Federal Open Market Committee : Don 't Forget The Balance Sheet

Using quantitative easing has helped the recovery of the USA and other developing countries. The Fed’s then limited their ability to pursue more measures, but congress ignored those appeals to help support the economy. The Fed’s decided to use smaller steps to help investor expectations and to prevent a possible financial crisis in Europe. In 2011 it was announced that the FED’s would hold short-term interest rates close to zero percent through 2013; to help support the economy. Soon after it was announced that using the “twist” operation would push long-term interest rates down, by purchasing $400 billion in long-term treasury securities with profits from the sale of the short-term government debt. Inaugurating a policy to help shape market expectations, which will raise interest rates at the end of 2014.

By law, the Federal Reserve conducts monetary policy to achieve its macroeconomic objectives of stable prices and maximum employment. The Federal Open Market Committee usually conducts policy by adjusting the level of short-term interest rates in response to changes in the outlook of the economy. Since 2008, the FOMC has also used large-scale purchases of Treasury securities and securities that were guaranteed or issued by federal agencies as a policy tool in an effort to lower longer-term interest rates and thereby improve financial conditions and so support the economic recovery (What).

The Federal Reserve System has three branches: the Board of Governors, The Federal Open Market Committee, and Reserve Banks. The Federal Reserve System (Fed) supplies and regulates America’s money to all the banks. The Board of Governors is the main authority of the three branches of the Fed, and it supervises other banks. The Federal Open Market Committee is the most prominent policymaker of the three branches and regulates the supply of money in the economy. Federal Reserve Banks serve other banks, this is why they are called banker’s banks. There are twelve Federal Reserve Banks which represent different states and these “districts” share data for monetary policies. The future role of monetary policy is vital

The discussion of whether the Federal Reserve should raise the federal funds rate is a highly contentious one. Members of the Federal Reserve (“Fed”) and academic economists disagree about what constitutes appropriate future macroeconomic policy for the Unites States. In the past, the Fed had been able to raise rates when the unemployment rate was under 5% and inflation was at a target of 2%. Enigmatically, since the Great Recession and despite a strengthening economy, year-over-year total inflation since 2008 has averaged only 1.4%—as measured by the Personal Consumption Expenditures Price Index (“PCE”). Today, PCE inflation is at 1-1.5% and has continuously undershot the Fed’s inflation target of 2% three years in a row. (Evan 2015) In the six years since the bottom of the Great Recession the U.S. economy has made great strides in lowering the published unemployment rate from about 10% back down to about 5.5%. In light of this data, certain individuals believe that the Federal Reserve should move to increase the federal funds rate in 2015 because unemployment is near 5% and inflation should bounce back on its own (Derby 2015). However, this recommendation is misguided.

The Federal Open Market Committee in the Federal Reserve System is who determines the monetary policies. The Federal Open Market Committee reviews economic and financial developments and determines the appropriate stance of monetary policy during their eight meetings per year. The Federal Reserve plays no role in determining fiscal policy. Fiscal policy refers to an economic strategy that utilizes the taxing and spending powers of the government to impact a nation's economy. It is different from monetary policy, which is usually set by a central bank and focuses on market interest rates and the money

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke 's meeting dealt mainly with the issues that could stabilize the economy after the great recession. After creating a number of policies to fight the 2008 crisis, Chairman 's move to further reduce Quantitative Easing was a bit of a disappointment. The Fed will reduce its purchases of long-term Treasuries and mortgage-backed securities by another $10 billion a month. Apart from this, Fed is going to concentrate on maximizing employment rates, stabilizing prices and interest rates.

Earlier this year the Fed announced it would likely end its record quantitative easing program in the fall, following a series of upbeat economic reports showing the US economy was gaining momentum. By paring asset purchases by another $10 billion at the September 16-7 policy meetings, the Fed has brought down the total of its monthly asset purchase facility to $15 billion. The markets widely expect the Fed to end its QE program at the October Federal Open Market Committee policy meetings with one final reduction of $15 billion.

