Federal Reserve System

More stories

  • 138 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    CPI Is Expected to Put Inflation at 7.8% for February 2022

    by

    Prices in the year though February were expected to have risen 7.8 percent, which would be the fastest pace of inflation in 40 years as gas prices increased and an array of goods and services became more expensive.Fresh Consumer Price Index data is set for release Thursday morning, and that estimate — the median in a Bloomberg survey of economists — underscores the grim reality facing economic policymakers. Climbing prices are hitting consumers in the pocketbook, causing their confidence to fall and stretching household budgets. The burden is falling most intensely on lower-income households, which devote a big chunk of their budgets to daily necessities that are rapidly becoming costlier.The quickest inflation in most Americans’ lifetimes is hurting President Biden politically, and the challenge could grow temporarily worse amid fallout from sanctions and other economic responses to Russia’s war in Ukraine, which has already pushed gas prices higher. Rising prices tend to make voters unhappy, posing trouble for Democrats ahead of the midterm elections in November.Understand Inflation in the U.S.Inflation 101: What is inflation, why is it up and whom does it hurt? Our guide explains it all.Your Questions, Answered: Times readers sent us their questions about rising prices. Top experts and economists weighed in.How Americans Feel: We asked 2,200 people where they’ve noticed inflation. Many mentioned basic necessities, like food and gas.Supply Chain’s Role: A key factor in rising inflation is the continuing turmoil in the global supply chain. Here’s how the crisis unfolded.They are also a problem for the Federal Reserve, which is in charge of achieving price stability. The central bank has signaled it will raise interest rates by a quarter percentage point at its meeting next week, likely the first in a series of moves meant to increase the cost of borrowing and spending money and slow down the economy. By reducing consumption and slowing the labor market, the Fed is able to take some pressure off inflation over time.“Mortgage rates will go up, the rates for car loans — all of those rates that affect consumers’ buying decisions,” Jerome H. Powell, the Fed chair, told Congress last week. “Housing prices won’t go up as much, and equity prices won’t go up as much, so people will spend less.”Even as the Fed prepares to rein in demand, high gas costs tied to the conflict in Ukraine threaten to keep inflation elevated for longer. They could become a serious issue for central bank policymakers if they help convince consumers that the burst in prices will last. If people begin to expect inflation, they may change their behavior in ways that make it more permanent — accepting price increases more readily and asking for bigger raises to keep up.This is just the latest instance, as far as prices go, in which what can go wrong does seem to be going wrong.Inflation F.A.Q.Card 1 of 6What is inflation? More

  • 113 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    Federal Reserve Chair Pledges to Bring Inflation Under Control

    by

    Jerome H. Powell, the Federal Reserve chair, told senators on Thursday that policymakers were prepared to rein in inflation as they tried to fulfill their price stability goal — even if that came at an economic cost.“We’re going to use our tools, and we’re going to get this done,” Mr. Powell told the Senate Banking Committee.Mr. Powell has signaled that the Fed is poised to raise interest rates by a quarter percentage point at its meeting that ends March 16, and follow up with additional rate increases over the next several months. Fed officials are also planning to come up with a strategy for shrinking their vast holdings of government-backed debt, which will increase longer-term interest rates.The suite of policy changes will be an effort to weigh on demand, tamping down price increases that are running at their fastest pace in 40 years. The Fed aims for 2 percent price gains on average over time, but inflation came in at 6.1 percent in the year through January.Asked if the Fed was prepared to do whatever it took to control inflation — even if that meant temporarily harming the economy, as Paul Volcker did while Fed chair in the early 1980s — Mr. Powell said it was.Understand Inflation in the U.S.Inflation 101: What is inflation, why is it up and whom does it hurt? Our guide explains it all.Your Questions, Answered: We asked readers to send questions about inflation. Top experts and economists weighed in.What’s to Blame: Did the stimulus cause prices to rise? Or did pandemic lockdowns and shortages lead to inflation? A debate is heating up in Washington.Supply Chain’s Role: A key factor in rising inflation is the continuing turmoil in the global supply chain. Here’s how the crisis unfolded.“I knew Paul Volcker,” he said during his testimony. “I think he was one of the great public servants of the era — the greatest economic public servant of the era. I hope that history will record that the answer to your question is yes.”Mr. Volcker’s campaign against double-digit price increases pushed unemployment above 10 percent in the early 1980s, hurting the economy so severely that wages and prices began to slow down.But central bankers are hoping they can engineer a smoother economic cool-down this time.They are reacting much faster to high inflation than officials did in the 1960s and 1970s, and data suggests that consumers and businesses, while cognizant of inflation, have not yet come to expect rapid increases year after year. By cooling off demand a little, the Fed’s policies may work together with easing supply chain problems to bring inflation down without tossing people out of jobs.“Mortgage rates will go up, the rates for car loans — all of those rates that affect consumers’ buying decisions,” Mr. Powell said of the way higher rates would work. “Housing prices won’t go up as much, and equity prices won’t go up as much, so people will spend less.”The goal is to allow factories and businesses to catch up so shoppers are no longer competing for a limited stock of goods and services, creating shortages that enable companies to raise prices without scaring voracious buyers away.Inflation F.A.Q.Card 1 of 6What is inflation? More

