Prices (Fares, Fees and Rates)

More stories

  • 113 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Inflation Is Still High. What’s Driving It Has Changed.

    by

    Two years ago, high inflation was about supply shortages and pricier goods. Then it was about war in Ukraine and energy. These days, services are key.America is now two years into abnormally high inflation — and while the nation appears to be past the worst phase of the biggest spike in price increases in half a century, the road back to normal is a long and uncertain one.The pop in prices over the 24 months that ended in March eroded wage gains, burdened consumers and spurred a Federal Reserve response that has the potential to cause a recession.What generated the painful inflation, and what comes next? A look through the data reveals a situation that arose from pandemic disruptions and the government’s response, was worsened by the war in Ukraine and is now cooling as supply problems clear up and the economy slows. But it also illustrates that U.S. inflation today is drastically different from the price increases that first appeared in 2021, driven by stubborn price increases for services like airfare and child care instead of by the cost of goods.Fresh wage and price data set for release on Friday are expected to show continued evidence of slow and steady moderation in March. Now Fed officials must judge whether the cool-down is happening fast enough to assure them that inflation will promptly return to normal — a focus when the central bank releases its next interest rate decision on Wednesday.Inflation Is Slowly Coming DownYear-over-year percentage change in the Consumer Price Index

    Sources: Bureau of Labor Statistics; New York Fed’s Global Supply Chain Pressure IndexBy The New York TimesThe Fed aims for 2 percent inflation on average over time using the Personal Consumption Expenditures index, which will be released on Friday. That figure pulls some of its data from the Consumer Price Index report, which was released two weeks ago and offered a clear picture of the recent inflation trajectory.Before the pandemic, inflation hovered around 2 percent as measured by the overall Consumer Price Index and by a “core” measure that strips out food and fuel prices to get a clearer sense of the underlying trend. It dropped sharply at the pandemic’s start in early 2020 as people stayed home and stopped spending money, then rebounded starting in March 2021.Some of that initial pop was due to a “base effect.” Fresh inflation data were being measured against pandemic-depressed numbers from the year before, which made the new figures look elevated. But by the end of summer 2021, it was clear that something more fundamental was happening with prices.Demand for goods was unusually high: Families had more money than usual after months at home and repeated stimulus checks, and they were spending it on cars, couches and deck furniture. At the same time, the pandemic had shut down many factories, limiting how much supply the world’s companies could churn out. Shipping costs surged, goods shortages mounted, and the prices of physical purchases from appliances to cars jumped.Higher Prices for Services Are Now Driving InflationBreakdown of the inflation rate, by category

    Note: The services category excludes energy services, and the goods category excludes food and energy goods.Sources: Bureau of Labor Statistics; New York Times analysisBy The New York TimesBy late 2021, a second trend was also getting started. Services costs, which include nonphysical purchases like tutoring and tax preparation, had begun to climb quickly.As with goods prices, that tied back to the strong demand. Because households were in good spending shape, landlords, child care providers and restaurants could charge more without losing customers.Across the economy, firms seized the moment to pad their bottom lines; profit margins soared in late 2021 before moderating late last year.Businesses were also covering their growing costs. Wages had started to climb more quickly than usual, which meant that corporate labor bills were swelling.Pay Has Climbed Quickly, but Not as Fast as PricesYear-over-year percentage change in the Employment Cost Index, a measure of labor costs, and the Consumer Price Index, a measure of living costs

    Note: The Consumer Price Index is reported monthly. The Employment Cost Index is reported quarterly and is as of Q4 2022. Early 2023 data is a Goldman Sachs forecast.Source: Bureau of Labor StatisticsBy The New York TimesFed officials had expected goods shortages to fade, but the combination of faster inflation for services and accelerating wage growth captured their attention.Even if pay gains had not been the original cause of inflation, policymakers were concerned that it would be difficult for price increases to return to a normal pace with pay rates rising briskly. Companies, they thought, would keep raising prices to pass on those labor expenses.Worried central bankers started raising interest rates in March 2022 to hit the brakes on growth by making it more expensive to borrow to buy a car or house or expand a business. The goal was to slow the labor market and make it harder for firms to raise prices. In just over a year, they lifted rates to nearly 5 percent — the fastest adjustment since the 1980s.Yet in early 2022, Fed policy started fighting yet another force stoking inflation. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine that February caused food and fuel prices to surge. Between that and the cost increases in goods and services, overall inflation reached its highest peak since the 1980s: about 9 percent in July.In the months since, inflation has slowed as cost increases for energy and goods have cooled. But food prices are still climbing swiftly, and — crucially — cost increases in services remain rapid.In fact, services prices are now the very center of the inflation story.They could soon start to fade in one key area. Housing costs have been picking up quickly for months, but rent increases have recently slowed in real-time private sector data. That is expected to feed into official inflation numbers by later this year.That has left policymakers focused on other services, which span an array of purchases including medical care, car repairs and many vacation expenses. How quickly those prices — often called “core services ex-housing” — can retreat will determine whether and when inflation can return to normal.Excluding Housing Costs, Prices of Core Services Are RisingYear-over-year percentage change in the Consumer Price Index for services, stripping out housing and energy costs

