline prices that resulted from a collapse in oil prices in the early part of the year, which only partially reversed in the second half. Similarly, airfares and hotel prices fell markedly, driven by huge reductions in demand due to the pandemic. In contrast, food prices increased at an unusually fast pace last year, given stronger demand at retail grocery stores and, at times, some pandemic- related supply chain disruptions. In addition, prices for some durable goods, such as motor vehicles and home appliances, rose sharply during the summer and remained somewhat elevated at the end of the year, in part because of a pandemic-induced shift in demand away from services and toward these goods. Prices of imports and oil have also rebounded The partial rebound in inflation later in 2020 7. Nonfuel import prices and industrial metals indexes also stemmed from a firming of import prices. After declining in the first half of last year, January 2014 = 100 January 2014 = 100 nonfuel import prices increased in the second 120 Industrial metals 104 half, as the dollar depreciated and the recovery 110 102 in global demand put upward pressure on non-oil commodity prices—a substantial 100 100 component of nonfuel import prices (figure 7). 90 98 Prices of both agricultural commodities and 80 96 Nonfuel import prices industrial metals increased considerably, and 70 94 nonfuel import prices are now higher than 60 92 they were a year ago. 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Early in the pandemic, benchmark oil prices NOTE: The data for nonfuel import prices are monthly and extend through December 2020. The data for industrial metals are monthly averages of daily fell below $20 per barrel, a level not breached data and extend through January 29, 2021. since 2002. While prices have now nearly SOURCE: For nonfuel import prices, Bureau of Labor Statistics; for industrial metals, S&P GSCI Industrial Metals Spot Index via Haver Analytics. 16 PART 1: RECENT ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL DEvELOPMENTS 8. Spot and futures prices for crude oil recovered, oil consumption and production are still well below pre-pandemic levels (figure 8). Weekly Dollars per barrel Although global economic activity has picked 160 up since last spring, oil demand has not fully recovered, held back by the slow recovery in 140 Brent spot price travel and commuting. Weak demand has been 120 met by reductions in supply: U.S. production 100 has fallen dramatically relative to a year ago, 80 while OPEC (Organization of the Petroleum 24-month-ahead 60 Exporting Countries) and Russia have only futures contracts 40 slightly increased production after making 20 sharp cuts last spring. 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 Survey-based measures of long-run NOTE: The data are weekly averages of daily data. The data begin on inflation expectations have been Thursdays and extend through February 10, 2021. SOURCE: ICE Brent Futures via Bloomberg. broadly stable . . . Despite the volatility in actual inflation last year, survey-based measures of inflation 9. Surveys of inflation expectations expectations at medium- and longer-term Percent horizons, which likely influence actual inflation by affecting wage- and price-setting decisions, have been little changed on net (figure 9). Michigan survey, NY Fed survey, 4 next 5 to 10 years 3 years ahead In the University of Michigan Surveys of Consumers, the median value for inflation 3 expectations over the next 5 to 10 years was 2.7 percent in January and early February. 2 In the Survey of Consumer Expectations, Survey of Professional Forecasters, conducted by the Federal Reserve Bank next 10 years 1 of New York, the median of respondents’ expected inflation rate three years ahead was 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 3.0 percent in January, somewhat above its NOTE: The series are medians of the survey responses. The Michigan year-earlier level. Finally, in the first-quarter survey data are monthly and extend through February 2021; the Survey of Professional Forecasters, conducted February data are preliminary. The Survey of Professional Forecasters data for inflation expectations for personal consumption expenditures by the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, are quarterly, begin in 2007:Q1, and extend through 2021:Q1. The NY Fed survey data are monthly and begin in June 2013. the median expectation for the annual rate SOURCE: University of Michigan Surveys of Consumers; Federal of increase in the PCE price index over the Reserve Bank of New York, Survey of Consumer Expectations; Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, Survey of Professional Forecasters. next 10 years was 2.0 percent, close to the level around which it had typically hovered in previous years. . . . and market-based measures of inflation compensation have retraced earlier declines Inflation expectations can also be inferred from market-based measures of inflation compensation, although the inference is not straightforward because these measures are affected by changes in premiums that provide compensation for bearing inflation MONETARy POLICy REPORT: FEBRUARy 2021 17 and liquidity risks. Measures of longer-term 10. 5-to-10-year-forward inflation compensation inflation compensation—derived either from Weekly Percent differences between yields on nominal Treasury securities and those on comparable-maturity 3.5 Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities (TIPS), Inflation swaps 3.0 or from inflation swaps—dropped sharply 2.5 last March, partly reflecting a reduction in 2.0 the relative liquidity of TIPS compared with nominal Treasury securities (figure 10). Both TIPS breakeven rates 1.5 measures rebounded in the next couple of 1.0 months as liquidity improved, before drifting .5 up further through the remainder of 2020 and 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 early 2021. The TIPS-based measure of 5-to- 10-year-forward inflation compensation and NOTE: The data are weekly averages of daily data and extend through February 12, 2021. TIPS is Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities. the analogous measure from inflation swaps SOURCE: Federal Reserve Bank of New York; Barclays; Federal Reserve Board staff estimates. are now about 2¼ percent and 2½ percent, respectively, a bit above the average levels seen in 2019.5 The plunge and rebound in gross domestic product reflected unusual 11. Real gross domestic product and gross patterns of spending during the pandemic domestic income After contracting with unprecedented speed Quarterly Billions of chained 2012 dollars and severity in the first half of 2020, gross 20 domestic product (GDP) rose rapidly in the third quarter and continued to pick up, albeit 19 at a much slower pace, in the fourth quarter Gross domestic income 18 (figure 11). The rebound in activity reflected a 17 relaxation of voluntary and mandatory social Gross domestic product 16 distancing, as well as unprecedented fiscal and monetary support. Nevertheless, the recovery 15 remains incomplete: At the end of 2020, GDP 14 was 2.5 percent below its level four quarters earlier. This incomplete recovery reflected 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 weakness in services consumption and overall NOTE: Gross domestic income extends through 2020:Q3. SOURCE: Bureau of Economic Analysis via Haver Analytics. exports that resulted largely from ongoing social-distancing measures to contain the virus, both at home and abroad. The concentration of the recession in services is unprecedented in the United States. Indeed, the sectors that are typically responsible for the cyclical dynamics of GDP have shown remarkable resilience: Activity in the housing market and consumer spending on goods were both above their 5. As these measures are based on consumer price index (CPI) inflation, one should probably subtract about ¼ percentage point—the average differential between CPI and PCE inflation over the past two decades—to infer inflation compensation on a PCE basis. 18 PART 1: RECENT ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL DEvELOPMENTS pre-pandemic levels in the fourth quarter, and business fixed investment and manufacturing output also recovered rapidly from their initial plunges. Consumer spending, particularly on goods, bounced back in the second half of 2020 . . . 12. Real personal consumption expenditures Household consumption rebounded rapidly during the late spring and summer from its Billions of chained 2012 dollars Billions of chained 2012 dollars COVID-induced plunge, and it continued to make gains through the fourth quarter, ending 5.5 9.5 the year 2.6 percent below its year-earlier 5.0 9.0 level. Notably, purchases of both durable 4.5 8.5 and nondurable goods rose above their pre- COVID levels in the second half of 2020, as 4.0 Goods 8.0 spending shifted away from services curtailed 3.5 7.5 by voluntary and mandatory social distancing Services 3.0 7.0 (figure 12). Within durable goods, sales of light 2.5 6.5 motor vehicles moved up quickly in the second half and are now close to their pre-pandemic 2005 2008 2011 2014 2017 2020 level; any residual weakness in sales may be NOTE: The data are monthly and extend through December 2020. attributable to low supply, as production SOURCE: Bureau of Economic Analysis via Haver Analytics. has failed to keep pace with demand. Services spending also rebounded from the 13. Indexes of consumer sentiment extraordinarily low level seen in April, but it remained well below its pre-pandemic 1985 = 100 1966 = 100 pace through the fourth quarter, as concerns 170 120 about the virus continued to limit in-person 150 Conference Board 110 interactions. Notably, consumer sentiment has 130 also remained well below pre-pandemic levels 100 110 (figure 13). 90 90 70 80 . . . assisted by government income 70 support . . . 50 60 30 Consumer spending has been bolstered by 10 Michigan survey 50 government income support in the form 2006 2009 2012 2015 2018 2021 of unemployment insurance and stimulus NOTE: The data are monthly. Michigan survey data extend through measures targeted at households. These February 2021; the February data are preliminary. payments were largest in the spring and SOURCE: University of Michigan Surveys of Consumers; Conference Board. summer of last year, but even in the fourth quarter aggregate real disposable personal income (DPI) was 3.7 percent above the level prevailing in late 2019, despite the low level of employment.6 The still-elevated level of DPI, 6. The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, which was enacted in late December, should provide a MONETARy POLICy REPORT: FEBRUARy 2021 19 combined with the low level of consumption, 14. Personal saving rate resulted in an aggregate saving rate of more Monthly Percent than 13 percent in the fourth quarter, nearly double its level from a year earlier (figure 14).7 36 That said, these aggregate figures mask 32 important variation across households, and 28 many low-income households, especially 24 20 those whose earnings declined as a result of 16 the pandemic and recession, have seen their 12 finances stretched.8 8 4 . . . but spending fell back late in the year 0 As COVID cases began rising again 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 in November, some states retightened NOTE: The data extend through December 2020. restrictions, and many households likely cut SOURCE: Bureau of Economic Analysis via Haver Analytics. back voluntarily on their activities, leading to a retrenchment in spending on services such as restaurants and travel. Spending on durable goods also stepped down late in the fourth quarter, possibly in part because many households had already purchased durable items such as furniture and electronics earlier in the year. Further, while higher- income households accrued substantial savings over the course of 2020, some lower- income consumers likely began to reduce their spending toward the end of the year, as support provided by the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) waned. More recently, however, retail sales data and high-frequency indicators suggest that consumer spending substantial further boost to DPI in the first quarter of this year. 7. The saving rate reached 26 percent in the second quarter of 2020—by far the highest level since World War II—before falling back as consumption rebounded and government transfers declined over the course of the year. Even so, the saving rate in the fourth quarter remained higher than in any other period since the 1970s. 8. Food pantries saw a significant increase in demand in 2020, and there was a sharp increase in the number of families reporting that they did not have sufficient money to buy food. See, for example, Marianne Bitler, Hilary W. Hoynes, and Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach (2020), “The Social Safety Net in the Wake of COVID-19,” NBER Working Paper Series 27796 (Cambridge, Mass.: National Bureau of Economic Research, September), https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/ w27796/w27796.pdf. 20 PART 1: RECENT ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL DEvELOPMENTS 15. Real prices of existing single-family houses rose appreciably in January, likely in part because of additional fiscal support from the Quarterly 2005 = 100 Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, which was enacted in late December. 120 Zillow index 110 Soaring equity and house prices have 100 pushed aggregate household wealth to S&P/Case-Shiller record highs 90 national index 80 Stock markets rallied after plunging in the CoreLogic spring and, more recently, have reached price index 70 record highs, largely reflecting the arrival of 60 effective vaccines, optimism about further fiscal stimulus, and notable improvement in 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 the outlook for corporate earnings. House NOTE: The data for the S&P/Case-Shiller index extend through 2020:Q3. Series are deflated by the personal consumption expenditure prices—which are of particular importance for price index. SOURCE: CoreLogic Home Price Index; Zillow; S&P/Case-Shiller U.S. the value of assets held by many households— National Home Price Index. The S&P/Case-Shiller index is a product of have also soared, boosted by strong demand S&P Dow Jones Indices LLC and/or its affiliates. (For Dow Jones Indices licensing information, see the note on the Contents page.) from record-low mortgage rates, a shift in 16. Wealth-to-income ratio demand from multifamily to single-family homes during the pandemic, and a shortage Quarterly Ratio of inventory (figure 15). As a result, aggregate household wealth is elevated relative to income, 7.5 which is supporting consumption, particularly 7.0 of relatively well-off households (figure 16). 6.5 Lending standards for households are 6.0 less accommodative than before the 5.5 pandemic, but credit is still available to households with good credit profiles 5.0 Consumer lending standards remain less 1999 2002 2005 2008 2011 2014 2017 2020 accommodative than before the pandemic, NOTE: The series is the ratio of household net worth to disposable on balance, and are particularly tight for personal income. Data extend through 2020:Q3. SOURCE: For net worth, Federal Reserve Board, Statistical Release individuals with low credit ratings. Banks Z.1, “Financial Accounts of the United States”; for income, Bureau of tightened lending standards substantially in the Economic Analysis via Haver Analytics. first half of 2020, but the tightening moderated 17. Consumer credit flows in the second half and credit remains available Billions of dollars, monthly rate to higher-score borrowers. Banks also reported considerably weaker demand for consumer Q3 20 credit on balance. Credit card lending volumes H1 10 have been weak, consistent with the incomplete + recovery in overall consumer spending, but _0 auto lending has been stronger amid the rapid 10 recovery in motor vehicle sales to consumers (figure 17). Mortgage lending has also been Student loans 20 Auto loans robust, boosted both by record-low mortgage Credit cards 30 interest rates and by mortgage credit that is generally available to those with good credit 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 scores who are seeking traditional mortgage NOTE: The data are seasonally adjusted by the Federal Reserve Board. SOURCE: Federal Reserve Board, Statistical Release G.19, “Consumer Credit.” MONETARy POLICy REPORT: FEBRUARy 2021 21 products (figure 18). Overall, loan defaults 18. Mortgage rates have remained low despite the weak labor Weekly Percent market, supported by various forbearance programs. 6 The housing sector made a remarkable 5 recovery in the second half of 2020 . . . Residential investment grew at a robust 4 pace of 14 percent over the four quarters 3 of 2020, as booming home sales and housing construction in the second half more than 2 offset the outsized declines in the second quarter that resulted from the COVID-19 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 outbreak and mitigation efforts. Historically NOTE: The data extend through February 11, 2021. low mortgage rates and the swift adaptation SOURCE: Freddie Mac Primary Mortgage Market Survey. of the real estate sector to the pandemic boosted housing activity later in the year, 19. Private housing starts and permits with both single-family housing starts and existing home sales rising to their highest levels Monthly Millions of units, annual rate since the mid-2000s (figures 19 and 20).9 The 2.0 burst of housing demand has left inventories 1.8 of both new and existing homes at all-time 1.6 lows, putting upward pressure on home Single-family starts 1.4 prices and supporting new construction. 1.2 Some of these patterns in the data likely 1.0 .8 reflect changes in preferences during the Single-family .6 pandemic, with households opting for larger permits .4 homes and housing in less dense areas, but Multifamily starts .2 the degree to which these changes will persist 0 remains unclear. 