speeches · May 4, 2021
Regional President Speech
Charles L. Evans · President
______________________________________________________________________________
A Promising Growth Outlook and
Thoughts on Inflation Dynamics
______________________________________________________________________________
Charles L. Evans
President and Chief Executive Officer
Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago
29th Annual Hyman P. Minksy Conference on the
State of the US and World Economies:
Prospects for the US and Europe in an
Emerging Post-Pandemic Recovery, organized by the
Levy Economics Institute of Bard College
May 5, 2021
_____________________________________
FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF CHICAGO
The views expressed today are my own and not necessarily those of the
Federal Reserve System or the FOMC.
A Promising Growth Outlook and
Thoughts on Inflation Dynamics
Charles L. Evans
President and Chief Executive Officer
Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago
Introduction
Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today; it’s a great pleasure to share
some of my thoughts with you on the course of the economy. But before I begin,
I should note that these views are my own and do not necessarily represent those
of my colleagues on the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) or others in the
Federal Reserve System.
Needless to say, it has been a very challenging year in so many respects. With regard
to the Fed, we, as the monetary policy authority, still have some ways to go before we
reach our dual mandate goals of maximum and inclusive employment and inflation that
averages 2 percent. We also face many uncertainties and risks on the road ahead.
But I am very optimistic about our economy’s growth prospects, and am hopeful that
our employment goal will be in sight before too long. Yet, despite some recent price
increases, achieving our inflation goal may prove more difficult.
The large and uneven impact of the pandemic
The pandemic has had a devastating impact on our nation. It has taken a horrible
number of lives and caused immeasurable hardship in so many different ways. It is
difficult to overstate the human costs of this tragedy. Economic developments over the
past year have been largely dictated by the pandemic and our efforts to contain it.
2
After huge declines in output with the onset of the pandemic, the economy rebounded
sharply in the second half of last year, and it is moving forward with a good deal of
momentum so far in 2021. Indeed, I—like most forecasters—have been surprised
by its resiliency.
A key reason for this resiliency has been the ability of so many households, businesses,
and nonprofit organizations to successfully adapt and operate safely in the midst of
the pandemic. Consequently, activity in many sectors of the economy, such as
manufacturing, has returned near—or even surpassed—its pre-pandemic level.
The efforts have been truly impressive. Part of this resiliency also is due to the
support provided by fiscal and monetary policies.1 Throughout the crisis and recovery,
federal funds flowing to the private sector and state and local governments, along with
low borrowing rates, have helped support the economy.2
One not-surprising feature of the recovery is that sectors of the economy where
in-person contact is not necessary are doing much better than those for which social
distancing is more difficult. For example, consumer spending on housing, autos, and
1 The $2.2 trillion Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act was signed into law on March 27,
2020, and an additional $900 billion in relief was provided as part of a government spending bill called the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, which was enacted on December 27, 2020. More recently, the $1.9 trillion
American Rescue Plan Act (ARP) was signed into law on March 11, 2021. These bills have provided loans to
businesses, direct payments and other benefits to individuals, and funding to health care providers and state and
local governments, as well as other support to various segments of the economy.
2 For instance, following the most recent round of stimulus payments, personal income in March 2021 from wages
and salaries plus pandemic relief provided by the government was nearly 48 percent above its pre-pandemic level
in February 2020. In addition, the average interest rate on 30-year mortgages declined 1 percentage point from
3.9 percent in March of last year to 2.9 percent in January of this year before rising to over 3 percent in
mid-February, where it has remained.
3
other goods has increased at a solid pace.3 In contrast, despite recent improvements,
the leisure and hospitality sector is still suffering immensely. Indeed, before the
pandemic, employment in leisure and hospitality accounted for only about a tenth of
total payrolls in the economy. Yet the job losses in this sector accounted for nearly
40 percent of the 8.5 million shortfall in total employment that we saw in March 2021
relative to its pre-pandemic level in February 2020.4
The impact of the pandemic has been uneven across a number of other dimensions as
well. For example, because a disproportionate number of women, minorities, and
lower-wage workers are employed in leisure and hospitality or other vulnerable sectors,
these demographic groups have been particularly hard hit. Worryingly, these shifts are
magnifying the longstanding inequalities among these segments of our society.
And depending on the path of the recovery, some of the recent changes may leave
unfortunate longer-lasting marks as well. Our economy cannot fully recover if a
substantial portion of the population is left behind.