    Sources: Bureau of Labor Statistics; New York Times analysisBy The New York TimesNow, Fed officials will have to assess whether the economy is poised to slow enough to bring down the cost of those critical services.Between the central bank’s rate moves and recent banking turmoil, some officials think that it may be. Policymakers projected in March that they would raise interest rates just once more in 2023, a move that is widely expected at their meeting next week.But market watchers will listen intently when Jerome H. Powell, the Fed chair, gives his postmeeting news conference. He could offer hints at whether officials think the inflation saga is heading for a speedy conclusion — or another chapter.Ben Casselman More

  • 75 Shares179 Views

    in Economy

    America’s Inflation Antihero Gets a Makeover

    by

    As the Fed fights inflation with a wary eye on the 1970s, some are arguing that Arthur Burns, the Fed chair at the time, gets too bad a rap.The years have not been kind to Arthur Burns, who led the Federal Reserve from 1970 to 1978 and is often remembered as perhaps the worst chair ever to head America’s central bank. His poor policy decisions, critics say, allowed inflation in the 1970s to jump out of control.Chris Hughes thinks he deserves another look. Mr. Hughes, 39, is a newly accepted doctoral student focused on central bank history at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. This is a third career for Mr. Hughes, who was Mark Zuckerberg’s college roommate and a founder of Facebook, a first act that left him with a personal fortune estimated to total hundreds of millions of dollars.Mr. Hughes then bought and for four years served as publisher of The New Republic, the liberal magazine. Starting this fall, he will spend his days studying the law and politics of central bank development and writing a book on the history of financial markets and politics.As a person who knows something about reinvention, Mr. Hughes thinks Mr. Burns should get one, too.He wrote a 6,000-word article for the journal Democracy on how America has misunderstood the former Fed chair, made the argument on NPR’s Planet Money and is now taking his spiel to academic gatherings.His point? He thinks Mr. Burns is portrayed in ways that are unfair to him — and which may offer the wrong lessons as America approaches the inflation burdening the rest of us at the grocery store, used car lot and day-care center today.Mr. Burns is frequently remembered in central banking and economic circles as a weak leader who failed to lift interest rates enough to control inflation because he feared harming the economy too much; Mr. Hughes and other Burns revisionists — a small but growing group of historians and economists who don’t necessarily love him, but do think he got an unfair rap — see him as someone who tried to balance concerns about hurting workers with a dedication to slowing down price increases. History often paints him as a political shill; the contrarians argue that he saw controlling inflation as a project that the Fed and elected officials in the White House and Congress could and should share.And because Mr. Burns gets blamed, without much nuance, for his failure to contain inflation, Mr. Hughes thinks that people miss the possible virtues of his more complicated view of price increases — as a problem that required multiple players, alongside the Fed, to successfully tackle.“I think he’s easily weaponized,” Mr. Hughes said in an interview. “The caricature is worth revisiting.”Mr. Burns plays the role of antihero in most stories about the Great Inflation of the 1970s — tales that are repeated often in academic circles and the news media as a warning about what not to do.Mr. Burns, a conservative economist, presided over rate increases during the 1970s, but he never pushed them far enough to bring inflation under control. And he may have pursued that start-and-stop approach partly because he was bending to political pressure.Richard Nixon with Arthur Burns in 1968. In the run-up to the 1972 election, President Nixon, who appointed Mr. Burns as Fed chair, urged him to cut rates.Associated PressPresident Richard Nixon, who appointed Mr. Burns as Fed chair, wanted him to cut rates in the run-up to the 1972 election. In taped conversations, Nixon urged Mr. Burns to push the Fed’s policy committee to lower borrowing costs.“Just kick ’em in the rump a little,” Nixon was recorded saying. Fed officials did cut rates in the latter part of 1971.Inflation deepened as the Fed’s rate moves remained more dawdling than decisive, and Mr. Burns’s name eventually became synonymous with bad central banking: irresolute and politicized. He remains the key historical foil to Paul Volcker, Fed chair from 1979 to 1987, who pushed interest rates up to nearly 20 percent in 1981, crashed the economy into a deep recession and ultimately saw price increases cool. Mr. Volcker, hated by many in his time, is now recalled as an almost heroic figure.The parable of Mr. Burns and Mr. Volcker retains a powerful hold today, as the Fed contends with the first major burst of inflation since the 1970s and ’80s. Fed officials regularly emphasize that they view a noncommittal approach to raising interest rates to slow the economy and choke off inflation — Mr. Burns’s style — as a mistake.Meanwhile, Mr. Volcker described his own approach as one of “keeping at it.” Jerome H. Powell, the current Fed chair, has echoed that phrase aspirationally.It is not clear whether the Fed would pursue a strategy just like Mr. Volcker’s. Mr. Powell has publicly noted that today’s circumstances differ from those of the 1970s. Nor do officials plan to push rates to the double-digit heights they reached in 1981 and 1982. But Mr. Volcker’s policies came at such a cost to workers, pushing unemployment up to a staggering 10.8 percent, that mere admiration of his approach has been enough to stir concern among some liberal economists and historians.Mr. Hughes agrees that rate increases have been necessary, but he is also pushing for a more detailed reading of Mr. Burns’ legacy. He has