Eric Rosengren, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, and John Williams, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, have both been known as “doves” in their individual monetary policy opinions and votes over the last five years. Since the summer of 2015, there has been a notable change in Rosengren’s rhetoric in the pursuit of normalization to the point where Rosengren is now actively suggesting an increase in interest rates in the very near future in order to promote growth in the economy, and as of the FOMC meeting on September 21st, 2016, was one of three dissenting votes (out of ten) for keeping rates low. Rosengren supports his new change of face with factors that will be discussed at length in this paper such as the pace of growth, the up-sides to higher rates, and the danger lurking in a prolonged low-rate economy. In similar (but not identical) fashion, John Williams is turning to the belief that rate hikes will be necessary sooner, rather than later if the Fed wishes to continue to spur growth in the United States economy, as opposed to letting the economy overheat into recession. Williams supports this point with evidence similar to Rosengren involving the pace of growth, the upside to higher rates, and the danger lurking in a prolonged low-rate economy. Eric Rosengren’s recent flip provides an interesting vantage point on both camps in the Federal Reserve. By comparing and contrasting the rhetoric of Rosengren (a former dove) and Williams

The Federal Reserve System is the most powerful institution in the United States economy. Functioning as the central bank of the United States, acting as a regulator, the lender of last resort, and setting the nation’s monetary policy via the Federal Open Market Committee, there is no segment of the American economy unaffected by the Federal Reserve [endnoteRef:1]. This power becomes even more substantial in times of “unusual and exigent circumstances,” as Section 13(3) of the Federal Reserve Act gives authority to the Board of Governors to act unilaterally in lending and market making operations during financial crisis[endnoteRef:2]. As illustrated by their decision making in the aftermath of the 2007-2008 Great Recession,

Bernanke’s comment that the Fed would maintain “highly accommodative monetary policy for the foreseeable future” sparked the mood swing on Wall Street. As noted on above, this is appropriate, but what the market may be missing is what “highly accommodative” policy actually means, at least to the Federal Reserve. It is not unreasonable to think that holding interest rates near zero for the next couple of years is “accommodative”. It most certainly is. Maintaining bond purchases is also obviously accommodative policy, but there could be a subtlety in Bernanke’s likely approach. If in coming months interest rates are held at zero (which is as certain as anyone can be on any policy setting), yet the Fed starts to scale back its $85 billion bond purchases a month to $75 billion, then $50 billion and so on, there is still no question that policy is still accommodative, but a little less than it was before.

The Federal Reserve is the Central bank of America and act as the lender of last resort. The central bank was founded in 1913 by the then elected members of congress. The Federal Reserve board is comprised of 12 members. The head of the Federal Reserve is the board of governors. Janet L. Yellen is the current Chair of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve. Janet Yellen also serves as Chairman of the Federal Open Market Committee which makes up part of the central bank, the System's primary monetary policymaking body.

Today, September 21, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) had an announcement released at 2:00 p.m. in which it was declared that the FOMC will keep their policies intact. I was unable to follow the announcement at the time of release, although I was informed of the decision a little before 5:00pm. I immediately checked federalreserve.gov when given the opportunity and further learned the reasoning behind the FOMC’s decision. The FOMC felt the economy is still stagnant and not growing at the rate they would like. Due to this, they kept their policies intact hoping the economy will right itself.

On September 18, 2013 the Federal Reserve reaffirmed its view that a highly accommodative stance of monetary policy will remain appropriate for a considerable time after the asset purchase program ends and the economic recovery strengthens. In addition, the committee agreed to continue its monthly $85 billion purchase of Treasury and mortgage-backed securities as long as the unemployment rate remains above 6.5 percent. Inflation between one and two years ahead is projected to be no more than a half percentage point above the Committee's 2 percent longer-run goal and longer-term inflation expectations continue to be well anchored .

The recent recession lasting from 2007 until 2009, and the effects of which are still highly visible in the U.S. economy, led the Federal Reserve to use new and largely untested methods for protecting the country from a total financial collapse. The new strategy, which blurs the lines between monetary and fiscal policy, had been attempted only once before, and is open to criticism from several difference angles. This report documents the history, purpose, and controversy surrounding quantitative easing as a strategy to mitigate the effects of the recent recession. After considering these factors, the conclusion is drawn that quantitative easing was a modestly successful policy, yet one which should not be employed again. Although

The market is looking forward to the next meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC). During the meeting the committee will announce whether they will increasing or not the target interest rate in the US, which is now between 0.00 - 0.25% per year. The two main factors that the FOMC considers when taking this decision are the inflation, and unemployment rates in the US. There is enough evidence to believe that the US economy is returning to growth. Which creates a lot of expectations about when and by how much will the interest rates rise. With this expected hike, central banks around the world look very close to all FED movements.