All told, even though the economy is recovering, we still have a long way to go before
economic activity returns to its pre-pandemic vibrancy. Even after the very strong March
employment report, at 6.0 percent, the unemployment rate is well above the 3.5 percent
3 Single-family permits in March 2021 were more than 20 percent above their pre-pandemic level. Real consumer
spending on goods in March 2021 was over 16 percent above its level in February 2020, and auto sales in the first
quarter of 2021 were at nearly pre-pandemic levels.
4 Between February 2020 and March 2021, total nonfarm employment decreased 5.5 percent, according to data
from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Over the same period, employment in leisure and hospitality declined
nearly 19 percent. Some of the other industries seeing large employment declines over this span include air, water,
rail, and ground passenger transportation (–22.8 percent), education services (–8.2 percent), mining and logging
(–11.6 percent), and motion picture production (–40.3 percent).
4
we saw on the eve of the pandemic. And many other workers have stopped looking for
a job and exited the labor force.
Optimistic outlook for growth
Despite these numerous hardships, I am optimistic that the economy is poised for
strong growth later this year, which will bring with it further significant improvements
in the labor market. One important reason for my optimism is that we have made good
progress on the health front. Though caseloads are still worrisome, the numbers are
much lower than they were at the turn of the year. Moreover, each day more and more
people are getting vaccinated, and hopefully, before too long, much of the population
will be able and willing to resume activities such as traveling, attending events,
and dining out.5
Fiscal policy will also provide a big boost to the economy. Over the past five months,
we have seen two large stimulus packages enacted: the $900 billion in relief from
the Consolidated Appropriations Act in late December and the $1.9 trillion American
Rescue Plan Act, or ARP, in early March. This legislation provides further direct
stimulus payments to individuals; extends unemployment insurance and lending
to small businesses; provides substantial funding to state and local governments;
5 According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), as of May 2, 2021, about 56 percent of the
U.S. population aged 18 and over had received at least one Covid-19 vaccine dose and over 40 percent were fully
vaccinated. CDC updates on the state of Covid-19 vaccinations across the United States are available online,
https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#vaccinations.
5
and authorizes spending on programs such as those for vaccines and testing,
childcare, housing assistance, and education.6
With these developments, my outlook for growth and unemployment is much more
positive today than it was just a few months ago. Since my forecast is similar to those
made by my colleagues on the FOMC, let me discuss mine in the context of theirs.
Four times a year each FOMC participant provides projections of key economic
variables. These are released in our Summary of Economic Projections, or SEP—
the most recent of which came out in mid-March.7 The median forecast in the SEP for
gross domestic product (GDP) growth in 2021 was 6.5 percent. This quite strong figure
reflects the return to more normal operations in sectors still impacted by the virus today,
as well as the big boost from fiscal policy. As these factors run their course, growth
is then expected to moderate to 3.3 percent next year and 2.2 percent in 2023.8
The median FOMC participant sees the unemployment rate declining steadily from
6.0 percent today to 4.5 percent by the end of this year and then to 3.5 percent by the
end of 2023—finally bringing us back to the mark we saw prior to the pandemic.
Of course, there is a lot of uncertainty underlying these projections. A very important
one surrounds the path for the virus. My base case is that the virus will become much
less of a public health concern by the second half of this year. But that is not assured;
6 The extension of unemployment benefits applies to the Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation (FPUC),
Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA), and Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation (PEUC)
programs created by the CARES Act.
7 Federal Open Market Committee (2021b).
8 While economic growth is projected to moderate in the next two years, it is expected to remain above the
economy’s long-run growth rate—which is estimated to be 1.8 percent by the median FOMC participant.
6
and there are downside risks if people become less vigilant or if vaccine hesitancy or
vaccine-resistant variants of the virus impede the immunization process.
Another is the speed at which hard-hit sectors will be able to resume business. Will the
return to normal be like flipping a switch, where activity and employment in sectors such
as leisure and hospitality return to high levels fairly quickly as demand reappears?
Or will significant start-up costs or sticky labor force adjustments slow the return?
The potential for longer-term structural changes in some sectors, such as retailing
and commercial real estate, pose similar questions about the path ahead.
The size and timing of the impact from fiscal policy also are uncertain. For example,
with regard to the stimulus payments, those whose livelihoods have been most severely
harmed by the pandemic will spend them quickly, but others will save theirs and spend
them gradually.9 Similar uncertainties surround other elements of the recent fiscal
packages. And then there is the possibility that further spending and tax changes will
be coming soon. So, we could see more—or less—impact from fiscal policy than I’ve
built into my projections.