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 NOTE: The data extend through December 2020. . . . and business fixed investment also SOURCE: Census Bureau via Haver Analytics. rebounded rapidly . . . Business fixed investment—that is, private 20. New and existing home sales expenditures for equipment, structures, research and development, and other Millions, annual rate Millions, annual rate intellectual property—contracted sharply 7.5 1.4 in the first half of 2020 but largely retraced 7.0 its decline in the second half. The recovery 6.5 1.2 in business investment has been centered in 6.0 Existing home sales 1.0 equipment and intellectual property, which 5.5 .8 rose 2.4 percent over the four quarters of 2020, 5.0 supported by stronger business sentiment, 4.5 .6 improved financing conditions, and the 4.0 .4 3.5 New home sales .2 3.0 9. In particular, during the pandemic, the real estate 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 sector has made increased use of virtual tours, remote NOTE: Data are monthly and extend through December 2020. New closings, and waivers on inspections and appraisals. home sales include only single-family sales. Existing home sales include single-family, condo, and co-op sales. SOURCE: For new home sales, Census Bureau; for existing home sales, National Association of Realtors; all via Haver Analytics. 22 PART 1: RECENT ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL DEvELOPMENTS 21. Real business fixed investment unwinding of direct disruptions from social distancing (figure 21). In addition, the health Billions of chained 2012 dollars Billions of chained 2012 dollars crisis and the shift to widespread teleworking 650 Equipment and 2,400 have led to a surge in investment in both intangible capital medical equipment and computers. In contrast, 2,200 600 investment in nonresidential structures 2,000 550 continued to decline sharply in the second 1,800 500 half. Drilling investment was particularly 1,600 hard hit and fell 30 percent in 2020 as a result 450 1,400 of declines in energy demand and oil prices. 400 1,200 Investment in nondrilling structures also fell, Structures 350 1,000 although more moderately. Long build times imply that the decline in new construction 2005 2008 2011 2014 2017 2020 projects started in the first half of 2020 led NOTE: Business fixed investment is known as “private nonresidential to less ongoing spending in the second half; fixed investment” in the national income and product accounts. The data are quarterly. moreover, firms likely remain uncertain about SOURCE: Bureau of Economic Analysis via Haver Analytics. future demand for many types of structures in the wake of the pandemic. . . . amid notable improvements in corporate financing conditions 22. Selected components of net debt financing for Financing conditions for nonfinancial firms nonfinancial businesses through capital markets have improved Billions of dollars, monthly rate notably since June. In particular, interest Commercial paper H1 rates have remained very low and corporate Bonds 200 bond spreads have narrowed. Gross issuance Bank loans 160 Sum of nonfinancial corporate bonds was solid 120 in the second half of the year, although it 80 slowed from the exceptional pace in the second 40 quarter (figure 22). In contrast, aggregate + _0 bank lending to businesses contracted in the second half, reflecting lower demand for new 40 H2 loans, the repayment of outsized draws on 80 credit lines earlier this year, the forgiveness 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 of some loans under the Paycheck Protection SOURCE: Mergent Inc., Fixed Income Securities Database; S&P Program, and tighter bank credit standards. In Global, Leveraged Commentary & Data; DTCC Solutions LLC, an part because of policy actions to foster smooth affiliate of The Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation. This publication includes data licensed from DTCC Solutions LLC, an market functioning, corporations have been affiliate of The Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation. (For the DTCC licensing disclaimer, see the note on the Contents page.) able to take advantage of favorable funding conditions in capital markets to refinance debt and bolster their balance sheets; as a result, corporate cash holdings are at record levels. In the small business sector, privately financed lending also picked up over the summer, and loan performance improved, supported by the Paycheck Protection Program. Nevertheless, MONETARy POLICy REPORT: FEBRUARy 2021 23 credit availability for small businesses remains 23. Real imports and exports of goods fairly tight, demand for such credit is weak, and services and default risk is still elevated. Quarterly Billions of chained 2012 dollars Exports remain lower, but imports have 3,750 recovered 3,500 Imports 3,250 U.S. exports remain well below pre-pandemic 3,000 levels. With many foreign economies still weak, 2,750 U.S. exports of goods have not quite fully Exports 2,500 recovered from their earlier sharp declines, 2,250 while exports of services remain depressed 2,000 because of the continued suspension of most 1,750 1,500 international travel. In contrast, imports have regained most of their lost ground. Reduced 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 imports of services have been offset by a full SOURCE: Bureau of Economic Analysis via Haver Analytics. rebound of goods imports, which reflects strong U.S. demand for household goods 24. U.S. trade and current account balances (figure 23). Both the nominal trade deficit and current account deficit, relative to GDP, Annual Percent of nominal GDP widened since 2019 (figure 24). + _0 1 Federal fiscal stimulus provided 2 substantial support to economic activity 3 while also significantly boosting the budget deficit and debt Trade 4 5 Federal fiscal policy measures enacted in 6 response to the pandemic continue to provide Current account 7 crucial income support to households and businesses, as well as grants-in-aid to state 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 and local governments. These measures NOTE: GDP is gross domestic product. The data for the trade balance have also facilitated loans to businesses, extend through 2020. The data for the current account balance extend through 2019. The blue dot refers to the average current account balance households, states, and localities.10 In total, for 2020:Q1–2020:Q3. the Congressional Budget Office projects that SOURCE: Bureau of Economic Analysis via Haver Analytics. in fiscal years 2020 and 2021, the additional federal government expenditures and foregone revenues from these policies will total roughly $3 trillion—around 15 percent of nominal GDP.11 In addition, the decline in economic 10. These policy measures include the CARES Act from last spring and the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, enacted in December. Passage of additional fiscal support remains under discussion. 11. The CBO’s projection and estimate can be found at Congressional Budget Office (2020), An Update to the Budget Outlook: 2020 to 2030 (Washington: CBO, September 2), https://www.cbo.gov/publication/56517; and Congressional Budget Office and Joint Committee 24 PART 1: RECENT ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL DEvELOPMENTS 25. Federal receipts and expenditures activity has pushed down tax receipts while pushing up outlays for certain transfer Monthly Percent change from year earlier programs—most notably for unemployment 50 insurance and Medicaid (figure 25). These tax decreases and transfer increases (referred to as 40 automatic stabilizers) worked in tandem with 30 the discretionary stimulus to support aggregate Expenditures 20 demand and blunt the extent of the economic 10 downturn. + _0 10 The combination of the discretionary stimulus Receipts 20 measures and the automatic stabilizers caused the budget deficit in fiscal 2020 to rise to 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 15 percent of nominal GDP—the largest NOTE: The data are 12-month moving sums. deficit as a share of GDP in the post–World SOURCE: Office of Management and Budget via Haver Analytics. War II era—up from its already elevated level of 4½ percent in fiscal 2019. Consequently, 26. Federal government debt and net interest outlays the ratio of federal debt held by the public to nominal GDP rose from 79 percent in fiscal Percent of nominal GDP Percent of nominal GDP 2019 to 100 percent by the end of fiscal 2020, 120 4.0 the highest debt-to-GDP ratio since 1947 Net interest outlays 110 3.5 on federal debt 100 (figure 26). Even so, the cost of servicing the 3.0 90 federal debt is not particularly elevated by 80 2.5 historical standards, because Treasury rates are 70 2.0 60 extremely low. 50 1.5 40 State and local governments are facing 1.0 30 .5 Debt held by 20 challenging fiscal conditions the public 10 0 0 State and local governments are confronting challenging budget conditions because of 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 weak tax collections and extraordinary NOTE: The data for net interest outlays are annual, begin in 1948, and extend through 2020. Net interest outlays are the cost of servicing the expenses related to the pandemic. Nominal debt held by the public. Federal debt held by the public equals federal debt less Treasury securities held in federal employee defined-benefit state government tax collections in 2020 were retirement accounts, evaluated at the end of the quarter. The data for about 1 percent below their 2019 level and federal debt begin in 1900 and are annual from 1900 to 1951 and quarterly thereafter. The data for gross domestic product (GDP) and well below levels generally expected before federal debt extend through 2020:Q3. SOURCE: For GDP, Bureau of Economic Analysis via Haver the pandemic (figure 27).12 The magnitude of Analytics; for federal debt, Federal Reserve Board, Statistical Release Z.1, “Financial Accounts of the United States.” on Taxation (2021), “H.R. 133, Summary Estimate for Divisions M Through FF Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 Public Law 116–260,” cost estimate, January 14, https://www.cbo.gov/publication/56963. 12. State tax collection data are available through November 2020. For additional details, see Urban Institute (2020), “State Tax and Economic Review,” State and Local Finance Initiative, November, https:// www.urban.org/policy-centers/cross-center-initiatives/ state-and-local-finance-initiative/projects/state-tax-and- economic-review (accessed January 2021). Although depressed, tax receipts have not fallen as significantly as economic activity, for several reasons. First, some of the federal fiscal aid to households (for MONETARy POLICy REPORT: FEBRUARy 2021 25 these revenue shortfalls varied considerably 27. State and local tax receipts across states, with the largest shortfalls in Year-over-year percent change states that rely heavily on sales taxes, tourism, and energy production. In contrast, property taxes—the principal local government Total state taxes 10 tax—have continued to rise apace, and state and local governments have received 5 federal aid that has assisted with COVID- Property taxes + related expenses and helped ease budget _0 strains. Meanwhile, bond market conditions for state and local governments have been 5 generally accommodative in the second half of the year, as robust municipal bond 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 issuance has been supported by historically low yields and tax-exempt municipal bond NOTE: State tax data are 12-month percent changes of 4-quarter moving averages, extend through November 2020, and are aggregated funds have seen solid inflows. Even so, in over all states except Wyoming, for which data are not available. Revenues from Washington, DC, are also excluded. Data for October response to social-distancing restrictions and November are missing for New Mexico, as this state has longer (including virtual learning), current budget reporting lags than others. Property tax data are 4-quarter percent changes of 4-quarter moving averages, extend through 2020:Q3, and are pressures, and concerns over future budgetary primarily collected by local governments. SOURCE: State Tax and Economic Review Project; State and Local challenges, state and local governments have Finance Initiative at Urban Institute; Census Bureau. cut payrolls—particularly in the education sector—an unprecedented 6½ percent over the 28. State and local government payroll employment past year (figure 28). Notably, public-sector employment is down significantly in nearly all Monthly Millions states, including those that have experienced relatively smaller revenue shocks. 20.0 Vaccines offer hope of an end to the 19.5 pandemic, but risks to the outlook are still substantial 19.0 The economic outlook presented in Part 3 18.5 depends crucially on the course of the 18.0 COVID-19 pandemic. The vaccination campaign now under way offers the prospect 2006 2009 2012 2015 2018 2021 of a return to more normal conditions by the end of this year. But the pace of NOTE: The data are seasonally adjusted. SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics, National Compensation Survey. vaccinations, the rate of decline in the spread of the virus, and the speed with which people return to normal activities all remain highly uncertain, particularly given the emergence of new, apparently more contagious strains. The longer-run economic effects of the pandemic are also difficult to predict. Many example, unemployment benefits) is taxable. Second, goods consumption, which is likelier to be subject to sales taxes than services, has largely held up. Finally, unemployment has been concentrated among low-income individuals, who pay less in income taxes. 26 PART 1: RECENT ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL DEvELOPMENTS small businesses have shut down and may not reopen. Some pandemic-driven shifts in economic activity, such as from in-person to online shopping and from office-based to remote work, may prove to be permanent. These shifts could increase productivity by substituting remote interactions for costly travel and commuting, but they could also put persistent upward pressure on unemployment, as affected workers may need to seek new jobs and perhaps new occupations. The pandemic has also disrupted schooling at all levels, which could have persistent negative effects on educational attainment and economic outcomes for affected students. Financial Developments The expected level of the federal funds rate over the next few years has remained 29. Market-implied federal funds rate path near zero Quarterly Percent Economic forecasters and financial market participants expect the federal funds rate over 1.25 the next several years to remain at the effective 1.00 lower bound. Market-based measures of federal funds rate expectations over the next .75 February 16, 2021 few years have increased moderately since June .50 and remain below 0.25 percent until the second .25 quarter of 2023 (figure 29).13 According to + _0 the results of the Survey of Primary Dealers June 11, 2020 and the Survey of Market Participants, both .25 conducted by the Federal Reserve Bank of 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 New York in January, the median respondent NOTE: The federal funds rate path is implied by quotes on overnight views the most likely path of the federal funds index swaps—a derivative contract tied to the effective federal funds rate. rate as remaining in its current range of 0 to The implied path as of June 11, 2020, is compared with that as of February 16, 2021. The path is estimated with a spline approach, ¼ percent until the first half of 2024.14 assuming a term premium of 0 basis points. The June 11, 2020, path extends through June 2024 and the February 16, 2021, path through January 2025. SOURCE: Bloomberg; Federal Reserve Board staff estimates. 13. These measures are based on a straight read of market quotes and are not adjusted for term premiums. 14. The results of the Survey of Primary Dealers and the Survey of Market Participants are available on the Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s website at https://www.newyorkfed.org/markets/primarydealer_ survey_questions.html and https://www.newyorkfed.org/ markets/survey_market_participants, respectively. MONETARy POLICy REPORT: FEBRUARy 2021 27 Yields on longer-term U.S. nominal Treasury securities increased markedly . . . Yields on nominal Treasury securities at longer 30. Yields on nominal Treasury securities maturities increased markedly since mid-2020 Daily Percent after falling sharply in late February and early March as investors’ concerns regarding the 5-year 4 implications of the COVID-19 outbreak for the economic outlook led to both falling policy 10-year 3 rate expectations and flight-to-safety flows (figure 30). The increase in yields on longer- 2 term Treasury securities followed news of the imminent arrival of multiple highly effective 2-year 1 COVID-19 vaccines in the fall of 2020 and 0 expectations of further fiscal support, as well as an increase in the issuance of longer-term 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 Treasury securities. Near-term uncertainty about longer-dated nominal Treasury SOURCE: Department of the Treasury via Haver Analytics. yields—as measured by volatility of near- term swaptions of 10-year interest rates—has remained low. . . . while spreads of other long-term debt 31. Yield and spread on agency mortgage-backed to Treasury securities narrowed . . . securities Despite the rise in Treasury yields, yields on Percent Basis points 30-year agency mortgage-backed securities (MBS)—an important determinant of 5 250 Yield mortgage interest rates—decreased somewhat, 200 4 on balance, amid the Federal Reserve’s 150 ongoing purchases of MBS and have remained 3 near their historical lows (figure 31). Thus, the 100 spread between yields on 30-year agency MBS 2 50 and comparable-maturity Treasury yields has Spread narrowed. 