spent the past four years researching central bank history, including as a graduate student of economics at the New School in New York City, where he lives with his husband — a former Democratic congressional candidate — and their two children. He remains a senior fellow at the Institute on Race, Power and Political Economy at the New School.Chris Hughes, a doctoral student on Fed history at Wharton, wrote a 6,000-word journal article defending Mr. Burns’s actions as Fed chair.Gili Benita for The New York TimesHis own rapid jump from an adolescence in North Carolina’s middle class to a young adulthood at the upper end of the Bay Area elite, one that pushed his net worth to just shy of $500 million before his 30th birthday, piqued his interested in the design of the nation’s economic system — in particular, how it intersects with government policy and how it allows immense inequality.Perhaps no part of that design is more complicated, or less well understood, than the Fed. “Some are looking at Burns as an example of what not to do,” said Mr. Hughes, who quickly became intrigued by the 1970s. “But I think that’s not necessarily right.”Tradeoffs between inflation and employment could be particularly stark in the coming months. Officials have rapidly lifted their main policy rate over the past year to nearly 5 percent. At their upcoming meeting in May or shortly thereafter, central bankers are poised to wrestle with when they ought to stop raising interest rates.And as 2023 progresses and growth slows, unemployment is expected to rise. Policymakers will most likely need to decide how they want to strike the balance between fostering a strong job market and controlling inflation in a slowing economy. Should policymakers keep rates high even if unemployment rises substantially?Mr. Burns avoided punishingly high rates for reasons beyond his politics, Mr. Hughes and those who agree with him argue. While he deeply hated inflation, he blamed supply-related forces, including union bargaining power, for the jump in prices. The Fed’s tools affect mostly demand, so he thought other parts of the government could do a better job of tackling those forces. Relying on rates alone to fully control inflation would come at an untenable economic cost.He was working from “a place of ideological conviction,” Mr. Hughes said.Still, many economists think Mr. Burns deserves his bad reputation, whatever his motivations.Because his Fed took so long to control inflation, households and businesses came to expect fast price increases in the future, said Donald Kohn, a former Fed vice chair who worked at a regional Fed during the Burns era. That changed consumer and corporate behavior — people asked for bigger raises and companies instituted regular price jumps.As that happened, inflation became a more permanent feature of daily life, making it harder to stamp out. If Mr. Burns hadn’t let inflation spin so far out of control, this argument goes, Mr. Volcker might never have needed to cause such a painful recession to tame it.Paul Volcker, the Fed chair from 1979 to 1987, raised interest rates to nearly 20 percent in 1981, crashing the economy into a deep recession.Chick Harrity/Associated Press“It felt like he was trying to find a way to bring down inflation without paying the price — and it just wasn’t possible,” said Mr. Kohn, who remembered Mr. Burns as an “autocratic” leader who did not accept differing views from the Fed’s research staff.“The Fed was dealt a bad hand and played it poorly,” he added.When Mr. Burns’s reputation went down in flames, so did the idea that controlling inflation should be a joint effort of the Fed, Congress and the White House. Since Mr. Volcker’s stand, inflation has been seen, first and foremost, as the central bank’s problem.Many economists see the Fed’s independence from politics and clear focus on controlling prices as a feature, not a bug: Someone now stands ready to promptly clamp down on price increases. Economists even argue that today’s Fed won’t have to act like Mr. Volcker specifically because it will not act like Mr. Burns.Yet skeptics of Mr. Volcker’s economic shock treatment have pointed out that he partly got lucky. Oil embargoes that had pushed inflation much higher eased during his tenure.Given the towering costs Mr. Volcker’s policies inflicted on workers, some are asking: Even if it failed to stem inflation, is it fair to conclude that everything about Mr. Burns’s approach was wrong?“Our simple story about what happened makes it harder to see the complexities of what is happening now,” said Lev Menand, who researches money and central banking at Columbia Law School.Mr. Hughes argued in his essay published last fall that modern policymakers could learn from Mr. Burns’s cross-government collaboration. Raising taxes, revising zoning rules, and other frequent Democratic priorities could help temper price increases, he thinks.Other suggestions for government intervention to tame price increases have gone even further: Isabella Weber, an economist at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, has suggested that price and wage controls should be reconsidered. Their design and implementation in the 1970s did not work, but that does not mean they never could.But such interventions — even if successful, which is far from assured — would take time. The way today’s central bankers understand Mr. Burns as disaster and Mr. Volcker as savior could matter more immediately.And while Peter Conti-Brown, a Fed historian at Wharton and Mr. Hughes’s thesis adviser, said he thought Mr. Burns deserved most of the blame he received for failing to control inflation, he also thought it was possible that Mr. Volcker had been improperly lionized.To foster both maximum employment and stable inflation — the Fed’s twin jobs — is a balancing act, and to do it requires acting like neither Mr. Volcker, with his firm concentration on inflation, nor Mr. Burns, with his yielding one, he said.“I think in the history of central banking, there are few if any heroes,” Mr. Conti-Brown said. “There are also few if any villains.” More