Inflation and inflation dynamics
Let me turn now to the price stability element of our dual mandate. This is a far more
nuanced story. To set the stage, the FOMC has an inflation target of 2 percent.10
Since the Great Financial Crisis, inflation has persistently run under our target,
9 See, for example, Karger and Rajan (2021).
10 The Committee’s inflation goal is measured by the annual change in the Personal Consumption Expenditures
(PCE) Price Index.
7
only fleetingly touching 2 percent a couple of times prior to the pandemic. The pandemic
further depressed inflation as demand plummeted for many goods and services,
with outright price declines in sectors hardest hit by the pandemic, such as air travel
and hotel accommodations. To be sure, prices rose for other items that were in higher
demand—such as hand sanitizers, autos, and household appliances. But if you look at
the overall basket of goods and services purchased by households—as measured by
the Personal Consumption Expenditures Price Index excluding food and energy
(or core PCE for short)—inflation has declined from 1.9 percent just before the
pandemic to 1.4 percent this past February.11 Core PCE inflation then popped up to
1.8 percent in March.
I was not surprised to see such an increase, and I expect to see some further pickup in
inflation in the coming months. Part of the increase will be purely mechanical as the low
inflation reading from April of last year falls out of the 12-month calculation—a factor
that boosted year-over-year inflation in March as well.12 In addition, as the virus
subsides and people resume normal activities, demand should pick up further for those
goods and services that are most affected by the pandemic, pulling their prices up to
more typical levels. Finally, we are seeing supply chain bottlenecks develop as activity
picks up rapidly in some sectors, and these can contribute to temporary price pressures
in selected industries. We’ve all read about issues with steel, computer chips,
construction materials, appliances, and other items.
11 Core PCE inflation is a better gauge of underlying inflation trends than total PCE inflation.
12 Core PCE prices fell 0.4 percent in April 2020. So even if core PCE prices were unchanged in April 2021,
the 12-month change would rise by 0.4 percentage points solely because the April 2020 number fell out
of the average.
8
But what happens once prices renormalize and supply chains adjust? Will inflation
just settle back down to 1-1/2 percent, or will we see a more persistent increase in
underlying inflation? And if we do see persistently higher inflation, how much higher
will that inflation be?
A number of economists have been warning that persistently higher inflation is coming.
This has generally been in the context of the effects of the American Rescue Plan Act.
They argue that the ARP is too big, will overheat the economy, and will generate higher
inflation that we really ought to be worried about. But two important questions often are
left unaddressed in their arguments: How high is this higher inflation? And what is the
mechanism generating it?
To understand these concerns, you need to have some coherent framework for
thinking about the inflationary process. The standard inflation-expectations-augmented
Phillips curve model is one such framework. This model tells you that inflation is
related to economic slack, supply shocks, inertia in the inflation process, and inflation
expectations. This is the model Janet Yellen often used when she was Fed Chair
to frame her discussions about inflation.
Two economists on my staff—Jonas Fisher and Leo Melosi—looked at a few alternative
scenarios for inflation that might accompany the ARP.13 They took some standard
calibrations of the resource pressures that might be generated and then ran those
through several versions of the inflation-expectations-augmented Phillips curve.
13 For details, see Bianchi, Fisher, and Melosi (2021).
9
What did they find? In most of the models, the increase in PCE inflation relative to
baseline over the next several quarters is fairly modest—topping out somewhere
between 1/2 and 3/4 percentage points. And these increases don’t last that long,
largely dissipating in two or three years.
One specification did yield some larger and persistently higher readings on inflation.
This was a model in which inflation expectations were assumed to vary with recent
inflationary experience and included so-called speed effects, in which the change in
unemployment, not just its level, influences inflation. Here, PCE inflation increased by
about a percentage point in some scenarios, and a feedback loop between higher
actual inflation and inflation expectations meant the higher rate was largely maintained
several years out.