1 0 Approval of the effective vaccines late last 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 year, optimism about further fiscal support, NOTE: The yield is on mortgage-backed securities from Fannie Mae through May 31, 2019, and from uniform mortgage-backed securities and notable improvement in the outlook thereafter. Data are daily. for corporate earnings boosted investors’ SOURCE: Department of the Treasury; J.P. Morgan. Courtesy of J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., Copyright 2021. optimism, and improvement in the credit quality of firms drove declines in yields on investment- and speculative-grade corporate bonds (figure 32). As with mortgage securities, spreads on corporate bond yields over comparable-maturity nominal Treasury yields have narrowed considerably since the end of June—as corporate bond yields declined and yields on nominal Treasury 28 PART 1: RECENT ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL DEvELOPMENTS 32. Corporate bond yields, by securities rating, and securities increased—and have returned to municipal bond yield levels observed before the pandemic. Yields on municipal debt continued to decline in the Daily Percent second half of 2020, and spreads on municipal 12 bonds over comparable-maturity nominal Treasury yields have narrowed substantially High-yield corporate Investment-grade corporate 10 since the end of June, as nominal Treasury 8 yields increased and investors grew more 6 optimistic about further fiscal stimulus and 4 aid to state and local governments. The year- end expiration of lending facilities that were 2 Municipal authorized under section 13(3) of the Federal 0 Reserve Act and that use CARES Act funding did not lead to upward pressure on corporate 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 or municipal bond spreads. NOTE: Investment-grade corporate is the 10-year triple-B, which reflects the effective yield of the ICE BofAML 7-to-10-year triple-B U.S. Corporate Index (C4A4). High-yield corporate is the 10-year high yield and reflects the effective yield of the ICE BofAML 7-to-10-year U.S. . . . and market functioning for Treasury Cash Pay High Yield Index (J4A0). Municipal is the Municipal Market securities, corporate bonds, mortgage- Advisors 20-year yield. SOURCE: ICE Data Indices, LLC, used with permission; Municipal backed securities, and municipal bonds Market Advisors. continued to improve . . . After having improved substantially in the spring of last year, measures of market liquidity for Treasury securities—such as measures of market depth and trade sizes— continued to improve somewhat in the second half of 2020 and moved closer to pre- pandemic levels, especially for shorter-dated Treasury securities. However, measures of liquidity for longer-dated Treasury securities and in some portions of the MBS market— notably for those securities excluded from Federal Reserve open market purchases— remained somewhat below pre-pandemic levels. Measures of market functioning of the corporate bond market continued to improve as bid-ask spreads narrowed considerably and returned to their pre-pandemic levels and issuance of corporate bonds in primary markets was robust. Measures of market functioning of the municipal bond market— such as robust issuance of municipal bonds in primary markets and round-trip transaction costs—indicate that market conditions remained stable in the second half of 2020. MONETARy POLICy REPORT: FEBRUARy 2021 29 . . . while conditions in short-term funding markets remained stable The effective federal funds rate and other secured and unsecured short-term rates continued to trade within the target range of the federal funds rate, as ample liquidity, primarily due to substantial increases in reserves, has kept markets functioning smoothly. Since June, measures of stress in short-term funding markets—including trading volumes, issuance, and spreads to overnight index swaps—have remained stable at or near pre-pandemic levels, and year-end funding pressures were minimal. 33. Equity prices Broad stock prices have risen notably Daily December 31, 2009 = 100 After starting to rebound last spring from 350 their COVID-related declines, broad stock 300 prices have risen notably further since 250 mid-2020, as the arrival of effective vaccines, optimism about further fiscal support, and S&P 500 index 200 notable improvement in the outlook for 150 corporate earnings outweighed investor Dow Jones bank index 100 concerns regarding the rise in COVID-19 50 cases (figure 33). The prospect of an economic 0 recovery aided by effective vaccines and fiscal support led to outsized price gains in 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 some cyclical sectors, such as the consumer SOURCE: S&P Dow Jones Indices LLC via Bloomberg. (For Dow Jones Indices licensing information, see the note on the Contents page.) discretionary, materials, and information technology sectors. Similarly, stock prices of smaller corporations considerably 34. S&P 500 volatility outperformed large-cap stock price indexes. Daily Percent After experiencing depressed levels through early fall, bank stock price indexes increased 90 80 considerably in late 2020, boosted by positive 70 vaccine news, a generally improved investor 60 outlook for loan losses and bank profitability, 50 and the release of favorable stress-test results VIX 40 in late 2020. Measures of realized and 30 implied stock price volatility for the S&P 500 20 index—the 20-day realized volatility and the 10 VIX—decreased sharply from their very high Realized volatility 0 levels at the end of the second quarter but 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 remained moderately above their historical NOTE: The VIX is a measure of implied volatility that represents the medians, respectively (figure 34). (For a expected annualized change in the S&P 500 index over the following 30 discussion of financial stability issues, see days. For realized volatility, 5-minute S&P 500 returns are used in an exponentially weighted moving average with 75 percent of weight the box “Developments Related to Financial distributed over the past 20 days. SOURCE: Cboe Volatility Index® (VIX®) via Bloomberg; Federal Stability.”) Reserve Board staff estimates. 30 PART 1: RECENT ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL DEvELOPMENTS Developments Related to Financial Stability This discussion reviews vulnerabilities in the elevated before the outbreak of the pandemic. Business U.S. fi nancial system since the COvID-19 outbreak leverage now stands near historical highs. While near- and summarizes recent actions and developments term risks associated with debt service may be limited at facilities established by the Federal Reserve to by large cash balances at large fi rms, low interest rates, support the fl ow of credit throughout the economy.1 and recently improved earnings prospects, insolvency The framework used by the Federal Reserve Board for risks at small and medium-sized fi rms, as well as at assessing the resilience of the U.S. fi nancial system some large fi rms, remain considerable. The household focuses on fi nancial vulnerabilities in four broad areas: sector entered the downturn with relatively low debt asset valuations, business and household debt, leverage but experienced signifi cant fi nancial strains because in the fi nancial sector, and funding risks. of the unprecedented spike in unemployment and Overall, asset valuation pressures, which were business closures. Government programs—including elevated before the COvID-19 outbreak in the United expanded unemployment insurance and direct stimulus States, briefl y subsided at the onset of the outbreak as payments in the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic asset prices plummeted but have since retraced in most Security Act, or CARES Act—and a rebound in markets. In particular, prices in equity, corporate bond, economic activity in the second half of 2020 reduced and residential real estate (RRE) markets have returned economic hardship for households and mitigated the to or exceeded pre-pandemic levels, buoyed in part by deterioration in household credit quality. recent developments related to vaccines. Equity prices In the fi nancial sector, bank profi tability and capital have more than recovered from the steep declines positions, which were strained by the outbreak of at the onset of the pandemic, with investor appetite the pandemic, improved in the second half of 2020 broadly rebounding across most sectors. Equity market because of a combination of lower-than-expected volatility remains high, indicating persistent uncertainty losses, a better economic outlook, and restrictions regarding the pandemic and the related course of imposed by the Federal Reserve on capital distributions economic activity. yields on corporate bonds over by the largest banks. In particular, the capitalization of comparable-maturity Treasury securities have narrowed U.S. global systemically important banks, or G-SIBs, considerably. Treasury yields across the maturity exceeds pre-pandemic levels. In addition, the results spectrum declined at the onset of the pandemic and of stress tests released in June and December 2020 remain near historical lows. The credit quality of indicated that banks would generally remain well outstanding leveraged loans deteriorated early this year, capitalized under extremely severe recession scenarios. but investor appetite remains strong and new issuance Leverage at broker-dealers changed little over 2020 and has increased in the second half of 2020. RRE prices remains at historically low levels. While the liquidity also rose rapidly in the second half of 2020, outpacing deterioration across dealer-intermediated markets in rent increases. Commercial real estate prices remain March 2020 demonstrated potential fragility despite at historically high levels despite high vacancy rates dealers’ low leverage, this fragility has been likely and appear susceptible to sharp declines, particularly mitigated by emergency lending facilities and the if the pace of distressed transactions picks up or, in the supervisory action of the Federal Reserve. By contrast, longer term, the pandemic leads to permanent changes leverage at life insurance companies has risen to post- in demand. 2008 highs. vulnerabilities from leverage at hedge vulnerabilities associated with business and funds remain elevated. Finally, securitization volumes household debt increased over the course of 2020. increased after coming to a halt in March 2020 but Business debt has risen from levels that were already remain signifi cantly below pre-pandemic levels. Over the course of 2020, banks relied only modestly on short-term wholesale funding and maintained 1. The Financial Stability Report published in November 2020 presents the most recent, detailed assessment of U.S. signifi cant levels of high-quality liquid assets. By fi nancial system vulnerabilities and a summary of Federal contrast, developments at the onset of the pandemic Reserve actions and developments at facilities during the demonstrated signifi cant structural vulnerabilities at COvID-19 crisis. See Board of Governors of the Federal money market mutual funds and open-end investment Reserve System (2020), Financial Stability Report (Washington: Board of Governors, November), https://www.federalreserve. funds, particularly those that invest substantially in gov/publications/files/financial-stability-report-20201109.pdf. (continued) MONETARy POLICy REPORT: FEBRUARy 2021 31 corporate and municipal debt. These funds experienced The Paycheck Protection Program Liquidity Facility large, sudden redemptions in March 2020, which (PPPLF) was established to extend credit to lenders contributed to strains in broader short-term funding that participate in the Paycheck Protection Program of markets and fi xed-income debt markets. Federal the Small Business Administration (SBA), which has Reserve actions, including emergency lending provided payroll support for small businesses. Through facilities, have mitigated these vulnerabilities for now, mid-January 2021, the Federal Reserve has made nearly but without structural reforms, the vulnerabilities 15,000 PPPLF advances to more than 850 banking demonstrated in March 2020 will persist and could institutions, totaling more than $110 billion in liquidity. signifi cantly amplify future shocks. The Federal Reserve has taken actions that reduce The outlook for the pandemic and economic spillovers to the U.S. economy from foreign fi nancial activity remains uncertain globally. In response to stresses. Temporary U.S. dollar liquidity swap lines the economic disruptions caused by the pandemic, were established in March 2020, in addition to the many foreign governments have ramped up spending preexisting standing lines, and have improved liquidity to support households and businesses. Nevertheless, conditions in dollar funding markets in the United fi nancial systems in some foreign economies are States and abroad by providing foreign central banks more vulnerable than before the pandemic, and these with the capacity to deliver U.S. dollar funding to vulnerabilities may grow in the near term. Risks from institutions in their jurisdictions during times of market widespread and persistent stresses in emerging markets stress. The FIMA (Foreign and International Monetary and dollar funding markets could interact with risks Authorities) Repo Facility has helped support the associated with the course of COvID-19 for the U.S. smooth functioning of the U.S. Treasury market by fi nancial system. In turn, these risks could be amplifi ed providing a temporary source of U.S. dollars to a by the vulnerabilities identifi ed in this discussion and broad range of countries, many of which do not have produce additional strains for the U.S. fi nancial system swap line arrangements with the Federal Reserve. The and economic activity. temporary swap lines and the FIMA Repo Facility will continue to serve as liquidity backstops until their Developments Associated with Facilities scheduled expiration at the end of September 2021. to Support the Economy during the Other facilities established at the onset of the COVID-19 Crisis pandemic expired either at the end of December 2020 or at the beginning of January 2021. The Primary In the immediate wake of the pandemic, the Market Corporate Credit Facility, the Secondary Federal Reserve took forceful actions and established Market Corporate Credit Facility, and the Municipal emergency lending facilities, with the approval of the Liquidity Facility were established to improve the fl ow Secretary of the Treasury as needed. These actions of credit through bond markets, where large fi rms and and facilities have supported the fl ow of credit to municipalities obtain most of their long-term funding. households and businesses and have served as The Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility was backstop measures that have given investors confi dence also set up to support the issuance of securities backed that support will be available should conditions by student loans, auto loans, credit card loans, loans deteriorate substantially. backed by the SBA, and certain other assets. Altogether, Some of the facilities established at the onset of the before expiring at the end of 2020, these facilities pandemic are still operational. The Commercial Paper brought rapid improvements to credit markets, with Funding Facility (CPFF), the Money Market Mutual only modest direct interventions. The Main Street Fund Liquidity Facility (MMLF), and the Primary Dealer Lending Program (Main Street) expired at the beginning Credit Facility (PDCF) stabilized short-term funding of January 2021. In its period of operation, Main Street markets and improved the fl ow of credit to households purchased about 1,800 loan participations, totaling and businesses. Although balances in the PDCF, more than $16 billion, which helped small and CPFF, and MMLF have fallen from their initial highs medium-sized businesses from some of the hardest- to low levels, the facilities will continue to serve as hit areas of the country and covered a wide range of important backstops against further market stress until industries. their scheduled expiration at the end of March 2021. 32 PART 1: RECENT ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL DEvELOPMENTS Bank credit contracted, while bank 35. Commercial and industrial loan growth profitability improved Monthly Percent In contrast with strong debt issuance through 40 securities markets, outstanding bank loan 30 balances across most major loan categories 20 have contracted since mid-June amid generally 10 weak borrower demand and tight lending + _0 standards. Commercial and industrial (C&I) 10 loans at banks declined sharply in the second 20 half of 2020, reflecting the repayment of 30 large credit-line draws made earlier in the year and the forgiveness of some loans under 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 the Paycheck Protection Program, as well as NOTE: Data are calculated as monthly year-over-year growth rates. generally weak borrower demand for such SOURCE: Federal Reserve Board, Statistical Release H.8, “Assets and Liabilities of Commercial Banks in the United States.” loans and tighter bank lending standards. However, overall C&I loan balances at banks 36. Profitability of bank holding companies remained higher compared with a year earlier Percent, annual rate Percent, annual rate (figure 35). Measures of bank profitability, such as return on assets and return on 2.0 30 equity, rebounded in the second half of 2020 Return on assets 1.5 20 following very low readings in the second 1.0 quarter, when banks significantly increased 10 .5 + + their loan loss provisions, but have remained _0 _0 below pre-pandemic levels (figure 36). .5 Return on equity 10 Delinquency rates on bank loans remained 1.0 low, as banks’ loss-mitigation and forbearance 20 1.5 programs allowed many borrowers to stay 30 2.0 current on their loans. Large banks posted higher-than-expected earnings in the fourth 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 quarter, bolstered by capital market activity NOTE: The data are quarterly, extend through 2020:Q3, and are seasonally adjusted. and loan loss reserve releases, while low rates SOURCE: Federal Reserve Board, Form FR Y-9C, Consolidated Financial Statements for Bank Holding Companies. continued to weigh on profit margins. 37. Foreign real gross domestic product International Developments Quarterly 2005 average = 100 160 Economic activity abroad snapped back 150 in the third quarter . . . 