  • 138 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Powell Says Rates Are Headed Higher, Even as Ukraine Poses Uncertainty

    by

    Jerome H. Powell, the Federal Reserve chair, told lawmakers on Wednesday that the central bank is poised to lift interest rates at its meeting this month as it tries to cool down high inflation — saying that while Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is ramping up economic uncertainty, it isn’t yet shaking the Fed off its course.Mr. Powell, testifying before the House Financial Services Committee, said the economic path ahead remained unsettled as Russia invaded Ukraine and the world reacted. He outlined with more clarity than usual how the Fed is thinking about policy in the coming months, saying, “We are going to avoid adding uncertainty to what is already an extraordinarily challenging and uncertain moment.”With inflation running hot, the labor market showing strength and the economy growing rapidly, the Fed’s leader said he thought a quarter-point interest rate increase would be appropriate at the central bank’s meeting, which will conclude on March 16. He expects the Fed to make a “series” of increases this year. And he thinks officials will agree to a plan for shrinking their balance sheet bond holdings in coming months, as they had been planning to do.“The question now really is how the invasion of Ukraine, the ongoing war, the response from nations around the world — including sanctions — may have changed that expectation,” Mr. Powell said. “It’s too soon to say for sure, but for now I would say that we will proceed carefully along the lines of that plan.”Mr. Powell emphasized that flexibility was critical, because it was too soon to know what today’s geopolitical tumult would mean for the American economy.Economists have said the conflict is likely to push up gas and other commodity prices, further elevating inflation — already, oil prices have shot higher. But at the same time, a combination of higher fuel costs and wavering consumer sentiment could be a drag on economic growth. Given the unclear effects on the American economy, Mr. Powell said, the Fed will need to remain “nimble.”The Fed chair and his colleagues must balance the risks that Ukraine poses to both inflation and growth against another pressing reality: Price gains in America had already been coming in high for about a year. Fed policymakers, who are tasked with maintaining stable prices, want to make sure that those quick increases do not become a permanent feature of the economic backdrop.Understand Inflation in the U.S.Inflation 101: What is inflation, why is it up and whom does it hurt? Our guide explains it all.Your Questions, Answered: We asked readers to send questions about inflation. Top experts and economists weighed in.What’s to Blame: Did the stimulus cause prices to rise? Or did pandemic lockdowns and shortages lead to inflation? A debate is heating up in Washington.Supply Chain’s Role: A key factor in rising inflation is the continuing turmoil in the global supply chain. Here’s how the crisis unfolded.“The game plan is to prevent recent high inflation outcomes from persisting,” Michael Gapen and his colleagues at Barclays wrote in a research report, summing up the crux of Mr. Powell’s testimony.Prices are increasing at the fastest pace in four decades, picking up by 7.5 percent over the year through January in the closely watched Consumer Price Index and by 6.1 percent in the Fed’s preferred inflation gauge, the Personal Consumption Expenditures index. The central bank aims for 2 percent inflation on average over time. Mr. Powell attributed the stubbornly rapid increases to strong consumer demand, especially for goods, that has “collided” with limited supply.“Admitting that inflation — proclaiming that inflation — is far too high, and that we are committed to using our tools to get it back down, it’s really about very, very high demand,” Mr. Powell said. “It’s a very different kind of inflation story than we’ve had in the past, but it’s one we have to deal with, and we will deal with it.”Mr. Powell said the Fed expected inflation to cool off this year as it raised interest rates, government pandemic relief spending faded and supply constraints cleared up. But officials are also closely monitoring factors that could keep it high.If price gains do not begin to come down in 2022, he said the central bank would be prepared to “move more aggressively” and make a larger-than-usual rate increase. Markets have expected that the Fed could increase rates, which are near zero, by half a percentage points at some meetings.“We will use our policy tools as appropriate to prevent higher inflation from becoming entrenched while promoting a sustainable expansion and a strong labor market,” Mr. Powell said.Drivers fueled up last month in Brooklyn. Economists have said the war in Ukraine is likely to push gas and other commodity prices higher.Amir Hamja for The New York TimesHis testimony underscored the tense political and economic moment that confronts the Fed — and policymakers across Washington — as a war rages overseas and inflation dominates headlines and spooks consumers at home.Today’s economy does have many bright spots, which Mr. Powell emphasized: Growth has been stronger than in many other advanced economies, and jobs are plentiful, creating opportunities for workers.“The labor market is extremely tight,” Mr. Powell said. He added that “employers are having difficulties filling job openings, an unprecedented number of workers are quitting to take new jobs and wages are rising at their fastest pace in many years.”Inflation F.A.Q.Card 1 of 6What is inflation? More

