Ten years on, Fed's long, strange, trip to zero
redefined central banking
Send a link to a friend
[December 17, 2018]
By Howard Schneider
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - ZIRP. ZLB. ELB.
Whatever the acronym, when the U.S. Federal Reserve dropped its policy
rate to near zero on Dec. 16, 2008, to counter a full-scale economic
crisis, it ushered in what the central bank's chairman at the time, Ben
Bernanke, called "the end of the old regime."
A decade later, the full impact and import of that move are still not
fully clear. But the Fed was never the same. The decision to move to
zero ushered in wholesale changes to how the Fed works, from its
building a massive balance sheet to adopting an explicit 2 percent
inflation target and holding regular post-meeting press conferences.
A new body of research continues to explore the likelihood that trips to
the "effective lower bound" will become common.
WHAT IS ZIRP?
It stands for "zero interest rate policy," and became one of the most
common acronyms used to describe the seven-year period when the Fed's
benchmark overnight lending rate was parked in a range of between zero
and 0.25 percent. Policymakers also called it the "zero lower bound" and
"effective lower bound."
The Fed was not the first to employ such an aggressive response to an
economic downturn. The Bank of Japan adopted ZIRP in the 1990s in
response to a collapse in its real estate market that helped trigger a
decade of economic stagnation. https://tmsnrt.rs/2QPjcTq
WHY ADOPT ZIRP?
There was nowhere else to go. From July 2007 to the fall of 2008, the
Fed had trimmed its target policy rate from 5.25 percent to 1 percent.
The economy was so weak that many models indicated the appropriate
interest rate for the Fed would have been negative - in effect a tax on
savings that might prompt people to spend. While theoretically possible
and in fact later adopted by a few central banks elsewhere, negative
interest rates would have been a political non-starter in the U.S.
Congress, and difficult to sell to the public in a fast-moving crisis.
Instead, a dramatic Fed action drove the policy rate to a range of
between zero and 0.25 percent. It was, in effect, a zero rate, but more
importantly demonstrated the Fed's willingness to go to extremes.
https://tmsnrt.rs/2QRlamE
DID IT WORK?
Not hardly. And Fed officials knew the developing crisis needed more
than just standard interest rate policy.
"I see few advantages to gradualism," then San Francisco Fed president
Janet Yellen, the eventual chair, said according to transcripts of the
December meeting. The statement announcing the cut also said the Fed
"will employ all available tools to promote the resumption of
sustainable economic growth."
[to top of second column] |
A jogger runs past the Federal Reserve building in Washington, DC,
U.S., August 22, 2018. REUTERS/Chris Wattie
That flagged what was to come, including trillions of dollars in asset purchases
used to shore up financial markets and maintain the low long-term interest rates
that are critical to the housing market and mortgage lending. Even though the
Fed could not cut its target rate any further once the "zero lower bound" had
been reached, the unconventional tools used by the Fed then still shape
financial markets today. https://tmsnrt.rs/2SFRJRo
DID IT HURT?
The unemployment rate is at its lowest in nearly 50 years. Inflation is hovering
around the Fed's target. A near decade of economic growth will become the
longest expansion on record next year.
What's not to like?
It took seven years for the Fed to leave the zero lower bound, and rates are
still abnormally low. By some accounts, consumers and businesses may be addicted
to cheap money, and so sensitive to interest rates their willingness to buy
homes or invest may fall off more quickly than in the past as rates rise.
Corporations, meanwhile, have gorged on cheap debt, possibly laying the
groundwork for the next crisis. https://tmsnrt.rs/2SK4s5T
WILL IT HAPPEN AGAIN?
Almost certainly.
The Fed has been raising interest rates now for three years, but does not expect
take them much higher than 3 percent. Target policy rates of 5 percent or more
were common in the past, but few at the Fed expect to return to those days.
The working assumption is that rates globally will remain lower than they were,
and that policymakers will routinely reduce rates to zero in future recessions.
As a consequence, they expect to keep tools like asset purchases at the ready,
and are exploring other strategies, such as higher inflation targets, that could
lift all rates closer to their previous levels.
The era of ZIRP, in other words, may have just begun. https://tmsnrt.rs/2QLv4G1
(Reporting by Howard Schneider; Editing by Andrea Ricci)
[© 2018 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2018 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content.
|