140 130 As in the United States, foreign GDP partially 120 rebounded in the third quarter of 2020 (figure 37). Nonetheless, foreign economic 110 100 90 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 NOTE: The data extend through 2020:Q3. Foreign GDP computed on a representative sample of 40 countries and aggregated using U.S. trade weights. SOURCE: Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, Database of Global Economic Indicators, https://www.dallasfed.org/institute/dgei/gdp.aspx. MONETARy POLICy REPORT: FEBRUARy 2021 33 activity remains well below its pre-pandemic 38. Services purchasing managers index in level, as a resurgence of infections in many selected foreign economies economies has recently led to renewed social- Monthly Index distancing restrictions. The accompanying 65 slowdown in economic activity appears to China Euro area 60 have been less dramatic than that in the 55 spring, as economies have adjusted to function 50 better under social-distancing restrictions. In Japan 45 40 addition, many current containment measures 35 have been less stringent relative to those in 30 the spring, and fiscal and monetary policies 25 continue to support the path to recovery. 20 15 10 Since last spring, manufacturing has generally 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 recovered more than services, which remain depressed because consumers have avoided NOTE: For the foreign services output purchasing managers index (PMI), values greater than (less than) 50 indicate better (worse) business socially intensive activities, especially in the conditions, on average, for the participants surveyed relative to conditions at the time of the previous survey. hospitality and leisure sectors (figure 38). SOURCE: IHS Markit, Global Sector PMI. Some higher-income Asian economies, where infections are more under control, experienced 39. Real gross domestic product in selected relatively better GDP growth than many foreign economies advanced economies and benefited from Percent change from year earlier increased export demand in the second half of 2020. Most notably, China’s GDP was 8 6.5 percent higher in the fourth quarter of 2020 6 compared with a year ago. In many Latin 4 American countries and advanced foreign 2 + economies (AFEs), fourth-quarter GDP _0 contracted relative to a year earlier (figure 39). 2 4 Although the ongoing spread of the virus— 6 including new variants—is concerning, 8 many AFEs have already started immunizing their populations and have commitments Euro area Canada China Mexico South Korea to purchase substantial stocks of vaccines. NOTE: The data are for 2020:Q4. For Canada, the euro area, and Mexico, the values correspond to flash estimates of GDP. For South Controlling the virus globally, however, will be Korea, the value is the advance GDP estimate. For China, the value corresponds to preliminary GDP. challenging, in part because many emerging SOURCE: For the euro area, Eurostat; for Canada, Statistics Canada; market economies (EMEs) have more limited for China, National Bureau of Statistics of China; for Mexico, Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía; for South Korea, Bank of Korea; access to vaccines and face greater distribution all via Haver Analytics. challenges. 34 PART 1: RECENT ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL DEvELOPMENTS 40. 24-month policy expectations for selected advanced . . . with considerable policy support and foreign economies subdued inflation Weekly Basis points Efforts to contain the virus’s resurgence in the fourth quarter prompted some foreign 150 central banks and fiscal authorities to United Kingdom 100 provide additional support to households and businesses, particularly in the AFEs. 50 High debt levels limited the fiscal space in Japan + _0 some EMEs, and emergency aid to sustain employment and household spending 50 Euro area expired in some EMEs with elevated fiscal 100 concerns. Monetary policy across foreign economies was highly accommodative, and 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 financing conditions remained supportive of NOTE: The data are weekly averages of daily 24-month market-implied growth, with a few major AFE central banks central bank policy rates. The 24-month policy rates are implied by quotes on overnight index swaps tied to the policy rates. The data begin introducing new stimulus measures late last on Thursdays and extend through February 10, 2021. year. Indeed, market-implied policy paths SOURCE: Bloomberg; Federal Reserve Board staff estimations. for the Japanese, U.K., and European central banks signal a prolonged period of monetary 41. Unemployment rate in selected advanced economies accommodation (figure 40). Monthly Percent Even with substantial policy support, AFE 16 unemployment rates at the end of 2020 are 14 higher than they were before the pandemic. United States 12 Unemployment rates in Europe and Japan Euro area 10 rose moderately during the spring and have 8 remained relatively unchanged (figure 41). Canada Canada, however, endured a large and rapid 6 increase in unemployment during the spring 4 and a commensurate decline by year-end, United Kingdom Japan 2 similar to the U.S. experience. The country- 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 specific dynamics of unemployment partly NOTE: The data for the United Kingdom extend through October reflect differences in labor market structures, 2020 and are centered 3-month averages of monthly data. The data for employment protection regulations, and the the euro area and Japan extend through December 2020. SOURCE: For the United Kingdom, Office for National Statistics; for expansion of wage subsidy programs. In Japan, Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare; for the euro area, Statistical Office of the European Communities; for Canada, Statistics general, unemployment rates in the EMEs Canada; for the United States, Bureau of Labor Statistics; all via Haver Analytics. increased since the start of the pandemic, and some Asian economies adopted direct wage subsidies to avert large dislocations in their labor markets. MONETARy POLICy REPORT: FEBRUARy 2021 35 Despite the recovery in activity and 43. Nominal 10-year government bond yields in employment in some sectors of the economy, selected advanced economies lower overall demand and continued Weekly Percent uncertainty about the path of the virus helped keep inflation subdued abroad. In many 6 foreign economies, inflation remains below United Kingdom 5 central banks’ targets. In the euro area and 4 United States Japan, the consumer price index fell in 2020, 3 Germany reflecting subdued inflation expectations and 2 persistent economic slack (figure 42). Japan 1 + Longer-term sovereign yields remained _0 low, while risk sentiment improved . . . 1 Longer-term sovereign yields in major 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 AFEs have moved up, on net, but remained NOTE: The data are weekly averages of daily benchmark yields. The data begin on Thursdays and extend through February 10, 2021. near historically low levels amid continued SOURCE: Bloomberg. monetary policy accommodation (figure 43). Foreign equity markets rebounded in the 44. Equity indexes for selected advanced economies second half of 2020, reflecting not only supportive monetary and fiscal policies, but Weekly Week ending January 6, 2016 = 100 also the development of effective vaccines. Although AFE stock markets largely 200 recovered, they still underperformed U.S. 180 equities, with greater restrictions on activity 160 United States abroad and a lower share of companies that 140 benefited from the digital economy (figure 44). 120 100 42. Consumer price inflation in selected advanced Euro area United Kingdom foreign economies Japan 80 Monthly 12-month percent change 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 4 NOTE: The data are weekly averages of daily data. The data begin on Thursdays and extend through February 10, 2021. United Kingdom SOURCE: For euro area, DJ Euro Stoxx Index; for Japan, TOPIX 3 Stock Index; for United Kingdom, FTSE 100 Stock Index; for United States, S&P 500 Index; all via Bloomberg. (For Dow Jones Indices Canada 2 licensing information, see the note on the Contents page.) 1 Japan + _0 Euro area 1 2 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 NOTE: The data extend through December 2020. SOURCE: For the United Kingdom, Office for National Statistics; for Japan, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications; for the euro area, Statistical Office of the European Communities; for Canada, Statistics Canada; all via Haver Analytics. 36 PART 1: RECENT ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL DEvELOPMENTS 45. Emerging market mutual fund flows and spreads EME equity markets have recovered since the spring, with recent strong capital inflows Basis points Billions of dollars (figure 45). Asian equity indexes rose well Equity fund flows (right scale) 900 Bond fund flows (right scale) 100 above pre-pandemic levels, while those in Latin EMBI+ (left scale) 75 America posted modest gains relative to a year 600 50 ago, largely reflecting Asian economies’ lower 300 25 infection rates, better fundamentals, and larger + + _0 _0 fiscal space to provide additional stimulus 300 25 (figure 46). Along with the improvement in Jan. 50 equity markets, sovereign borrowing spreads 600 75 generally narrowed, although they are still 900 100 above pre-pandemic levels. 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 NOTE: The bond and equity fund flows data are semiannual sums of . . . and the broad dollar depreciated weekly data from December 28, 2006, to December 30, 2020, and a monthly sum of weekly data from December 31, 2020, to January 26, 2021. Weekly data span Thursday through Wednesday, and the semiannual and monthly The broad dollar index—a measure of the values are sums over weekly data for weeks ending in that half year or month. The fund flows data exclude funds located in China. The J.P. trade-weighted value of the dollar against Morgan Emerging Markets Bond Index Plus (EMBI+) data are weekly averages of daily data. The weekly data begin on Thursdays and extend through February 10, 2021. The EMBI+ data exclude Venezuela. SOURCE: For bond and equity fund flows, EPFR Global; for EMBI+, J.P. Morgan Emerging Markets Bond Index Plus via Bloomberg. 46. Equity indexes for selected emerging market economies Weekly Week ending January 6, 2016 = 100 300 250 Brazil Taiwan 200 South Korea 150 100 China Mexico 50 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 NOTE: The data are weekly averages of daily data. The data begin on Thursdays and extend through February 10, 2021. SOURCE: For China, Shanghai Composite Index; for Brazil, Bovespa Index; for South Korea, Korean Composite Index; for Mexico, IPC Index; for Taiwan, TAIEX; all via Bloomberg. MONETARY POLICY REPORT: FEBRUARY 2021 37 foreign currencies—fell in the second half of 47. U.S. dollar exchange rate indexes last year. Both the continued improvement Weekly Week ending January 6, 2016 = 100 in market conditions following the stresses of last March and highly accommodative Dollar appreciation AFE dollar index 120 U.S. monetary policy contributed to dollar 115 depreciation. On balance, the dollar has depreciated about 3.5 percent relative to a year Broad dollar index 110 ago (figure 47). The dollar broadly weakened 105 against AFE currencies, notably the euro. The 100 dollar also fell against some Asian emerging 95 market currencies, particularly the Chinese EME dollar index renminbi and Korean won (figure 48). 90 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 NOTE: The data, which are in foreign currency units per dollar, are weekly averages of daily values of the broad dollar index, advanced foreign economies (AFE) dollar index, and emerging market economies (EME) dollar index. The weekly data begin on Thursdays and extend through February 10, 2021. As indicated by the leftmost arrow, increases in the data reflect U.S. dollar appreciation and decreases reflect U.S. dollar depreciation. SOURCE: Federal Reserve Board, Statistical Release H.10, “Foreign Exchange Rates.” 48. Exchange rate indexes for selected emerging market economies Weekly Week ending January 6, 2016 = 100 Dollar appreciation 150 140 Chinese renminbi 130 Mexican peso 120 110 100 90 Korean won 80 Brazilian real 70 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 NOTE: The data, which are in foreign currency units per dollar, are weekly averages of daily data. The weekly data begin on Thursdays and extend through February 10, 2021. As indicated by the leftmost arrow, increases in the data reflect U.S. dollar appreciation and decreases reflect U.S. dollar depreciation. SOURCE: Federal Reserve Board, Statistical Release H.10, “Foreign Exchange Rates.” 39 P 2 art m P onetary oLiCy The Federal Open Market Committee appropriate monetary policy will likely maintained the federal funds rate near aim to achieve inflation moderately above zero as it seeks to achieve maximum 2 percent for some time” so that inflation employment and inflation at the rate of averages 2 percent over time and longer-term 2 percent over the longer run . . . inflation expectations remain well anchored at 2 percent. (See the box “The FOMC’s In light of the effects of the continuing Revised Statement on Longer-Run Goals and public health crisis on the economy and the Monetary Policy Strategy.”) The Committee associated risks to the outlook, the Federal expects to maintain an accommodative stance Open Market Committee (FOMC) has of monetary policy until these outcomes are maintained the target range for the federal funds rate at 0 to ¼ percent since March 2020, achieved and has indicated that it expects when the global pandemic led the Committee it will be appropriate to maintain the target to quickly lower the target range to the range for the federal funds rate at 0 to effective lower bound (figure 49).15 In its ¼ percent until labor market conditions have revised Statement on Longer-Run Goals and reached levels consistent with the Committee’s Monetary Policy Strategy, issued in August, assessments of maximum employment and the Committee reaffirmed its commitment to inflation has risen to 2 percent and is on track achieving maximum employment and inflation to moderately exceed 2 percent for some time. at the rate of 2 percent over the longer run and noted that “following periods when inflation . . . and the Committee increased the has been running persistently below 2 percent, holdings of Treasury securities and agency mortgage-backed securities in the System Open Market Account 15. See the FOMC statements issued since the March meetings, which are available (along with other In addition, the Federal Reserve has continued postmeeting statements) on the Monetary Policy portion to expand its holdings of Treasury securities of the Board’s website at https://www.federalreserve.gov/ monetarypolicy.htm. by $80 billion per month and its holdings of 49. Selected interest rates Daily Percent 5 10-year Treasury rate 4 3 2 2-year Treasury rate 1 0 Target federal funds rate 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 NOTE: The 2-year and 10-year Treasury rates are the constant-maturity yields based on the most actively traded securities. SOURCE: Department of the Treasury; Federal Reserve Board. 40 PART 2: MONETARy POLICy The FOMC’s Revised Statement on Longer-Run Goals and Monetary Policy Strategy On August 27, 2020, the Federal Open Market the Congress to promote maximum employment, price Committee (FOMC) issued a revised Statement on stability, and moderate long-term interest rates. It also Longer-Run Goals and Monetary Policy Strategy.1 This describes the benefi ts of explaining policy actions to document, fi rst released in January 2012, lays out the public as clearly as possible. The statement then the Committee’s goals, articulates its framework for outlines important changes to the characterization of monetary policy, and serves as the foundation for its the Committee’s policy framework for achieving its policy actions. The revised statement encapsulates the dual-mandate goals of maximum employment and key conclusions from the Federal Reserve’s review of price stability. After stating that economic variables the monetary policy strategy, tools, and communication fl uctuate in response to disturbances and that monetary practices it uses to pursue its statutory dual-mandate policy plays an important role in stabilizing the goals of maximum employment and price stability. economy, the statement notes that the Committee’s The review, which commenced in early 2019, was primary means of adjusting policy is through changes in undertaken because the U.S. economy has changed the policy interest rate (the target range for the federal in ways that matter for monetary policy. In particular, funds rate). Furthermore, because the neutral level of the neutral level of the policy interest rate—the policy the policy rate is now lower than its historical average, rate consistent with the economy operating at full “the federal funds rate is likely to be constrained by strength and with stable infl ation—has fallen over its effective lower bound more frequently than in the recent decades in the United States and abroad. This past.” Therefore, “the Committee judges that downward decline in the neutral policy rate increases the risk risks to employment and infl ation have increased.” The that the effective lower bound (ELB) on interest rates statement then notes that the “Committee is prepared will constrain central banks from reducing their policy to use its full range of tools to achieve its maximum interest rates enough to effectively support economic employment and price stability goals,” indicating that activity during downturns. In addition, during the it could deploy other policy tools, such as forward economic expansion that followed the Global Financial guidance and asset purchases, when the policy rate is Crisis—the longest U.S. expansion on record—the at its ELB. unemployment rate hovered near 50-year lows for In its revised statement, the Committee characterizes roughly 2 years, resulting in new jobs and opportunities maximum employment as a “broad-based and inclusive for many who have typically been left behind. At the goal” in addition to saying—as it did in the 2012 same time, with brief exceptions, infl ation ran below statement—that maximum employment is not directly the Committee’s 2 percent objective. measurable and that it changes over time and depends The revised statement