  • 125 Shares119 Views

    in Economy

    Biden’s Fed Nominees Are Frozen as One Faces Republican Questions

    by

    Sarah Bloom Raskin, his choice for the Federal Reserve’s head of bank oversight, has faced staunch G.O.P. opposition over her climate views. Yet her private sector work is holding up her nomination.President Biden’s nominee for the top banking cop at the Federal Reserve was expected to face Republican backlash over her views on how finance should guard against climate change and her preference for tough regulation.She has. But it is Sarah Bloom Raskin’s tenure on the board of a financial technology company that has given Republicans a cudgel that they are trying to use to quash her nomination.Senate Republicans are preventing a vote on Ms. Raskin, a former Fed governor and Treasury official during the Obama administration, as they press for answers about whether she used her central bank connections to help the company, Reserve Trust, gain access to a lucrative Fed account in 2018. They have boycotted her nomination, refusing to show up to vote on it until she provides more details.By holding Ms. Raskin’s nomination hostage, Republicans on the Senate Banking Committee are also preventing Mr. Biden’s four other Fed nominees from advancing since Democrats have grouped the officials together. That includes the renomination of Jerome H. Powell, the Fed chair, who testified before lawmakers on Wednesday and was set to return on Thursday.Senator Sherrod Brown, Democrat of Ohio and the head of the committee, plans to try to hold another vote on Ms. Raskin and the other nominees as soon as possible, a spokesperson for the committee said Tuesday.“This is not the moment for political stunts,” Mr. Brown said on the Senate floor this week.Democrats have dismissed the opposition to Ms. Raskin as politically opportunistic and baseless, a crude attempt to tank a candidate whom bank-friendly Republicans dislike for her views on regulation. Senator Patrick J. Toomey, the Pennsylvania Republican who is leading the effort to kill her nomination, opposed Ms. Raskin from the outset because of her climate views.But interviews and nomination filings suggest that Ms. Raskin may not have been entirely forthcoming about what role she played in helping Reserve Trust secure its sought-after Fed account. She may have leveraged her connection to the Fed to try to help the company, whose board she sat on between 2017 and 2019.Ethics experts said that even if she had petitioned on the company’s behalf, that was likely neither illegal nor against ethics rules. But when questioned, Ms. Raskin has repeatedly said she does not remember what happened.Republicans have blasted Ms. Raskin’s lack of responsiveness and highlighted her payout from the firm, suggesting that she may have benefited financially from helping the company, taking part in the revolving door that many Democrats have denounced. She sold her stock for $1.5 million in 2020.The White House continues to support Ms. Raskin. Michael Gwin, an administration spokesman, said she had “earned widespread support in the face of an unprecedented, baseless campaign that seeks to tarnish her distinguished career in public service and her commitment to upholding the highest ethical standards any administration has ever put forward.”But the controversy surrounding her nomination could prove uncomfortable for Democrats, who are trying to prevent regulators from so frequently leaving the government to advise the sort of companies they once policed. “The Republicans do this all the time because they are seen as the party of business,” said Meredith McGehee, a longtime Washington ethics expert. “The vulnerability is that here you have a Democrat who’s in this position that’s in conflict with the rhetoric of the Democratic Party.”The issue centers on a wonky but increasingly important corner of finance.Ms. Raskin started on the board of Reserve Trust, a Colorado-based trust company that now calls itself a financial technology firm, shortly after leaving a top role at the Treasury Department in 2017. From 2010 to 2014, she served as a Fed governor.When she joined the board, the Kansas City Fed had recently rejected the firm’s first application for a so-called master account with the central bank. Such accounts allow firms to tap the Fed’s payment infrastructure, enabling them to carry out services for clients without relying on an external partner. They are hot commodities, and nonbank financial firms often strive but struggle to qualify for them.To qualify for the account, the firm changed its business