scholarly journals Should the U.S. Federal Reserve increase the federal funds rate in 2016? An assessment based on the neutral interest rate

2016 ◽  
Vol 75 (296) ◽  
pp. 5-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Armando Sánchez Vargas
2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Albulena Basha ◽  
Wendong Zhang ◽  
Chad Hart

PurposeThis paper quantifies the effects of recent Federal Reserve interest rate changes, specifically recent hikes and cuts in the federal funds rate since 2015, on Midwest farmland values.Design/methodology/approachThe authors apply three autoregressive distributed lag (ARDL) models to a panel data of state-level farmland values from 1963 to 2018 to estimate the dynamic effects of interest rate changes on the US farmland market. We focus on the I-states, Lakes states and Great Plains states. The models in the study capture both short-term and long-term impacts of policy changes on land values.FindingsThe authors find that changes in the federal funds rate have long-lasting impacts on farmland values, as it takes at least a decade for the full effects of an interest rate change to be capitalized in farmland values. The results show that the three recent federal funds rate cuts in 2019 were not sufficient to offset the downward pressures from the 2015–2018 interest rate hikes, but the 2020 cut is. The combined effect of the Federal Reserve's recent interest rate moves on farmland values will be positive for some time starting in 2022.Originality/valueThis paper provides the first empirical quantification of the immediate and long-run impacts of recent Federal Reserve interest rate moves on farmland values. The authors demonstrate the long-lasting repercussions of Federal Reserve's policy choices in the farmland market.


2012 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 177-202 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kazuo Ueda

As the U.S. economy works through a sluggish recovery several years after the Great Recession technically came to an end in June 2009, it can only look with horror toward Japan's experience of two decades of stagnant growth since the early 1990s. In contrast to Japan, U.S. policy authorities responded to the financial crisis since 2007 more quickly. Surely, they learned from Japan's experience. I will begin by describing how Japan's economic situation unfolded in the early 1990s and offering some comparisons with how the Great Recession unfolded in the U.S. economy. I then turn to the Bank of Japan's policy responses to the crisis and again offer some comparisons to the Federal Reserve. I will discuss the use of both the conventional interest rate tool—the federal funds rate in the United States, and the “call rate” in Japan—and nonconventional measures of monetary policy and consider their effectiveness in the context of the rest of the financial system.


2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 121-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth N. Kuttner

In November 2008, the Federal Reserve faced a deteriorating economy and a financial crisis. The federal funds rate had already been reduced to virtually zero. Thus, the Federal Reserve turned to unconventional monetary policies. Through “quantitative easing,” the Fed announced plans to buy mortgage-backed securities and debt issued by government-sponsored enterprises. Subsequent purchases would eventually lead to a five-fold expansion in the Fed’s balance sheet, from $900 billion to $4.5 trillion, and leave the Fed holding over 20 percent of all mortgage-backed securities and marketable Treasury debt. In addition, Fed policy statements in December 2008 began to include explicit references to the likely path of the federal funds interest rate, a policy that came to be known as “forward guidance.” The Fed ceased its direct asset purchases in late 2014. Starting in October 2017, it has allowed the balance sheet to shrink gradually as existing assets mature. From December 2015 through June 2018, the Fed has raised the federal funds interest rate seven times. Thus, the time is ripe to step back and ask whether the Fed’s unconventional policies had the intended expansionary effects—and by extension, whether the Fed should use them in the future.