begins by reaffi rming the largely on nonmonetary factors. During the Fed Listens Committee’s commitment to its statutory mandate from events that were a pillar of the review of monetary policy strategy, tools, and communication practices, policymakers heard from a broad range of stakeholders in the U.S. economy about how monetary policy affects 1. The FOMC’s revised Statement on Longer-Run Goals peoples’ daily lives and livelihoods.2 and Monetary Policy Strategy, which was unanimously (continued) reaffi rmed at the FOMC’s January 2021 meeting, appears in the front matter of this report. Additional information about the Federal Reserve’s review of monetary policy strategy, tools, and communication practices and the revised statement is 2. Between February 2019 and May 2020, the Federal available on the Board’s website at https://www.federalreserve. Reserve System hosted 15 Fed Listens events with gov/monetarypolicy/review-of-monetary-policy-strategy-tools- representatives of the public. See Board of Governors of the and-communications.htm. Federal Reserve System (2020), Fed Listens: Perspectives MONETARy POLICy REPORT: FEBRUARy 2021 41 The FOMC’s Revised Statement on Longer-Run Goals and Monetary Policy Strategy On August 27, 2020, the Federal Open Market the Congress to promote maximum employment, price A key takeaway from these events was that a strong the FOMC’s policy actions to achieve maximum Committee (FOMC) issued a revised Statement on stability, and moderate long-term interest rates. It also labor market during the late stages of an economic employment and price stability will be most effective Longer-Run Goals and Monetary Policy Strategy.1 This describes the benefi ts of explaining policy actions to expansion—conditions that were in effect in 2019 and if longer-term infl ation expectations remain well document, fi rst released in January 2012, lays out the public as clearly as possible. The statement then early 2020—offers signifi cant benefi ts to residents of anchored at 2 percent. However, if infl ation runs the Committee’s goals, articulates its framework for outlines important changes to the characterization of low- and moderate-income communities, primarily by below 2 percent following economic downturns but monetary policy, and serves as the foundation for its the Committee’s policy framework for achieving its providing employment opportunities for people who never moves above 2 percent even when the economy policy actions. The revised statement encapsulates the dual-mandate goals of maximum employment and have had diffi culty fi nding jobs in the past. is strong, then, over time, infl ation will average less key conclusions from the Federal Reserve’s review of price stability. After stating that economic variables The revised statement says that “the Committee’s than 2 percent. Households and businesses will the monetary policy strategy, tools, and communication fl uctuate in response to disturbances and that monetary policy decisions must be informed by assessments of come to expect this result, meaning that infl ation practices it uses to pursue its statutory dual-mandate policy plays an important role in stabilizing the the shortfalls [emphasis added] of employment from expectations would tend to move below the 2 percent goals of maximum employment and price stability. economy, the statement notes that the Committee’s its maximum level” rather than by “deviations”— infl ation goal and pull down realized infl ation. Lower The review, which commenced in early 2019, was primary means of adjusting policy is through changes in the word used in the earlier statement.3 In previous infl ation expectations also pull down the level of undertaken because the U.S. economy has changed the policy interest rate (the target range for the federal decades, infl ation tended to rise noticeably in response nominal interest rates, further diminishing the scope in ways that matter for monetary policy. In particular, funds rate). Furthermore, because the neutral level of to a strengthening labor market. It was sometimes for monetary policy to reduce the policy rate during a the neutral level of the policy interest rate—the policy the policy rate is now lower than its historical average, appropriate for the Fed to tighten monetary policy as downturn and further worsening economic outcomes. rate consistent with the economy operating at full “the federal funds rate is likely to be constrained by employment rose toward its estimated maximum level To prevent infl ation expectations from falling below strength and with stable infl ation—has fallen over its effective lower bound more frequently than in the in order to stave off an unwelcome rise in infl ation. 2 percent and the adverse cycle that could ensue, recent decades in the United States and abroad. This past.” Therefore, “the Committee judges that downward The change to “shortfalls” clarifi es that, in the the statement indicates that “the Committee seeks to decline in the neutral policy rate increases the risk risks to employment and infl ation have increased.” The future, the Committee will not have concerns when achieve infl ation that averages 2 percent over time, that the effective lower bound (ELB) on interest rates statement then notes that the “Committee is prepared employment runs at or above real-time estimates of and therefore judges that, following periods when will constrain central banks from reducing their policy to use its full range of tools to achieve its maximum its maximum level unless accompanied by signs of infl ation has been running persistently below 2 percent, interest rates enough to effectively support economic employment and price stability goals,” indicating that unwanted increases in infl ation or the emergence of appropriate monetary policy will likely aim to achieve activity during downturns. In addition, during the it could deploy other policy tools, such as forward other risks that could impede the attainment of the infl ation moderately above 2 percent for some time.” economic expansion that followed the Global Financial guidance and asset purchases, when the policy rate is dual-mandate goals. The revised statement acknowledges that Crisis—the longest U.S. expansion on record—the at its ELB. The Committee’s longer-run goal for infl ation “sustainably achieving maximum employment and unemployment rate hovered near 50-year lows for In its revised statement, the Committee characterizes remains 2 percent, unchanged from the 2012 price stability depends on a stable fi nancial system.” roughly 2 years, resulting in new jobs and opportunities maximum employment as a “broad-based and inclusive statement.4 The revised statement emphasizes that Therefore, as with the 2012 statement, the Committee’s for many who have typically been left behind. At the goal” in addition to saying—as it did in the 2012 policy decisions will take into account “its assessments same time, with brief exceptions, infl ation ran below statement—that maximum employment is not directly of the balance of risks, including risks to the fi nancial from the Public (Washington: Board of Governors, the Committee’s 2 percent objective. measurable and that it changes over time and depends system that could impede the attainment” of the June), https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/files/ The revised statement begins by reaffi rming the largely on nonmonetary factors. During the Fed Listens fedlistens-report-20200612.pdf. In addition, see the box statutory goals. Committee’s commitment to its statutory mandate from events that were a pillar of the review of monetary “Federal Reserve Review of Monetary Policy Strategy, Tools, The Committee concludes its revised statement by policy strategy, tools, and communication practices, and Communication Practices” in Board of Governors indicating its intention to undertake a review of the of the Federal Reserve System (2020), Monetary Policy policymakers heard from a broad range of stakeholders Federal Reserve’s monetary policy strategy, tools, and Report (Washington: Board of Governors, February), in the U.S. economy about how monetary policy affects communication practices roughly every fi ve years. pp. 40–41, https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/ 1. The FOMC’s revised Statement on Longer-Run Goals peoples’ daily lives and livelihoods.2 files/20200207_mprfullreport.pdf. Conducting a review at regular intervals is a good and Monetary Policy Strategy, which was unanimously (continued) 3. The most recent version of the 2012 statement is institutional practice, provides valuable feedback, and reaffi rmed at the FOMC’s January 2021 meeting, appears in available on the Board’s website at https://www.federalreserve. enhances transparency and accountability. the front matter of this report. Additional information about gov/monetarypolicy/files/FOMC_LongerRunGoals_201901.pdf. the Federal Reserve’s review of monetary policy strategy, tools, 4. The infl ation goal is measured by the annual change and communication practices and the revised statement is 2. Between February 2019 and May 2020, the Federal in the price index for personal consumption expenditures. available on the Board’s website at https://www.federalreserve. Reserve System hosted 15 Fed Listens events with The statement says: “The Committee reaffi rms its judgment gov/monetarypolicy/review-of-monetary-policy-strategy-tools- representatives of the public. See Board of Governors of the that infl ation at the rate of 2 percent, as measured by the expenditures, is most consistent over the longer run with the and-communications.htm. Federal Reserve System (2020), Fed Listens: Perspectives annual change in the price index for personal consumption Federal Reserve’s statutory mandate.” 42 PART 2: MONETARy POLICy agency mortgage-backed securities (MBS) by gathered from business contacts and other $40 billion per month. These asset purchases informed parties around the country, help foster smooth market functioning and policymakers routinely consult prescriptions accommodative financial conditions, thereby for the policy interest rate provided by various supporting the flow of credit to households monetary policy rules. Such prescriptions can and businesses. The Committee’s current provide useful benchmarks for the FOMC. guidance regarding asset purchases indicates Although simple rules cannot capture the that increases in the holdings of Treasury complexities of monetary policy and many securities and agency MBS in the System Open practical considerations make it undesirable Market Account will continue at least at this for the FOMC to adhere strictly to the pace until substantial further progress has been prescriptions of any specific rule, some made toward its maximum-employment and principles of good monetary policy can be price-stability goals. In addition, the minutes illustrated by these policy rules (see the box of the January 2021 FOMC meeting noted the “Monetary Policy Rules and Shortfalls from importance attached to clear communications Maximum Employment”). about the Committee’s assessment of progress The size of the Federal Reserve’s balance toward its longer-run goals well in advance sheet has grown since the end of June, of the time when progress could be judged reflecting continued asset purchases substantial enough to warrant a change in the of U.S. Treasury securities and agency pace of purchases.16 mortgage-backed securities The FOMC is committed to using its full The Federal Reserve’s balance sheet has grown range of tools to promote maximum to $7.4 trillion from $7 trillion at the end of employment and price stability June, reflecting continued asset purchases to help foster accommodative financial conditions The ongoing public health crisis continues to and smooth market functioning, thereby weigh on economic activity, employment, and supporting the flow of credit to households inflation, and it poses considerable risks to and businesses (figure 50). The Federal the economic outlook. The Federal Reserve is Reserve has continued rolling over at auction committed to using its full range of tools to all principal payments from its holdings support the U.S. economy in this challenging of Treasury securities. Principal payments time, thereby promoting its maximum- received from agency MBS and agency employment and price-stability goals. The debt continue to be reinvested into agency Committee will continue to monitor the MBS. Agency commercial mortgage-backed implications of incoming information for the securities purchases have also continued, but in economic outlook and is prepared to adjust very small amounts. the stance of monetary policy as appropriate if risks emerge that could impede the attainment The increase in asset holdings on the Federal of the Committee’s goals. The Committee’s Reserve’s balance sheet due to Treasury assessments will take into account a wide securities and agency MBS purchases has been range of information, including readings partially offset by declines in several other on public health, labor market conditions, asset categories. Outstanding balances at many inflation pressures and inflation expectations, of the Federal Reserve’s emergency liquidity and financial and international developments. and credit facilities have declined since June.17 In addition to evaluating a wide range of economic and financial data and information 17. A list of funding, credit, liquidity, and loan facilities established by the Federal Reserve in response to 16. The minutes for the January 2021 FOMC meeting COVID-19 is available on the Board’s website at are available on the Board’s website at https://www. https://www.federalreserve.gov/funding-credit-liquidity- federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/fomccalendars.htm. and-loan-facilities.htm. MONETARy POLICy REPORT: FEBRUARy 2021 43 50. Federal Reserve assets and liabilities Weekly Trillions of dollars Other assets 8 Credit and liquidity Agency debt and mortgage-backed securities holdings 6 Treasury securities held outright 4 2 + 0 - 2 4 Federal Reserve notes in circulation 6 Deposits of depository institutions Capital and other liabilities 8 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 NOTE: “Agency debt and mortgage-backed securities holdings” includes agency residential mortgage-backed securities and agency commercial mortgage-backed securities. “Credit and liquidity facilities” consists of primary, secondary, and seasonal credit; term auction credit; central bank liquidity swaps; support for Maiden Lane, Bear Stearns Companies, Inc., and AIG; and other credit and liquidity facilities, including the Primary Dealer Credit Facility, the Asset-Backed Commercial Paper Money Market Mutual Fund Liquidity Facility, the Commercial Paper Funding Facility, the Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility, the Primary and Secondary Market Corporate Credit Facilities, the Paycheck Protection Program Liquidity Facility, the Municipal Liquidity Facility, and the Main Street Lending Program. “Other assets” includes repurchase agreements, FIMA (Foreign and International Monetary Authorities) repurchase agreements, and unamortized premiums and discounts on securities held outright. “Capital and other liabilities” includes reverse repurchase agreements, the U.S. Treasury General Account, and the U.S. Treasury Supplementary Financing Account. The data extend through February 10, 2021. Key identifies shaded areas in order from top to bottom. SOURCE: Federal Reserve Board, Statistical Release H.4.1, “Factors Affecting Reserve Balances.” In particular, outstanding balances for the Primary Dealer Credit Facility, Commercial Paper Funding Facility, and Money Market 51. Federal Reserve open market operations Mutual Fund Liquidity Facility have all fallen to near zero. Draws on central bank liquidity Daily Billions of dollars swap lines have decreased substantially, and, Overnight repos 4,500 despite continued large-scale offerings, usage Outstanding term repos Cumulative MBS purchases 4,000 of repurchase operations has been essentially Cumulative coupon purchases 3,500 Cumulative bill purchases zero since their minimum bid rate was 3,000 increased in mid-June (figure 51). 