model and reapplied in 2017.Dennis Gingold, a founder of Reserve Trust who was a longtime acquaintance of Ms. Raskin’s and who has donated to the political campaigns of her husband, Representative Jamie Raskin of Maryland, said in an interview that he had helped to bring Ms. Raskin to the company.Mr. Gingold said Ms. Raskin had called the Fed about the master account at his behest, because he was worried that the central bank was not giving the reapplication a fair consideration. From his Washington office, she phoned Esther George, the Kansas City Fed president. The call lasted two minutes and was “insignificant,” Mr. Gingold said, noting that Ms. Raskin simply “asked that the decision be made on the facts.”Mr. Gingold said he could not remember the date of the call. Mr. Toomey has said staff at the Kansas City Fed told his office that a call between Ms. Raskin and Ms. George happened in August 2017.Mr. Gingold does not know what led the Fed to approve the account, which he said it did in mid-2018, noting that it happened months later and after what he described as an opaque process.No evidence has suggested that Ms. Raskin’s intervention was the decisive factor in the approval, and the Kansas City Fed has issued a statement saying it followed its usual practices in approving the account in 2018.The account does appear to have been lucrative: Reserve Trust still prominently advertises its rare access.When another company took over the firm in 2020, it paid $7.50 per share for it — which was how Ms. Raskin made money from the company. Mr. Gingold said that Ms. Raskin had been given shares from his portfolio, and that he believed she acquired them in January 2018, which would have been after the reported call with Ms. George. She did not receive director’s compensation, as other board members did, he said.Nothing that happened obviously conflicted with ethics rules, experts said. The trouble for Democrats is that many of the details that have emerged either conflict with things Ms. Raskin has said or provide answers to questions that she did not respond to in her filings or confirmation hearing.In Ms. Raskin’s written responses to senators’ questions, she said that she could not recall who had recruited her to Reserve Trust’s board and that to the best of her recollection she had “received shares in Reserve Trust upon joining” the board. She did “not recall any communications I made to help Reserve Trust obtain a master account,” she said.“Based on what is in the public now, I think she complied with the relevant rules,” said Kedric Payne, senior director of ethics at the Campaign Legal Center. “The practical point is: Even if there’s no legal violation, the public wants to know if there is full transparency there.”Seats for Republican senators were empty last week on Capitol Hill during a scheduled vote on Ms. Raskin’s nomination.Sarahbeth Maney/The New York TimesRepublicans have pointed out that Ms. Raskin and her husband have also repeatedly failed to disclose her involvement with Reserve Trust on government filings.Ms. Raskin left her Reserve Trust service off her original questionnaire to the Senate Banking Committee, according to a Republican committee aide, though she did note her sale of Reserve Trust shares in her simultaneously filed financial disclosures to the Office of Government Ethics.Mr. Raskin failed to note the Reserve Trust shares on his financial filings in 2018 and 2019, and disclosed the 2020 share sale eight months late. He has attributed the late 2020 filing to a family tragedy — the Raskins’ son died by suicide on Dec. 31, 2020. The lawmaker’s office, when asked by email, did not explain why the shares were left off the earlier disclosures.If Ms. Raskin leveraged Fed connections, that would not have been unusual: People often profit from prior government positions. But the situation could look bad, as both the Biden administration and Senator Elizabeth Warren, a Massachusetts Democrat and one of Ms. Raskin’s champions on Capitol Hill, try to put a lock — or at least a temporary stopper — on the revolving door between Washington and Wall Street.Ms. Raskin has signed an ethics pledge that Ms. Warren asked all Fed nominees to sign, which would prevent her from working in financial services for four years after she left the Fed if confirmed to her new post.If Ms. Raskin’s nomination does come up for a vote, it “could be an issue,” said Ian Katz at Capital Alpha, a Washington research firm. “If it’s a close call and there are any questions of propriety, sure, it could sway a senator. We just don’t know that yet.” More

