Earth to Federal Reserve: What are you waiting for?

This is the same headline I used in February 2022 in this article
Earth to Federal Reserve: What are you waiting for?,
when the Federal Reserve (Fed) was dithering about raising rates. It is just as applicable today as they dither about cutting rates.
Indeed, sometimes I wonder if the Fed is more concerned about coming up with catchy phrases: “transient inflation; “data dependent”; “higher for longer”; and now “data-dependent, not data point dependent” – than actually taking decisions.

“Date-dependent mean the Fed doesn’t have a clue”
This was a heading in an earlier Bloomberg article, which continued: But perhaps the bigger takeaway is that Chair Jerome Powell and his fellow policymakers really don’t have a clue what’s going to happen in the economy. They’re shooting in the dark. “They’re making it up as they go along.”

These comments may seem harsh but it expresses the frustration many feel about what I described in this recent article: The Federal Reserve’s Analysis Paralysis

The data is unreliable and subject to change
Mohamed El-Erian, whom I often quote, captured the current state of affairs when he observed: “I think the major issue is that the market has become overly data-dependent, just like our central banks have become overly data-dependent. So, we’re not looking beyond the next data release because we’re worried about what will the Fed do in September, what will the ECB (European) Central) Bank) do in September.”

Central bankers and markets should be aware of the risks associated with an overly data-dependent approach to monetary policymaking. In 2019, Powell himself highlighted the basic challenge: “We must sort out in real time, as best we can, what the profound changes underway in the economy mean for issues such as the functioning of labor markets, the pace of productivity growth, and the forces driving inflation.”
Yet economic data are often unreliable. Official statistics undergo multiple and often substantial revisions. For instance, the payroll numbers undergo subsequent revisions —sometimes large ones that give the lie to the initial perceptions.
Richard Fisher, a former Dallas Fed president, once offered an example of the dangers involved. Data pointing to excessively low levels of inflation had prompted the Fed to keep rates low in 2002 and 2003. Subsequent revisions, he acknowledged, showed that “inflation had actually been a half point higher than first thought. In retrospect, the real fed funds rate turned out to be lower than what was deemed appropriate at the time and was held lower longer that it should have been.”

In a recent Financial Times article, Mohammed-El Erian asked a number of questions, amongst them:
Why did Fed forecasts get it so wrong, be it on inflation or unemployment — the so-called dual mandate — in recent years? And to what extent has this resulted in a longer-term shift to excessive data dependency in the formulation of the central bank’s policy?

Ongoing structural and secular changes in how the US and global economies function are more consequential for policy design than “noisy” short-term data. So, is it not now time to combine data dependency with a much greater injection of forward-looking strategic thinking? (more…)