2,500 2,000 The expansion in the balance sheet was 1,500 accompanied by a substantial increase in 1,000 Federal Reserve liabilities, including reserve 500 balances held by depository institutions as well Feb. May Aug. Nov. Feb. as nonreserve liabilities such as currency and 2020 2021 other deposits. NOTE: The data are at a business-day frequency, excluding federal holidays. The data begin January 1, 2020. Repo is repurchase agreement. MBS is mortgage-backed security. Key identifies bars in order from top The Federal Reserve concluded the to bottom. SOURCE: Federal Reserve Bank of New York; Federal Reserve Board review of its strategic framework for staff calculations. monetary policy in the second half of 2020 Over 2019 and 2020, the Federal Reserve conducted a broad review of the monetary policy strategy, tools, and communication practices it uses to pursue its statutory dual- mandate goals of maximum employment and price stability. In addition to the release of 44 PART 2: MONETARy POLICy the revised Statement on Longer-Run Goals to enhance the information provided to the and Monetary Policy Strategy in August (see public. First, the release of the full set of the box “The FOMC’s Revised Statement SEP exhibits was accelerated by three weeks: on Longer-Run Goals and Monetary Policy Starting with the December 2020 meeting, Strategy”), analytical work that was prepared the FOMC began releasing all SEP exhibits by Federal Reserve System staff and that on the day of the policy decision (following served as background to the review was the conclusion of an FOMC meeting) rather released to the public.18 than with the release of the FOMC meeting In December, two changes were made to the minutes. As such, the written summary of Summary of Economic Projections (SEP) the projections that had been included as an addendum to the minutes of the corresponding 18. A report on the Fed Listens initiative, a key FOMC meeting was discontinued. Second, two component of the review process, was released in new exhibits were added that display a time June 2020 and is available on the Board’s website at https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/files/ series of diffusion indexes for participants’ fedlistens-report-20200612.pdf. The analytical materials judgments of uncertainty and risks. These prepared by System staff are accessible from the Board’s diffusion indexes illustrate how FOMC main webpage on the review (https://www.federalreserve. participants’ assessments of uncertainties and gov/monetarypolicy/review-of-monetary-policy-strategy- tools-and-communications.htm). risks have evolved over time. MONETARy POLICy REPORT: FEBRUARy 2021 45 Monetary Policy Rules and Shortfalls from Maximum Employment Simple interest rate rules relate a policy interest considerations, the Federal Open Market Committee’s rate, such as the federal funds rate, to a small number (FOMC) revised Statement on Longer-Run Goals of other economic variables—typically including and Monetary Policy Strategy refers to “shortfalls the deviation of infl ation from its target value of employment” from the Committee’s assessment and a measure of resource slack in the economy. of its maximum level rather than the “deviations of Policymakers consult policy rate prescriptions derived employment” used in the previous statement.2 This from a variety of policy rules as part of their monetary change has important implications for the design of policy deliberations without mechanically following the simple interest rate rules. prescriptions of any particular rule. Most rules analyzed This discussion examines the prescriptions from in the research literature respond to deviations—both a number of commonly studied monetary policy positive and negative—of resource utilization from its rules, along with the prescriptions from a modifi ed longer-run level because their design was informed simple rule that, all else being equal, would not call by historical periods and economic models in which for increasing the policy rate as employment moves high resource utilization and a strong labor market higher and unemployment drops below its estimated are accompanied by infl ation pressure and in which longer-run level. This modifi ed rule aims to illustrate, policy rates remain well above the effective lower in a simple way, the Committee’s focus on shortfalls bound (ELB). of employment from assessments of its maximum Economic performance in recent decades, level. Other key changes to the Committee’s monetary including during the previous economic expansion, policy strategy, including the aim of having infl ation has demonstrated that a strong labor market can be average 2 percent over time to ensure that longer- sustained without inducing an unwanted increase in term infl ation expectations remain well anchored, are infl ation. During that expansion, the unemployment not incorporated in the simple rules analyzed in this rate fell to low levels—it remained at or below discussion. 4 percent from early 2018 until the start of the pandemic—bringing many benefi ts to families and Policy Rules: Some Key Design Principles communities that, all too often, had been left behind, and Limitations with no sign of excessive pressures on prices. The lack of undue infl ation pressures during this period In many stylized models of the economy, desirable illustrates that a strong labor market, by itself, need economic outcomes can be achieved by following a not cause concern unless accompanied by signs of monetary policy rule that incorporates key principles unwanted increases in infl ation or the emergence of good monetary policy. One such principle is that of other risks that could impede the attainment of monetary policy should respond in a predictable way to the Committee’s goals. In addition, the expansion changes in economic conditions, thus fostering public reinforced the view that assessments of the maximum understanding of policymakers’ goals and strategy.3 level of employment are imprecise and may change A second principle is that, to stabilize infl ation, the over time.1 Tightening monetary policy in the absence policy rate should be adjusted over time in response of evidence of excessive infl ation pressures may to persistent increases or decreases in infl ation to an result in an unwarranted loss of opportunity for extent suffi cient to ensure a return of infl ation to the many Americans, whereas if an undue increase in longer-run objective. infl ation were to arise, policymakers would have the (continued on next page) tools to address such an increase. Refl ecting these 2. See the box “The FOMC’s Revised Statement on Longer- Run Goals and Monetary Policy Strategy” (earlier in Part 2) 1. In recent years, forecasters covered by the Blue Chip for a discussion of this change and other changes made to the Survey, as well as FOMC participants in the Summary of statement. Economic Projections, have substantially reduced their 3. The effectiveness of monetary policy is enhanced when implied estimates of the unemployment rate that is sustainable it is well understood by the public. For a discussion of how in the longer run. For a discussion, see the box “Monetary the public’s understanding of monetary policy matters for the Policy Rules and Uncertainty in Monetary Policy Settings” effectiveness of monetary policy, see Janet L. yellen (2012), in Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2020), “Revolution and Evolution in Central Bank Communications,” Monetary Policy Report (Washington: Board of Governors, speech delivered at the Haas School of Business, University February), pp. 33–37, https://www.federalreserve.gov/ of California, Berkeley, November 13, https://www. monetarypolicy/files/20200207_mprfullreport.pdf. federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/yellen20121113a.htm. 46 PART 2: MONETARy POLICy Monetary Policy Rules (continued) Simple monetary policy rules also have important Policy Rules: Historical Prescriptions limitations. A fi rst limitation is that many formulations Economists have analyzed many monetary policy of simple rules do not recognize that the ELB limits the rules, including the well-known Taylor (1993) rule, the extent that the policy rate can be lowered to support “balanced approach” rule, the “adjusted Taylor (1993)” the economy, which may impart a downward bias to rule, and the “fi rst difference” rule.6 In addition to these both infl ation and infl ation expectations. As part of rules, fi gure A shows a “balanced approach (shortfalls)” the FOMC’s revised strategy to mitigate the challenges rule, which represents one simple way to illustrate posed by the ELB and anchor longer-term infl ation the Committee’s focus on shortfalls from maximum expectations at 2 percent, the Committee states that it employment. All of the policy rules analyzed in this “seeks to achieve infl ation that averages 2 percent over discussion embody the key principles of good monetary time, and therefore judges that, following periods when policy previously noted. They are also subject to the infl ation has been running persistently below 2 percent, associated limitations. Thus, the balanced-approach appropriate monetary policy will likely aim to achieve (shortfalls) rule, as is the case with all simple rules, does infl ation moderately above 2 percent for some time.” not fully capture the monetary policy strategy that the None of the simple rules analyzed in this discussion FOMC announced in August 2020. take into account average infl ation performance or All fi ve rules feature the unemployment rate gap, developments in measures of infl ation expectations. As measured as the difference between an estimate of the such, they do not refl ect this important aspect of the rate of unemployment in the longer run (uLR) and the FOMC’s monetary policy strategy.4 t current unemployment rate; the fi rst-difference rule A second limitation is that simple rules respond includes the change in the unemployment rate gap to only a small set of economic variables and thus rather than its level.7 All of the rules abstract from the necessarily abstract from many of the considerations uncertainty affecting estimates of the unemployment taken into account by the FOMC. For example, rate gap. In addition, all of the rules include the a simple rule might respond to movements in a specifi c labor market indicator, such as the overall (continued) unemployment rate. However, no single labor market indicator can precisely capture the size of the shortfall 6. The Taylor (1993) rule was suggested in John B. Taylor from maximum employment or identify when a strong (1993), “Discretion versus Policy Rules in Practice,” Carnegie- labor market can be sustained without putting undue Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, vol. 39 (December), pp. 195–214. The balanced-approach rule was upward pressure on infl ation.5 A third limitation of analyzed in John B. Taylor (1999), “A Historical Analysis of simple rules for the policy rate is that they generally Monetary Policy Rules,” in John B. Taylor, ed., Monetary Policy do not recognize the fact that the monetary policy Rules (Chicago: University of Chicago Press), pp. 319–41. The toolkit includes other tools—notably, large-scale asset adjusted Taylor (1993) rule was studied in David Reifschneider purchases and forward guidance, which are especially and John C. Williams (2000), “Three Lessons for Monetary Policy in a Low-Infl ation Era,” Journal of Money, Credit and relevant when the policy rate is near or at the ELB. Banking, vol. 32 (November), pp. 936–66. The fi rst-difference rule is based on a rule suggested in Athanasios Orphanides (2003), “Historical Monetary Policy Analysis and the Taylor 4. For a discussion of policy strategies that seek to make up Rule,” Journal of Monetary Economics, vol. 50 (July), pp. 983– for past infl ation shortfalls, see Jonas Arias, Martin Bodenstein, 1022. A review of policy rules is in John B. Taylor and John Hess Chung, Thorsten Drautzburg, and Andrea Raffo (2020), C. Williams (2011), “Simple and Robust Rules for Monetary “Alternative Strategies: How Do They Work? How Might They Policy,” in Benjamin M. Friedman and Michael Woodford, Help?” Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2020-068 eds., Handbook of Monetary Economics, vol. 3B (Amsterdam: (Washington: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve North-Holland), pp. 829–59. The same volume of the System, August), https://dx.doi.org/10.17016/FEDS.2020.068; Handbook of Monetary Economics also discusses approaches and James Hebden, Edward P. Herbst, Jenny Tang, Giorgio other than policy rules for deriving policy rate prescriptions. Topa, and Fabian Winkler (2020), “How Robust Are Makeup 7. The original Taylor (1993) rule represented slack in Strategies to Key Alternative Assumptions?” Finance and resource utilization using an output gap (the difference Economics Discussion Series 2020-069 (Washington: Board of between the current level of real gross domestic product Governors of the Federal Reserve System, August), (GDP) and the level that GDP would be if the economy https://dx.doi.org/10.17016/FEDS.2020.069. were operating at maximum employment, measured in 5. See Lael Brainard (2020), “Achieving a Broad-Based and percent of the latter). The rules in fi gure A represent slack in Inclusive Recovery,” speech delivered at “Post-COvID—Policy resource utilization using the unemployment rate gap instead, Challenges for the Global Economy,” Society of Professional because that gap better captures the FOMC’s statutory goal Economists Annual Online Conference (via webcast), to promote maximum employment. However, movements in October 21, https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/ these alternative measures of resource utilization are highly speech/brainard20201021a.htm. correlated. For more information, see the note below fi gure A. MONETARy POLICy REPORT: FEBRUARy 2021 47 A. Monetary policy rules Taylor (1993) rule 93 = + +0.5( − )+( − ) Balanced-approach rule = + +0.5( − )+2( − ) Balanced-approach (shortfalls) rule S= + +0.5( − )+ 2 n{( − ), 0} Adjusted Taylor (1993) rule 93 = { 93− , ELB} First-difference rule = −1 +0.5( − )+ ( − )−( −4 − −4 ) Note: Rt T93, Rt BA, Rt BAS, Rt T93adj, and Rt FD represent the values of the nominal federal funds rate prescribed by the Taylor (1993), balanced-approach, balanced-approach (shortfalls), adjusted Taylor (1993), and first-difference rules, respectively. Rt denotes the realized nominal federal funds rate for quarter t, πt is the four-quarter price inflation for quarter t, ut is the unemployment rate in quarter t, and rt LR is the level of the neutral real federal funds rate in the longer run that is expected to be consistent with sustaining maximum employment and inflation at the FOMC’s 2 percent longer-run objective, denoted πLR. In addition, ut LR is the rate of unemployment expected in the longer run. Zt is the cumulative sum of past deviations of the federal funds rate from the prescriptions of the Taylor (1993) rule when that rule prescribes setting the federal funds rate below an ELB of 12.5 basis points. The Taylor (1993) rule and other policy rules are generally written in terms of the deviation of real output from its full capacity level. In these equations, the output gap has been replaced with the gap between the rate of unemployment in the longer run and its actual level (using a relationship known as Okun’s law) to represent the rules in terms of the unemployment rate gap. The rules are implemented as responding to core PCE inflation rather than to headline PCE inflation because current and near-term core inflation rates tend to outperform headline inflation rates as predictors of the medium-term behavior of headline inflation. Box note 6 provides references for the policy rules. difference between infl ation and the FOMC’s longer- Contrary to the other simple rules featured here, run objective of 2 percent. All but the fi rst-difference the adjusted Taylor (1993) rule recognizes that the rule include an estimate of the neutral real interest rate federal funds rate cannot be reduced materially below in the longer run (rLR).8 the ELB. To make up for the cumulative shortfall in t By construction, the balanced-approach (shortfalls) accommodation following a recession during which rule prescribes identical policy rates to those prescribed the federal funds rate has fallen to its ELB, the adjusted by the balanced-approach rule at times when the Taylor (1993) rule prescribes only a gradual return of unemployment rate is above its estimated longer-run the policy rate to the (positive) levels prescribed by the level. However, when the unemployment rate is below standard Taylor (1993) rule after the economy begins that level, the balanced-approach (shortfalls) rule is to recover. more accommodative than the balanced-approach rule Figure B shows historical prescriptions for the because it does not call for the policy rate to rise as the federal funds rate from the fi ve rules. For each period, unemployment rate drops further. the fi gure reports the policy rates prescribed by the rules, taking as given the prevailing economic conditions and estimates of uLR and rLR at the time. 8. The neutral real interest rate in the longer run (rLR) is t t the level of the real federal funds rate that is expected t to be The four rules whose formulas do not impose the ELB consistent, in the longer run, with maximum employment imply prescriptions of strongly negative policy rates in and stable infl ation. Like uLR, rLR is determined largely by response to the pandemic-driven recession, well below t t nonmonetary factors. The expression of the fi rst-difference their respective troughs in the 2008–09 recession. These rule shown in fi gure A does not involve an estimate of rLR. t deeply negative prescribed policy rates show the extent However, this rule has its own shortcomings. For example, research suggests that this sort of rule often results in greater to which policymakers’ ability to support the economy volatility in employment and infl ation relative to what through cuts in the policy rate was constrained by would be obtained under the Taylor (1993) and balanced- approach rules. (continued on next page) 48 PART 2: MONETARy POLICy Monetary Policy Rules (continued) B. Historical federal funds rate prescriptions from simple policy rules Quarterly Percent Taylor (1993) rule Balanced-approach rule 6 3 + _0 3 Target federal funds rate Adjusted Taylor (1993) rule 6 Balanced-approach (shortfalls) rule 9 12 First-difference rule 15 18 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 NOTE: The rules use historical values of the federal funds rate, core personal consumption expenditure inflation, and the unemployment rate. Quarterly projections of longer-run values for the federal funds rate and the unemployment rate are derived through interpolations of the biannual projections from Blue Chip Economic Indicators. The longer-run value for inflation is taken as 2 percent. SOURCE: Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia; Wolters Kluwer, Blue Chip Economic Indicators; Federal Reserve Board staff estimates. the ELB during the pandemic-driven recession—a Although these two rules prescribe identical constraint that helped motivate the FOMC’s other policy rates over most of the period shown, including policy actions at the time, including forward guidance departure from the ELB about two years before the and asset purchases. actual departure in December 2015, one should not Regarding the recovery from the 2008–09 recession, conclude that they generally offer a similar degree of all of the simple rules shown here prescribe departure policy accommodation. Had the previous economic from the ELB well before the FOMC determined expansion not been cut short by the pandemic, the that it was appropriate to do so. The FOMC’s balanced-approach (shortfalls) rule would likely have judgment that it was appropriate to maintain a more continued to prescribe a lower policy rate than the accommodative path of the federal funds rate than balanced-approach rule. In addition, knowledge on the prescribed by these rules was informed by a wide part of households and businesses that policymakers range of information, including measures of labor will respond to shortfalls rather than deviations from market conditions, indicators of infl ation pressures and maximum employment can, in practice, help foster infl ation expectations, and readings on fi nancial and more accommodative fi nancial conditions even when international developments. employment is below its maximum level because The balanced-approach (shortfalls) rule calls for fi nancial conditions are affected by the expected path lower policy rates than the balanced-approach rule of the policy rate. Expectations of lower policy rates at times when unemployment is below its estimated in the future—once employment has recovered— longer-run level, thus providing somewhat more policy can reduce longer-term interest rates, support accommodation during the 2006–07 period and from accommodative fi nancial conditions, and encourage late 2016 until the start of the pandemic. The fact that aggregate spending in the present. These observations the policy rate prescriptions for the balanced-approach underline the importance of communication and balanced-approach (shortfalls) rules coincide about future policy actions and demonstrate how from the 2008–09 recession up to the end of 2016 a shift in focus to employment shortfalls, in the refl ects the slow recovery in this period, during which context of a simple rule, can provide more policy unemployment remained above real-time estimates of accommodation—even during times like today when its longer-run level. employment remains depressed. 