  • 125 Shares129 Views

    in Economy

    U.S. Eases Sanctions to Allow Routine Transactions With Afghan Government

    by

    The move allows financial dealings with civil servants at government institutions, even if those ministries are now overseen by Taliban members.WASHINGTON — The Biden administration moved on Friday to relax sanctions that have contributed to the collapse of Afghanistan’s economy since the Taliban takeover in August, issuing a measure that makes clear that people can lawfully engage in transactions with the Afghan government in most circumstances.The measure, known as a general license and announced by the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control, says that people can lawfully transfer money to civil servants in government agencies — including ministries now led by Taliban officials. The move covers transactions like taxes, fees, import duties and the purchase or receipt of permits, licenses or public utility services.In a statement, Wally Adeyemo, the deputy Treasury secretary, portrayed the move as part of a larger effort by the United States to not just support the flow of humanitarian aid to Afghanistan, but also to facilitate commercial and financial activity there that could allow the economy to function — without directly benefiting Islamist extremists.“In light of this dire crisis, it is essential that we address concerns that sanctions inhibit commercial and financial activity while we continue to deny financial resources to the Taliban, the Haqqani network and other malign actors,” he said.The measure appeared aimed at making it harder to blame the United States government’s sanctions for the unfolding economic disaster in Afghanistan. The economic situation is creating a humanitarian crisis, including widespread starvation, that is spurring a huge wave of migrants to leave the country.The malnutrition ward of the Indira Gandhi Children’s Hospital in Kabul last month.Jim Huylebroek for The New York TimesA senior Biden administration official, speaking on the condition of anonymity in a background briefing for reporters, cautioned that many other factors were contributing to the economic collapse in Afghanistan. Those include the abrupt cutoff of huge amounts of Western foreign aid that had paid for government salaries and infrastructure projects, as well as the exodus of technocrats and others with special expertise after the Taliban swept into control.In a statement describing the move, the Treasury Department also emphasized that theme.“While sanctions relief alone cannot reverse longstanding structural challenges and the flight of technocratic and government experts due to the Taliban’s mismanagement, it can ensure that sanctions do not prevent economic activity that the people of Afghanistan rely on to meet their most fundamental needs,” it said.The general license excludes doing business with any entity in which the Taliban or the Haqqani network owns a majority interest. It also does not permit payments related to luxury items or services.The Afghan central bank, known as Da Afghanistan Bank or D.A.B., is among the governing institutions that will face fewer obstacles under the measure. The central bank had formerly propped up the value of the Afghan currency by regularly auctioning United States dollars.That activity has ceased, and the value of the Afghan currency has plunged — making food too expensive for many poor Afghans to buy. At the same time, a currency shortage has led to limits on how much those Afghans who have bank accounts may withdraw from them.Many officials from the bank fled in August, and the Taliban has installed its own leaders to oversee it. But in the briefing, a senior administration official said the U.S. government had been exploring ideas for restarting some normal central bank activities if it can be made truly independent, with controls to prevent money laundering and third-party monitoring. The official said much of whether that could be done was in the hands of the Taliban.The notion of potentially trying to resuscitate Afghanistan’s central bank is in some tension with a move this month by the Biden administration regarding about $7 billion the central bank has deposited at the Federal Reserve Bank in New York, money whose fate has been a major focus since the Taliban takeover.When the government of Afghanistan dissolved, the bank made those funds unavailable for withdrawal. The Taliban have since claimed a right to them, while relatives of people killed in the Sept. 11 attacks are trying to seize the funds to pay off the Taliban’s default judgment debts to them from lawsuits they had brought against the Taliban, Al Qaeda and others.On Feb. 11, the Biden administration moved to split those funds in half — in a way that would potentially leave the bank decapitalized. Mr. Biden invoked emergency powers to try to move $3.5 billion into a fund that will be used for the benefit of the Afghan people. The administration left the remaining money for the Sept. 11 plaintiffs to continue pursuing in court.It will be up to a judge to decide whether those funds can be lawfully used to pay off the Taliban’s judgment debts, a question that raises several thorny and unresolved legal issues.The Treasury Department noted that nothing in the new general license “affects the property or interests in property of Da Afghanistan Bank that are protectively blocked” pursuant to Mr. Biden’s recent action. More