The lessons from these exercises are well known. The coefficient on resource utilization
in the Phillips curve is small, so that resource pressures on their own will have a limited
impact on inflation. As an example of recent work documenting this, I would point you to
a paper by Jonathon Hazell and co-authors that controls for simultaneity bias by
analyzing state variation in prices for tradable goods and still finds that the Phillips curve
is quite flat.14 Furthermore, even the modest effects of resource pressures on inflation
will go away as those pressures dissipate. To generate larger and persistently higher
inflation, you need higher inflation expectations.15 That is, you need to see households
and businesses begin to incorporate a higher underlying rate of inflation into their
14 Hazell et al. (2021).
15 Hazell et al. (2021) find that the greater stability of inflation since the 1990s is mostly due to long-run inflationary
expectations becoming more firmly anchored.
10
decisions today and their plans for the future. As these plans take hold, they become
embedded in actual inflation itself and, in a self-fulfilling process, justify the beliefs.
Now it turns out that to get the results in those higher-inflation simulations, Jonas and
Leo estimated the feedback between actual inflation and inflation expectations using
data going back to 1959. We “seasoned veterans” remember that when working with
data from the 1960s, ’70s, and ’80s, we usually estimated accelerationist Phillips
curves, in which the change—not the level—of inflation was driven by the output gap.
In these models, even if resource pressures were eliminated, inflation would remain at
its new higher level. If resource pressures were maintained, inflation would continue to
spiral upward. And theory gave us a very credible underpinning for this accelerationist
result: It could be explained by a strong and long-lasting sensitivity of inflation
expectations to recent inflation experience.
It seems to me that such an accelerationist view is on the minds of many of those
warning about an outbreak of inflation today. I think the risk of this scenario is remote.
Inflation certainly wasn’t spiraling upward prior to the pandemic, when the
unemployment rate was at a historically low 3.5 percent. Furthermore, given the low
inflation experienced over the past 15 years, inflation expectations have likely drifted
noticeably below 2 percent. For example, the ten-year Treasury rate is just 1.6 percent
today. That low rate can hardly reflect outsized inflation expectations on the part of
financial market participants. Even with the increases we’ve seen in recent weeks,
inflation compensation priced into Treasury rates over the five- to ten-year horizon are
still noticeably below where they were in 2012 and 2013—a period when one might
11
argue that inflation expectations were more aligned with our 2 percent target. So there
is no evidence that inflation expectations are spiraling out of control.
Indeed, I have to say that I hope we do get some feedback between actual inflation and
inflation expectations as we move through the year. If expectations move up, then we
could make some real progress toward reaching our inflation target. So, we will be
watching measures of inflation expectations very carefully. And I would not be
concerned about inflation moving persistently too high unless we saw some quite
outsized movements in financial market pricing at the longer maturities or in
survey-based measures of inflation expectations.
What are forecasters looking for? Well, according to the March SEP, the median FOMC
participant sees core inflation rising to 2.2 percent by the end of this year and then
slowing to 2.0 next year before moving up slightly to 2.1 percent in 2023. That’s better
than the 1.8 percent we have today. And while I can’t speak for others on the
Committee, my outlook is consistent with some increase in longer-run inflation
expectations. But does it mean we’ve reached our inflation goal?
Policy to remain accommodative for some time
Before I answer this question, let me say a few words about our policy goals.
Congress gave the Federal Reserve a dual mandate to achieve maximum employment
and price stability. Last August, after a lengthy review, the FOMC revised our long-run
strategy statement that operationalizes this mandate.16 First, we stated that our
16 Federal Open Market Committee (2020).
12
employment goal is broad-based and inclusive and that our aim is to eliminate shortfalls
of employment from our assessment of its maximum level.17 The term “shortfalls” is
significant—in the past we characterized our employment mandate in terms of
eliminating deviations from some long-run normal level of employment. Under the new
framework, the FOMC will not be concerned about high employment—or low
unemployment—unless it is also associated with undesirable inflationary pressures.
With regard to our price stability objective, we indicated we want to achieve inflation
that averages 2 percent over time. This averaging is important in order to center
longer-term inflation expectations at 2 percent and thus achieve our target on a
persistent basis. Therefore, if inflation has been running persistently below 2 percent,
we need to have inflation overshoot our goal moderately for some time to bring the
average back to 2 percent.
As you know, even before we adopted this new framework, monetary policymakers
responded to the pandemic swiftly and strongly. In order to support the overall
economy, we brought the federal funds rate down to nearly zero, introduced a host of
liquidity and credit facilities, and purchased U.S. government securities on a large scale.
While the emergency actions are behind us, today the fed funds rate remains near zero
and we continue to purchase securities at a pace of $120 billion per month.