49 P 3 art s e P ummary of ConomiC rojeCtions The following material was released after the conclusion of the December 15–16, 2020, meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee. In conjunction with the Federal Open run projections represent each participant’s Market Committee (FOMC) meeting held on assessment of the value to which each variable December 15–16, 2020, meeting participants would be expected to converge, over time, submitted their projections of the most likely under appropriate monetary policy and in the outcomes for real gross domestic product absence of further shocks to the economy. (GDP) growth, the unemployment rate, and “Appropriate monetary policy” is defined as inflation for each year from 2020 to 2023 the future path of policy that each participant and over the longer run. Each participant’s deems most likely to foster outcomes for projections were based on information economic activity and inflation that best available at the time of the meeting, together satisfy his or her individual interpretation of with her or his assessment of appropriate the statutory mandate to promote maximum monetary policy—including a path for the employment and price stability. federal funds rate and its longer-run value— and assumptions about other factors likely Beginning with the December 2020 FOMC to affect economic outcomes. The longer- meeting, all Summary of Economic Table 1. Economic projections of Federal Reserve Board members and Federal Reserve Bank presidents, under their individual assumptions of projected appropriate monetary policy, December 2020 Percent Median1 Central tendency2 Range3 Variable Longer Longer Longer 2020 2021 2022 2023 2020 2021 2022 2023 2020 2021 2022 2023 run run run Change in real GDP .... -2.4 4.2 3.2 2.4 1.8 -2.5–-2.2 3.7–5.0 3.0–3.5 2.2–2.7 1.7–2.0 -3.3–-1.0 0.5–5.5 2.5–4.0 2.0–3.5 1.6–2.2 September projection -3.7 4.0 3.0 2.5 1.9 -4.0–-3.0 3.6–4.7 2.5–3.3 2.4–3.0 1.7–2.0 -5.5–1.0 0.0–5.5 2.0–4.5 2.0–4.0 1.6–2.2 Unemployment rate .... 6.7 5.0 4.2 3.7 4.1 6.7–6.8 4.7–5.4 3.8–4.6 3.5–4.3 3.9–4.3 6.6–6.9 4.0–6.8 3.5–5.8 3.3–5.0 3.5–4.5 September projection 7.6 5.5 4.6 4.0 4.1 7.0–8.0 5.0–6.2 4.0–5.0 3.5–4.4 3.9–4.3 6.5–8.0 4.0–8.0 3.5–7.5 3.5–6.0 3.5–4.7 PCE inflation .......... 1.2 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.0 1.2 1.7–1.9 1.8–2.0 1.9–2.1 2.0 1.1–1.4 1.2–2.3 1.5–2.2 1.7–2.2 2.0 September projection 1.2 1.7 1.8 2.0 2.0 1.1–1.3 1.6–1.9 1.7–1.9 1.9–2.0 2.0 1.0–1.5 1.3–2.4 1.5–2.2 1.7–2.1 2.0 Core PCE inflation4 .... 1.4 1.8 1.9 2.0 1.4 1.7–1.8 1.8–2.0 1.9–2.1 1.3–1.5 1.5–2.3 1.6–2.2 1.7–2.2 September projection 1.5 1.7 1.8 2.0 1.3–1.5 1.6–1.8 1.7–1.9 1.9–2.0 1.2–1.6 1.5–2.4 1.6–2.2 1.7–2.1 Memo: Projected appropriate policy path Federal funds rate ..... 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 2.5 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1–0.4 2.3–2.5 0.1 0.1 0.1–0.4 0.1–1.1 2.0–3.0 September projection 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 2.5 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1–0.4 2.3–2.5 0.1 0.1 0.1–0.6 0.1–1.4 2.0–3.0 Note: Projections of change in real gross domestic product (GDP) and projections for both measures of inflation are percent changes from the fourth quarter of the previous year to the fourth quarter of the year indicated. PCE inflation and core PCE inflation are the percentage rates of change in, respectively, the price index for personal consump- tion expenditures (PCE) and the price index for PCE excluding food and energy. Projections for the unemployment rate are for the average civilian unemployment rate in the fourth quarter of the year indicated. Each participant’s projections are based on his or her assessment of appropriate monetary policy. Longer-run projections represent each participant’s assessment of the rate to which each variable would be expected to converge under appropriate monetary policy and in the absence of further shocks to the econ- omy. The projections for the federal funds rate are the value of the midpoint of the projected appropriate target range for the federal funds rate or the projected appropriate target level for the federal funds rate at the end of the specified calendar year or over the longer run. The September projections were made in conjunction with the meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee on September 15–16, 2020. One participant did not submit longer-run projections for the change in real GDP, the unemployment rate, or the federal funds rate in conjunction with the September 15–16, 2020, meeting, and one participant did not submit such projections in conjunction with the December 15–16, 2020, meeting. 1. For each period, the median is the middle projection when the projections are arranged from lowest to highest. When the number of projections is even, the median is the average of the two middle projections. 2. The central tendency excludes the three highest and three lowest projections for each variable in each year. 3. The range for a variable in a given year includes all participants’ projections, from lowest to highest, for that variable in that year. 4. Longer-run projections for core PCE inflation are not collected. 50 Part 3: Summary of Economic ProjEctionS Table 2. Average historical projection error ranges Projections charts and tables previously Percentage points released with the minutes of a meeting will be Variable 2020 2021 2022 2023 released following the conclusion of an FOMC Change in real GDP1 ...... ±0.8 ±1.5 ±1.9 ±2.0 meeting. That is, the release of the distribution Unemployment rate1 ...... ±0.1 ±0.8 ±1.4 ±1.9 of participants’ projections (Figures 3.A. Total consumer prices2 .... ±0.2 ±0.9 ±1.0 ±0.9 through 3.E.), participants’ assessments of Short-term interest rates3 .. ±0.1 ±1.4 ±2.0 ±2.4 uncertainty and risks associated with the Note: Error ranges shown are measured as plus or minus the root mean squared projections (Figures 4.A. through 4.C. and error of projections for 2000 through 2019 that were released in the winter by var- ious private and government forecasters. As described in the box “Forecast Un- Figure 5), and Table 2 and associated box, certainty,” under certain assumptions, there is about a 70 percent probability that actual outcomes for real GDP, unemployment, consumer prices, and the federal which describe projection error ranges, have funds rate will be in ranges implied by the average size of projection errors made in the past. For more information, see David Reifschneider and Peter Tulip (2017), been accelerated by three weeks. Two new “Gauging the Uncertainty of the Economic Outlook Using Historical Forecasting Errors: The Federal Reserve’s Approach,” Finance and Economics Discussion exhibits, Figures 4.D. and 4.E., have been Series 2017-020 (Washington: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, February), https://dx.doi.org/10.17016/FEDS.2017.020. added to further enhance the information 1. Definitions of variables are in the general note to table 1. provided on uncertainty and risks by showing 2. Measure is the overall consumer price index, the price measure that has been most widely used in government and private economic forecasts. Projections are how FOMC participants’ assessments of percent changes on a fourth quarter to fourth quarter basis. 3. For Federal Reserve staff forecasts, measure is the federal funds rate. For uncertainties and risks have evolved over time. other forecasts, measure is the rate on 3-month Treasury bills. Projection errors are calculated using average levels, in percent, in the fourth quarter. MONETARy POLICy REPORT: FEBRUARy 2021 51 Figure 1. Medians, central tendencies, and ranges of economic projections, 2020–23 and over the longer run Percent Change in real GDP 6 5 4 3 2 Actual 1 0 −1 Median of projections −2 Central tendency of projections −3 Range of projections −4 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Longer run Percent Unemployment rate 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Longer run Percent PCE inflation 3 2 1 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Longer run Percent Core PCE inflation 3 2 1 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Longer run Note: Definitions of variables and other explanations are in the notes to table 1. The data for the actual values of the variables are annual. 52 PART 3: SUMMARy OF ECONOMIC PROJECTIONS Figure 2. FOMC participants’ assessments of appropriate monetary policy: Midpoint of target range or target level for the federal funds rate Percent 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 2020 2021 2022 2023 Longer run Note: Each shaded circle indicates the value (rounded to the nearest 1/8 percentage point) of an individual participant’s judgment of the midpoint of the appropriate target range for the federal funds rate or the appropriate target level for the federal funds rate at the end of the specified calendar year or over the longer run. One participant did not submit longer-run projec- tions for the federal funds rate. MONETARy POLICy REPORT: FEBRUARy 2021 53 Figure 3.A. Distribution of participants’ projections for the change in real GDP, 2020–23 and over the longer run Number of participants 2020 S D e e p c t e e m m b b e e r r p p r r o o j j e e c c t t i i o o n n s s 246811111 02468 −5.8− −5.2− −4.6− −4.0− −3.4− −2.8− −2.2− −1.6− −1.0− −0.4− 0.2− 0.8− 1.4− 2.0− 2.6− 3.2− 3.8− 4.4− 5.0− −5.7 −5.1 −4.5 −3.9 −3.3 −2.7 −2.1 −1.5 −0.9 −0.3 0.3 0.9 1.5 2.1 2.7 3.3 3.9 4.5 5.1 Percent range Number of participants 2021 246811111 02468 −5.8− −5.2− −4.6− −4.0− −3.4− −2.8− −2.2− −1.6− −1.0− −0.4− 0.2− 0.8− 1.4− 2.0− 2.6− 3.2− 3.8− 4.4− 5.0− −5.7 −5.1 −4.5 −3.9 −3.3 −2.7 −2.1 −1.5 −0.9 −0.3 0.3 0.9 1.5 2.1 2.7 3.3 3.9 4.5 5.1 Percent range Number of participants 2022 246811111 02468 −5.8− −5.2− −4.6− −4.0− −3.4− −2.8− −2.2− −1.6− −1.0− −0.4− 0.2− 0.8− 1.4− 2.0− 2.6− 3.2− 3.8− 4.4− 5.0− −5.7 −5.1 −4.5 −3.9 −3.3 −2.7 −2.1 −1.5 −0.9 −0.3 0.3 0.9 1.5 2.1 2.7 3.3 3.9 4.5 5.1 Percent range Number of participants 2023 246811111 02468 −5.8− −5.2− −4.6− −4.0− −3.4− −2.8− −2.2− −1.6− −1.0− −0.4− 0.2− 0.8− 1.4− 2.0− 2.6− 3.2− 3.8− 4.4− 5.0− −5.7 −5.1 −4.5 −3.9 −3.3 −2.7 −2.1 −1.5 −0.9 −0.3 0.3 0.9 1.5 2.1 2.7 3.3 3.9 4.5 5.1 Percent range Number of participants Longer run 246811111 02468 −5.8− −5.2− −4.6− −4.0− −3.4− −2.8− −2.2− −1.6− −1.0− −0.4− 0.2− 0.8− 1.4− 2.0− 2.6− 3.2− 3.8− 4.4− 5.0− −5.7 −5.1 −4.5 −3.9 −3.3 −2.7 −2.1 −1.5 −0.9 −0.3 0.3 0.9 1.5 2.1 2.7 3.3 3.9 4.5 5.1 Percent range Note: Definitions of variables and other explanations are in the notes to table 1. 54 PART 3: SUMMARy OF ECONOMIC PROJECTIONS Figure 3.B. Distribution of participants’ projections for the unemployment rate, 2020–23 and overthe longer run Number of participants 2020 S D e e p c t e e m m b b e e r r p p r r o o j j e e c c t t i i o o n n s s 246811111 02468 2.8− 3.4− 4.0− 4.6− 5.2− 5.8− 6.4− 7.0− 7.6− 2.9 3.5 4.1 4.7 5.3 5.9 6.5 7.1 7.7 Percent range Number of participants 2021 246811111 02468 2.8− 3.4− 4.0− 4.6− 5.2− 5.8− 6.4− 7.0− 7.6− 2.9 3.5 4.1 4.7 5.3 5.9 6.5 7.1 7.7 Percent range Number of participants 2022 246811111 02468 2.8− 3.4− 4.0− 4.6− 5.2− 5.8− 6.4− 7.0− 7.6− 2.9 3.5 4.1 4.7 5.3 5.9 6.5 7.1 7.7 Percent range Number of participants 2023 246811111 02468 2.8− 3.4− 4.0− 4.6− 5.2− 5.8− 6.4− 7.0− 7.6− 2.9 3.5 4.1 4.7 5.3 5.9 6.5 7.1 7.7 Percent range Number of participants Longer run 246811111 02468 2.8− 3.4− 4.0− 4.6− 5.2− 5.8− 6.4− 7.0− 7.6− 2.9 3.5 4.1 4.7 5.3 5.9 6.5 7.1 7.7 Percent range Note: Definitions of variables and other explanations are in the notes to table 1. MONETARy POLICy REPORT: FEBRUARy 2021 55 Figure 3.C. Distribution of participants’ projections for PCE inflation, 2020–23 and over the longer run Number of participants 2020 December projections September projections 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0.7− 0.9− 1.1− 1.3− 1.5− 1.7− 1.9− 2.1− 2.3− 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 Percent range Number of participants 2021 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0.7− 0.9− 1.1− 1.3− 1.5− 1.7− 1.9− 2.1− 2.3− 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 Percent range Number of participants 2022 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0.7− 0.9− 1.1− 1.3− 1.5− 1.7− 1.9− 2.1− 2.3− 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 Percent range Number of participants 2023 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0.7− 0.9− 1.1− 1.3− 1.5− 1.7− 1.9− 2.1− 2.3− 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 Percent range Number of participants Longer run 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0.7− 0.9− 1.1− 1.3− 1.5− 1.7− 1.9− 2.1− 2.3− 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 Percent range Note: Definitions of variables and other explanations are in the notes to table 1. 56 PART 3: SUMMARy OF ECONOMIC PROJECTIONS Figure 3.D. Distribution of participants’ projections for core PCE inflation, 2020–23 Number of participants 2020 December projections September projections 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0.9− 1.1− 1.3− 1.5− 1.7− 1.9− 2.1− 2.3− 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 Percent range Number of participants 2021 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0.9− 1.1− 1.3− 1.5− 1.7− 1.9− 2.1− 2.3− 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 Percent range Number of participants 2022 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0.9− 1.1− 1.3− 1.5− 1.7− 1.9− 2.1− 2.3− 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 Percent range Number of participants 2023 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0.9− 1.1− 1.3− 1.5− 1.7− 1.9− 2.1− 2.3− 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 Percent range Note: Definitions of variables and other explanations are in the notes to table 1. MONETARy POLICy REPORT: FEBRUARy 2021 57 Figure 3.E. Distribution of participants’ judgments of the midpoint of the appropriate target range for the federal funds rate or the appropriate target level for the federal funds rate, 2020–23 and over the longer run Number of participants 2020 December projections September projections 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0.13− 0.38− 0.63− 0.88− 1.13− 1.38− 1.63− 1.88− 2.13− 2.38− 2.63− 2.88− 0.37 0.62 0.87 1.12 1.37 1.62 1.87 2.12 2.37 2.62 2.87 3.12 Percent range Number of participants 2021 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0.13− 0.38− 0.63− 0.88− 1.13− 1.38− 1.63− 1.88− 2.13− 2.38− 2.63− 2.88− 0.37 0.62 0.87 1.12 1.37 1.62 1.87 2.12 2.37 2.62 2.87 3.12 Percent range Number of participants 2022 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0.13− 0.38− 0.63− 0.88− 1.13− 1.38− 1.63− 1.88− 2.13− 2.38− 2.63− 2.88− 0.37 0.62 0.87 1.12 1.37 1.62 1.87 2.12 2.37 2.62 2.87 3.12 Percent range Number of participants 2023 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0.13− 0.38− 0.63− 0.88− 1.13− 1.38− 1.63− 1.88− 2.13− 2.38− 2.63− 2.88− 0.37 0.62 0.87 1.12 1.37 1.62 1.87 2.12 2.37 2.62 2.87 3.12 Percent range Number of participants Longer run 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0.13− 0.38− 0.63− 0.88− 1.13− 1.38− 1.63− 1.88− 2.13− 2.38− 2.63− 2.88− 0.37 0.62 0.87 1.12 1.37 1.62 1.87 2.12 2.37 2.62 2.87 3.12 Percent range Note: Definitions of variables and other explanations are in the notes to table 1. 