  • 163 Shares179 Views

    in Economy

    A Key Inflation Gauge Is Still Rising, and War Could Make It Worse

    by

    A measure of inflation closely watched by the Federal Reserve is expected to show that prices continued to rise in January, accelerating on a monthly basis and increasing from a year earlier at the fastest pace since 1982.Economists expect that the Personal Consumption Expenditures index, which the Fed targets as it aims for 2 percent annual inflation on average over time, rose 6 percent from the previous January. Prices probably climbed 0.6 percent from December, up from 0.4 percent the prior month, based on the central estimate in a Bloomberg survey.The Commerce Department will release the data at 8:30 a.m. on Friday.High inflation remains stubborn at a tense moment. With consumers already struggling with rising costs, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine this week promises to push inflation even higher as prices for oil and other commodities increase.The Fed has been preparing to steadily pull back its pandemic-era economic support in an effort to cool off consumer demand and tame prices. The White House is monitoring inflation closely as rising prices for food, rent and gas shake consumer confidence and dent President Biden’s approval ratings ahead of midterm elections in November.The fresh inflation reading won’t surprise economists or policymakers — the Personal Consumption Expenditures number is fairly predictable because it is based on Consumer Price Index figures that come out more quickly, along with other already available data. But it will reaffirm that price increases, which were expected to prove temporary as the pandemic economy reopened, have instead lasted almost an entire year and seeped into areas not affected by the coronavirus.Price increases have hit a wide array of products and services, including used cars, beef, chicken, restaurant meals and home furnishings, and several trends risk keeping inflation elevated. Notably, wages are rising rapidly, and employers are finding that they can pass their climbing labor costs along to shoppers.Grocery shopping in Queens this month. Price increases are sweeping a growing array of products and services, and several trends could keep them elevated.Amir Hamja for The New York TimesEconomists are also warily eyeing the conflict in Ukraine, which has already caused oil and gas prices to rise and is likely to push commodity costs higher still.Researchers at Goldman Sachs estimate that an increase of $10 per barrel of oil would increase headline inflation in the United States by a fifth of a percentage point while lowering economic output by just under a tenth of a percentage point.Brent crude oil, the global benchmark, rose as much as 6 percent to more than $100 per barrel after Russia invaded Ukraine and could climb further as Russia reacts to sanctions from the United States and Europe. Russia is a major exporter of energy to Europe.“Potentially, Russia could retaliate by limiting oil exports,” Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy, said on Thursday. Prices at the pump are likely to reflect repercussions from the conflict almost immediately, he said.Russia’s Attack on Ukraine and the Global EconomyCard 1 of 6A rising concern. More