Author(s):  
Todd Potts ◽  
David Yerger

<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">This paper extends the existing research on regional economic responses to federal-reserve policy shocks along two dimensions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>First, we focus on the evolution over time of a particular region&rsquo;s responsiveness to federal funds shocks.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>This differs from prior work that analyzed differences across regions in their responsiveness to a federal funds shock over a single sample period.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>For the state of Delaware, we track how the declining importance of manufacturing and construction alters the region&rsquo;s income response to both federal funds rate and oil price shocks.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Delaware was selected for analysis because of the large decline since the 1970&rsquo;s in the share of its Gross State Product coming from construction and manufacturing.</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">&nbsp;</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">This paper&rsquo;s second extension of the literature is its use of sequential updating of the data set.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Prior research utilized quarterly data sets starting in the late 1950&rsquo;s and ending in the early 1990&rsquo;s.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>We construct a parsimonious structural VAR model and first estimate the model over the 1958Q1 to 1992 Q4 period. Over this period our results are consistent with earlier findings.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Next, we roll the sample period forward one year at a time, keeping the time period&rsquo;s length constant, up through 2004 Q2 and re-estimate the model after each resetting of the sample period. </span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">&nbsp;</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">Overall, our findings are consistent with the view that declines in the importance of interest rate sensitive sectors will lead to declines in the responsiveness of a region&rsquo;s income growth to federal funds rate shocks, but the magnitude of the observed decline in income sensitivity is considerably smaller than what one would forecast based upon the earlier cross-sectional based research.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The impact of oil price shocks, however, was contrary to &lsquo;conventional wisdom&rsquo; expectations.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Despite the declining share of manufacturing in GSP for Delaware over the rolling sample periods, there was a modest increase in the sensitivity of Delaware real personal income to oil price shocks as the sample period rolled forward.</span></span></p>


2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Savi Virolainen

Abstract We introduce a new mixture autoregressive model which combines Gaussian and Student’s t mixture components. The model has very attractive properties analogous to the Gaussian and Student’s t mixture autoregressive models, but it is more flexible as it enables to model series which consist of both conditionally homoscedastic Gaussian regimes and conditionally heteroscedastic Student’s t regimes. The usefulness of our model is demonstrated in an empirical application to the monthly U.S. interest rate spread between the 3-month Treasury bill rate and the effective federal funds rate.


FEDS Notes ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 (2076) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashish Kumbhat ◽  
◽  
Francisco Palomino ◽  
Ander Perez-Orive ◽  
◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (064) ◽  
pp. 1-40
Author(s):  
Callum Jones ◽  
◽  
Mariano Kulish ◽  
James Morley ◽  
◽  
...  

We propose a shadow policy interest rate based on an estimated structural model that accounts for the zero lower bound. The lower bound constraint, if expected to bind, is contractionary and increases the shadow rate compared to an unconstrained systematic policy response. By contrast, forward guidance and other unconventional policies that extend the expected duration of zero-interest-rate policy are expansionary and decrease the shadow rate. By quantifying these distinct effects, our structural shadow federal funds rate better captures the stance of monetary policy given economic conditions than a shadow rate based only on the term structure of interest rates.


2017 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim Oliver Berg

AbstractThis paper discusses how the forecast accuracy of a Bayesian vector autoregression (BVAR) is affected by introducing the zero lower bound on the federal funds rate. As a benchmark I adopt a common BVAR specification, including 18 variables, estimated shrinkage, and no nonlinearity. Then I entertain alternative specifications of the zero lower bound. I account for the possibility that the effect of monetary policy on the economy is different in this regime, replace the federal funds rate by its shadow rate, consider a logarithmic transformation, feed in monetary policy shocks, or utilize conditional forecasts allowing for all shocks implemented through a rejection sampler. The latter two are also coupled with interest rate expectations from future contracts. It is shown that the predictive densities of all these specifications are greatly different, suggesting that this modeling choice is not innocuous. The comparison is based on the accuracy of point and density forecasts of major US macroeconomic series during the period 2009:1 to 2014:4. The introduction of the zero lower bound is not beneficial per se, but it depends on how it is done and which series is forecasted. With caution, I recommend the shadow rate specification and the rejection sampler combined with interest rate expectations to deal with the nonlinearity in the policy rate. Since the policy rate will remain low for some time, these findings could prove useful for practical forecasters.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document