58 PART 3: SUMMARy OF ECONOMIC PROJECTIONS Figure 4.A. Uncertainty and risks in projections of GDP growth Median projection and confidence interval based on historical forecast errors Percent Change in real GDP Median of projections 6 70% confidence interval 5 4 3 2 Actual 1 0 −1 −2 −3 −4 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 FOMC participants’ assessments of uncertainty and risks around their economic projections Number of participants Number of participants Uncertainty about GDP growth Risks to GDP growth December projections December projections September projections September projections 18 18 16 16 14 14 12 12 10 10 8 8 6 6 4 4 2 2 Lower Broadly Higher Weighted to Broadly Weighted to similar downside balanced upside Note: The blue and red lines in the top panel show actual values and median projected values, respectively, of the percent change in real gross domestic product (GDP) from the fourth quarter of the previous year to the fourth quarter of the year indicated. The confidence interval around the median projected values is assumed to be symmetric and is based on root mean squared errors of various private and government forecasts made over the previous 20 years; more information about these data is available in table 2. Because current conditions may differ from those that prevailed, on average, over the previous 20 years, the width and shape of the confidence interval estimated on the basis of the historical forecast errors may not reflect FOMC participants’ current assessments of the uncertainty and risks around their projections; these current assessments are summa- rized in the lower panels. Generally speaking, participants who judge the uncertainty about their projections as “broadly similar” to the average levels of the past 20 years would view the width of the confidence interval shown in the historical fan chart as largely consistent with their assessments of the uncertainty about their projections. Likewise, participants who judge the risks to their projections as “broadly balanced” would view the confidence interval around their projections as approximately symmetric. For definitions of uncertainty and risks in economic projections, see the box “Forecast Uncertainty.” MONETARy POLICy REPORT: FEBRUARy 2021 59 Figure 4.B. Uncertainty and risks in projections of the unemployment rate Median projection and confidence interval based on historical forecast errors Percent Unemployment rate Median of projections 8 70% confidence interval 7 6 5 Actual 4 3 2 1 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 FOMC participants’ assessments of uncertainty and risks around their economic projections Number of participants Number of participants Uncertainty about the unemployment rate Risks to the unemployment rate December projections December projections September projections September projections 18 18 16 16 14 14 12 12 10 10 8 8 6 6 4 4 2 2 Lower Broadly Higher Weighted to Broadly Weighted to similar downside balanced upside Note: The blue and red lines in the top panel show actual values and median projected values, respectively, of the average civilian unemployment rate in the fourth quarter of the year indicated. The confidence interval around the median projected values is assumed to be symmetric and is based on root mean squared errors of various private and government forecasts made over the previous 20 years; more information about these data is available in table 2. Because current conditions may differ from those that prevailed, on average, over the previous 20 years, the width and shape of the confidence interval estimated on the basis of the historical forecast errors may not reflect FOMC participants’ current assessments of the uncertainty and risks around their projections; these current assessments are summarized in the lower panels. Generally speaking, participants who judge the uncertainty about their projections as “broadly similar” to the average levels of the past 20 years would view the width of the confidence interval shown in the historical fan chart as largely consistent with their assessments of the uncertainty about their projections. Likewise, participants who judge the risks to their projections as “broadly balanced” would view the confidence interval around their projections as approximately symmetric. For definitions of uncertainty and risks in economic projections, see the box “Forecast Uncertainty.” 60 PART 3: SUMMARy OF ECONOMIC PROJECTIONS Figure 4.C. Uncertainty and risks in projections of PCE inflation Median projection and confidence interval based on historical forecast errors Percent PCE inflation Median of projections 70% confidence interval 3 2 Actual 1 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 FOMC participants’ assessments of uncertainty and risks around their economic projections Number of participants Number of participants Uncertainty about PCE inflation Risks to PCE inflation December projections December projections September projections September projections 18 18 16 16 14 14 12 12 10 10 8 8 6 6 4 4 2 2 Lower Broadly Higher Weighted to Broadly Weighted to similar downside balanced upside Number of participants Number of participants Uncertainty about core PCE inflation Risks to core PCE inflation December projections December projections September projections September projections 18 18 16 16 14 14 12 12 10 10 8 8 6 6 4 4 2 2 Lower Broadly Higher Weighted to Broadly Weighted to similar downside balanced upside Note: The blue and red lines in the top panel show actual values and median projected values, respectively, of the percent change in the price index for personal consumption expenditures (PCE) from the fourth quarter of the previous year to the fourth quarter of the year indicated. The confidence interval around the median projected values is assumed to be symmetric and is based on root mean squared errors of various private and government forecasts made over the previous 20 years; more information about these data is available in table 2. Because current conditions may differ from those that prevailed, on average, over the previous 20 years, the width and shape of the confidence interval estimated on the basis of the historical forecast errors may not reflect FOMC participants’ current assessments of the uncertainty and risks around their projections; these current assessments are summarized in the lower panels. Generally speaking, participants who judge the uncertainty about their projections as “broadly similar” to the average levels of the past 20 years would view the width of the confidence interval shown in the historical fan chart as largely consistent with their assessments of the uncertainty about their projections. Likewise, participants who judge the risks to their projections as “broadly balanced” would view the confidence interval around their projections as approximately symmetric. For definitions of uncertainty and risks in economic projections, see the box “Forecast Uncertainty.” MONETARy POLICy REPORT: FEBRUARy 2021 61 Figure 4.D. Diffusion indexes of participants’ uncertainty assessments Diffusion index Change in real GDP 1.00 0.75 0.50 0.25 0.00 −0.25 −0.50 −0.75 −1.00 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Diffusion index Unemployment rate 1.00 0.75 0.50 0.25 0.00 −0.25 −0.50 −0.75 −1.00 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Diffusion index PCE inflation 1.00 0.75 0.50 0.25 0.00 −0.25 −0.50 −0.75 −1.00 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Diffusion index Core PCE inflation 1.00 0.75 0.50 0.25 0.00 −0.25 −0.50 −0.75 −1.00 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Note: For each SEP, participants provided responses to the question “Please indicate your judgment of the uncertainty attached to your projections relative to the levels of uncertainty over the past 20 years.” Each point in the diffusion indexes represents the number of participants who responded “Higher” minus the number who responded “Lower,” divided by the total number of participants. Figure excludes March 2020 when no projections were submitted. 62 PART 3: SUMMARy OF ECONOMIC PROJECTIONS Figure 4.E. Diffusion indexes of participants’ risk weightings Diffusion index Change in real GDP 1.00 0.75 0.50 0.25 0.00 −0.25 −0.50 −0.75 −1.00 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Diffusion index Unemployment rate 1.00 0.75 0.50 0.25 0.00 −0.25 −0.50 −0.75 −1.00 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Diffusion index PCE inflation 1.00 0.75 0.50 0.25 0.00 −0.25 −0.50 −0.75 −1.00 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Diffusion index Core PCE inflation 1.00 0.75 0.50 0.25 0.00 −0.25 −0.50 −0.75 −1.00 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Note: For each SEP, participants provided responses to the question “Please indicate your judgment of the risk weighting around your projections.” Each point in the diffusion indexes represents the number of participants who responded “Weighted to the Upside” minus the number who responded “Weighted to the Downside,” divided by the total number of participants. Figure excludes March 2020 when no projections were submitted. MONETARy POLICy REPORT: FEBRUARy 2021 63 Figure 5. Uncertainty and risks in projections of the federal funds rate Percent Federal funds rate Midpoint of target range Median of projections 70% confidence interval* 4 3 2 1 Actual 0 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Note: The blue and red lines are based on actual values and median projected values, respectively, of the Committee’s target for the federal funds rate at the end of the year indicated. The actual values are the midpoint of the target range; the median projected values are based on either the midpoint of the target range or the target level. The confidence interval around the median projected values is based on root mean squared errors of various private and government forecasts made over the previous 20 years. The confidence interval is not strictly consistent with the projections for the federal funds rate, primarily because these projections are not forecasts of the likeliest outcomes for the federal funds rate, but rather projections of participants’ individual assessments of appropriate monetary policy. Still, historical forecast errors provide a broad sense of the uncertainty around the future path of the federal funds rate generated by the uncertainty about the macroeconomic variables as well as additional adjustments to monetary policy that may be appropriate to onset the effects of shocks to the economy. The confidence interval is assumed to be symmetric except when it is truncated at zero - the bottom of the lowest target range for the federal funds rate that has been adopted in the past by the Committee. This truncation would not be intended to indicate the likelihood of the use of negative interest rates to provide additional monetary policy accommodation if doing so was judged appropriate. In such situations, the Committee could also employ other tools, including forward guidance and large-scale asset purchases, to provide additional accommodation. Because current conditions may differ from those that prevailed, on average, over the previous 20 years, the width and shape of the confidence interval estimated on the basis of the historical forecast errors may not reflect FOMC participants’ current assessments of the uncertainty and risks around their projections. * The confidence interval is derived from forecasts of the average level of short-term interest rates in the fourth quarter of the year indicated; more information about these data is available in table 2. The shaded area encompasses less than a 70 percent confidence interval if the confidence interval has been truncated at zero. 64 PART 3: SUMMARy OF ECONOMIC PROJECTIONS Forecast Uncertainty The economic projections provided by the members reported in table 2 would imply a probability of about of the Board of Governors and the presidents of 70 percent that actual GDP would expand within a the Federal Reserve Banks inform discussions of range of 2.2 to 3.8 percent in the current year, 1.5 to monetary policy among policymakers and can aid 4.5 percent in the second year, 1.1 to 4.9 percent in public understanding of the basis for policy actions. the third year, and 1.0 to 5.0 percent in the fourth year. Considerable uncertainty attends these projections, The corresponding 70 percent confi dence intervals however. The economic and statistical models and for overall infl ation would be 1.8 to 2.2 percent in relationships used to help produce economic forecasts the current year, 1.1 to 2.9 percent in the second are necessarily imperfect descriptions of the real world, year, 1.0 to 3.0 percent in the third year, and 1.1 to and the future path of the economy can be affected 2.9 percent in the fourth year. Figures 4.A through by myriad unforeseen developments and events. Thus, 4.C illustrate these confi dence bounds in “fan charts” in setting the stance of monetary policy, participants that are symmetric and centered on the medians of consider not only what appears to be the most likely FOMC participants’ projections for GDP growth, the economic outcome as embodied in their projections, unemployment rate, and infl ation. However, in some but also the range of alternative possibilities, the instances, the risks around the projections may not likelihood of their occurring, and the potential costs to be symmetric. In particular, the unemployment rate the economy should they occur. cannot be negative; furthermore, the risks around a Table 2 summarizes the average historical accuracy particular projection might be tilted to either the upside of a range of forecasts, including those reported in or the downside, in which case the corresponding fan past Monetary Policy Reports and those prepared chart would be asymmetrically positioned around the by the Federal Reserve Board’s staff in advance of median projection. meetings of the Federal Open Market Committee Because current conditions may differ from those (FOMC). The projection error ranges shown in the that prevailed, on average, over history, participants table illustrate the considerable uncertainty associated provide judgments as to whether the uncertainty with economic forecasts. For example, suppose a attached to their projections of each economic variable participant projects that real gross domestic product is greater than, smaller than, or broadly similar to (GDP) and total consumer prices will rise steadily at typical levels of forecast uncertainty seen in the past annual rates of, respectively, 3 percent and 2 percent. 20 years, as presented in table 2 and refl ected in If the uncertainty attending those projections is similar the widths of the confi dence intervals shown in the to that experienced in the past and the risks around top panels of fi gures 4.A through 4.C. Participants’ the projections are broadly balanced, the numbers (continued) MONETARy POLICy REPORT: FEBRUARy 2021 65 current assessments of the uncertainty surrounding rather are projections of participants’ individual their projections are summarized in the bottom-left assessments of appropriate monetary policy and are panels of those fi gures. Participants also provide on an end-of-year basis. However, the forecast errors judgments as to whether the risks to their projections should provide a sense of the uncertainty around the are weighted to the upside, are weighted to the future path of the federal funds rate generated by the downside, or are broadly balanced. That is, while uncertainty about the macroeconomic variables as the symmetric historical fan charts shown in the top well as additional adjustments to monetary policy that panels of fi gures 4.A through 4.C imply that the risks to would be appropriate to offset the effects of shocks to participants’ projections are balanced, participants may the economy. judge that there is a greater risk that a given variable If at some point in the future the confi dence interval will be above rather than below their projections. These around the federal funds rate were to extend below judgments are summarized in the lower-right panels of zero, it would be truncated at zero for purposes of fi gures 4.A through 4.C. the fan chart shown in fi gure 5; zero is the bottom of As with real activity and infl ation, the outlook the lowest target range for the federal funds rate that for the future path of the federal funds rate is subject has been adopted by the Committee in the past. This to considerable uncertainty. This uncertainty arises approach to the construction of the federal funds rate primarily because each participant’s assessment of fan chart would be merely a convention; it would the appropriate stance of monetary policy depends not have any implications for possible future policy importantly on the evolution of real activity and decisions regarding the use of negative interest rates to infl ation over time. If economic conditions evolve provide additional monetary policy accommodation in an unexpected manner, then assessments of the if doing so were appropriate. In such situations, the appropriate setting of the federal funds rate would Committee could also employ other tools, including change from that point forward. The fi nal line in forward guidance and asset purchases, to provide table 2 shows the error ranges for forecasts of short- additional accommodation. term interest rates. They suggest that the historical While fi gures 4.A through 4.C provide information confi dence intervals associated with projections on the uncertainty around the economic projections, of the federal funds rate are quite wide. It should fi gure 1 provides information on the range of views be noted, however, that these confi dence intervals across FOMC participants. A comparison of fi gure 1 are not strictly consistent with the projections for with fi gures 4.A through 4.C shows that the dispersion the federal funds rate, as these projections are not of the projections across participants is much smaller forecasts of the most likely quarterly outcomes but than the average forecast errors over the past 20 years. 67 a bbreviations AFE advanced foreign economy BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics CARES Act Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act CES Current Employment Statistics C&I commercial and industrial COVID-19 coronavirus disease 2019 CPFF Commercial Paper Funding Facility CPI consumer price index DPI disposable personal income ELB effective lower bound EME emerging market economy EPOP ratio employment-to-population ratio FIMA Foreign and International Monetary Authorities FOMC Federal Open Market Committee; also, the Committee GDP gross domestic product G-SIBs global systemically important banks LFPR labor force participation rate Main Street Main Street Lending Program MBS mortgage-backed securities MMLF Money Market Mutual Fund Lending Facility OPEC Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries PCE personal consumption expenditures PDCF Primary Dealer Credit Facility PPPLF Paycheck Protection Program Liquidity Facility QSS Quarterly Services Survey repo repurchase agreement RRE residential real estate SBA Small Business Administration SEP Summary of Economic Projections TIPS Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities VIX implied volatility for the S&P 500 index For use at 11:00 a.m. EST February 19, 2021 M P r onetary olicy ePort February 19, 2021 Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System

Federal Reserve (2021, February 18). Monetary Policy Report. Monetary Policy Reports, Federal Reserve. https://whenthefedspeaks.com/doc/monetary_policy_report_20210219

@misc{wtfs_monetary_policy_report_20210219,
  author = {Federal Reserve},
  title = {Monetary Policy Report},
  year = {2021},
  month = {Feb},
  howpublished = {Monetary Policy Reports, Federal Reserve},
  url = {https://whenthefedspeaks.com/doc/monetary_policy_report_20210219},
  note = {Retrieved via When the Fed Speaks corpus}
}