I expect monetary policy will have to remain accommodative for some time to ensure
that we meet the policy goals laid out in our new framework. With regard to our
17 We consider a wide range of indicators in making that assessment; see Federal Open Market Committee
(2021c)—which is the very latest version of the long-run strategy statement (reaffirming the 2020 version).
13
employment mandate, an important gauge is the unemployment rate. The median
FOMC participant estimates that the longer-run unemployment rate is 4.0 percent.
In other words, after the effects of various shocks to the economy dissipate,
the unemployment rate should naturally settle at 4.0 percent. The median FOMC
forecast has the unemployment rate falling below this level by the end of 2022.
So, our employment mandate is within sight. Now, the median inflation forecast I just
mentioned is at or somewhat above 2 percent. But after years of underrunning our
target, in my view those increases and, down the road, some even higher rates of
inflation are needed to get inflation to average 2 percent and to solidify inflation
expectations about that number. So, I see the need for continued accommodative
monetary policy to reach our goals.
What does this mean in terms of our policy tools? The FOMC statements, released after
each meeting, provide some guidance. The one we just issued in April reaffirmed that it
will be appropriate to maintain the current target range for the federal funds rate until
labor market conditions have reached levels consistent with the Committee’s
assessments of maximum employment and inflation has risen to 2 percent and is on
track to moderately exceed 2 percent for some time. In addition, the Federal Reserve
will continue to purchase assets until substantial further progress has been made
toward the Committee’s maximum employment and price stability goals.18 Judging from
the most recent SEP, those conditions will not be met for a while. The median FOMC
18 Federal Open Market Committee (2021a).
14
participant expects the federal funds rate to stay in its current low range of 0 to
1/4 percent through at least the end of 2023. So, policy is likely on hold for some time.
Conclusion
In sum, we still have quite a way to go before we return to pre-pandemic levels of
employment, but given the growth prospects for the economy, I am confident that we
will be making good progress toward our inclusive employment objective over the next
couple of years. I expect inflation will pick up in the near to medium term, but a firming
in inflation expectations will still be needed to achieve our goal of averaging 2 percent
inflation over the longer run.
Thank you.
15
References
Bianchi, Francesco, Jonas D. M. Fisher, and Leonardo Melosi, 2021, “Some inflation
scenarios for the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021,” Chicago Fed Letter, Federal
Reserve Bank of Chicago, No. 453, April. Crossref, https://doi.org/10.21033/cfl-2021-
453
Federal Open Market Committee, 2021a, “Federal Reserve issues FOMC statement,”
press release, Washington, DC, April 28, available online,
https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/monetary20210428a.htm.
Federal Open Market Committee, 2021b, Summary of Economic Projections,
Washington, DC, March 17, available online,
https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/fomcprojtabl20210317.htm.
Federal Open Market Committee, 2021c, “Statement on longer-run goals and monetary
policy strategy,” Washington, DC, as reaffirmed effective January 26, available online,
https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/files/fomc_longerrungoals.pdf.
Federal Open Market Committee, 2020, “2020 statement on longer-run goals and
monetary policy strategy,” Washington, DC, as amended effective August 27, available
online, https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/review-of-monetary-policy-
strategy-tools-and-communications-statement-on-longer-run-goals-monetary-policy-
strategy.htm.
Hazell, Jonathon, Juan Herreño, Emi Nakamura, and Jón Steinsson, 2021, “The slope
of the Phillips curve: Evidence from U.S. states,” National Bureau of Economic
Research, working paper, No. 28005, revised May 2021. Crossref,
https://doi.org/10.3386/w28005
Karger, Ezra, and Aastha Rajan, 2021, “Heterogeneity in the marginal propensity to
consume: Evidence from Covid-19 stimulus payments,” Federal Reserve Bank of
Chicago, working paper, No. 2020-15, revised February 2021. Crossref,
https://doi.org/10.21033/wp-2020-15
16
Cite this document
APA
Charles L. Evans (2021, May 4). Regional President Speech. Speeches, Federal Reserve. https://whenthefedspeaks.com/doc/regional_speeche_20210505_charles_l_evans
BibTeX
@misc{wtfs_regional_speeche_20210505_charles_l_evans,
author = {Charles L. Evans},
title = {Regional President Speech},
year = {2021},
month = {May},
howpublished = {Speeches, Federal Reserve},
url = {https://whenthefedspeaks.com/doc/regional_speeche_20210505_charles_l_evans},
note = {Retrieved via When the Fed Speaks corpus}
}