  • 125 Shares129 Views

    in Economy

    Federal Reserve Isn't Likely to Change Course After Ukraine Invasion

    by

    Federal Reserve officials are turning a wary eye to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, though several have signaled in recent days that geopolitical tensions are unlikely to keep them from pulling back their support for the U.S. economy when the job market is booming and prices are climbing rapidly.Stock indexes are swooning, and the prices of key commodities — including oil and gas — have risen sharply and could continue to rise as Russia, a major producer, responds to American and European sanctions.That makes the invasion a complicated risk for the Fed: On one hand, its fallout is likely to further push up price inflation, which is already running at its fastest pace in 40 years. On the other, it could weigh on growth if stock prices continue to plummet and nervous consumers in Europe and the United States pull back from spending.The magnitude of the potential economic hit is far from certain, and for now, central bank officials have signaled that they will remain on track to raise interest rates from near zero in a series of increases starting next month, a policy path that will make borrowing money more expensive and cool down the economy.Loretta Mester, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, said during a speech on Thursday that she still expected it “will be appropriate to move the funds rate up in March and follow with further increases in the coming months.”But she noted that the invasion could inform how quickly the Fed moved over a longer time frame.“The implications of the unfolding situation in Ukraine for the medium-run economic outlook in the U.S. will also be a consideration in determining the appropriate pace at which to remove accommodation,” Ms. Mester said.Her comments were in line with those that many of her colleagues have made this week, including on Thursday after the invasion: Central bankers are monitoring the situation, but with inflation rapid and likely to head higher yet, they are not preparing to cancel their plans to pull back economic support.“I see the geopolitical situation, unless it would deteriorate substantially, as part of the larger uncertainty that we face in the United States and our U.S. economy,” Mary C. Daly, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, said Wednesday at an event hosted by the Los Angeles World Affairs Council. “We’ll have to navigate that as we go forward.”But Ms. Daly said she did not “see anything right now” that would disrupt the Fed’s plan to lift interest rates.Thomas Barkin, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, said during an appearance Thursday that “time will tell” if the policy path needed to adjust. Raphael Bostic, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, said during a separate speech on Thursday that it was not his baseline expectation that the Ukraine conflict would affect the timing of the central bank’s first rate increase.Even if it is not enough to shake the Fed from its course, some analysts are warning that the fallout of the conflict could be meaningful.“Normally geopolitical crises ultimately turn out to be a fade for financial markets and a buying opportunity for investors willing to look past the headlines,” Krishna Guha at Evercore ISI wrote in a research note Thursday morning. “We are very wary of taking that line today.”Mr. Guha noted that the invasion could disrupt the post-Cold War world order and warned that the jump in energy prices and fallout from sanctions “will complicate the ability of central banks on both sides of the Atlantic to engineer a soft landing from the pandemic inflation surge.”Economists have been warning that a “soft landing” — in which central banks guide the economy onto a sustainable path without causing a recession — might be difficult to achieve when prices have taken off and monetary policies across much of Europe and North America may need to readjust substantially.“The shock of war adds to the enormous challenges facing central banks worldwide,” Isabel Schnabel, an executive board member at the European Central Bank, said during a Bank of England event on Thursday. She added that policymakers were monitoring the situation in Ukraine “very closely.”Inflation is high around much of the world, and though it is slightly less pronounced in Europe, and E.C.B. policymakers are reacting more slowly to it than some of their global counterparts, recent high readings there have prompted some officials to edge toward policy changes.In America, the Fed has sometimes reacted to global problems by cutting borrowing costs, making money cheaper and easier to obtain, rather than by lifting interest rates and making credit conditions tighter. But economists said this time was likely to be different.Russia’s Attack on Ukraine and the Global EconomyCard 1 of 6A rising concern. More