  • 163 Shares129 Views

    in Economy

    Wages May Not Be Inflation’s Cause, but They’re the Focus of the Cure

    by

    While fear of a “wage-price spiral” has eased, the Federal Reserve’s course presumes job losses and risks a recession. Some see less painful remedies.As Covid-19 eased its debilitating grip on the U.S. economy two years ago, businesses scrambled to hire. That lifted the pay of the average worker. But as one economic challenge ended, another potential problem emerged.Many economic analysts feared that a wage-price spiral was forming, with employers trying to recover the higher labor costs by increasing prices, and workers in turn continually ratcheting up their pay to make up for inflation’s erosion of their buying power.As wages and prices have risen at the fastest pace in decades, however, it has not been an evenly matched back and forth. Inflation has outstripped wage growth for 22 consecutive months, as calculated by economists at J.P. Morgan.That has prompted economists to debate how much, if at all, pay has driven the current bout of inflation. As recently as November, the Federal Reserve chair, Jerome H. Powell, said at a news conference, “I don’t think wages are the principal story for why prices are going up.”At the same time, influential voices on Wall Street and in Washington are arguing over whether workers’ earnings growth — which, on average, has already slowed — will need to let up further if inflation is to ease to a rate that policymakers find tolerable.Wage growth has not kept up with inflationYear-over-year percentage change in earnings vs. inflation through February More

  • 113 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    The Fed’s Preferred Inflation Gauge Cooled Notably in February

    by

    A closely watched measure of price increases provided encouraging news as the Fed considers when to stop raising rates.The measure of inflation most closely watched by the Federal Reserve slowed substantially in February, an encouraging sign for policymakers as they consider whether to raise interest rates further to slow the economy and bring price increases under control.The Personal Consumption Expenditures Index cooled to 5 percent on an annual basis in February, down from 5.3 percent in January and slightly lower than economists in a Bloomberg survey had forecast. It was the lowest reading for the measure since September 2021.After the removal of food and fuel prices, which are volatile from month to month, a “core” measure that tries to gauge underlying inflation trends also cooled more than expected on both an annual and a monthly basis.The data provides the latest evidence that inflation has turned a corner and is decelerating, though the process is gradual and bumpy at times. And the report is one of many that Fed officials will take into account as they approach their next interest rate decision, on May 3.Central bankers are watching how inflation, the labor market and consumer spending shape up. They will be monitoring financial markets and credit measures, too, to get a sense of how significantly recent bank failures are likely to weigh on lending, which could slow the economy.Fed officials have raised rates rapidly over the past year to try to rein in inflation, pushing them from near zero a year ago to just below 5 percent this month. But policymakers have suggested that they are nearing the end, forecasting just one more rate increase this year.Jerome H. Powell, the Fed chair, hinted that officials could stop adjusting policy altogether if the problems in the banking sector weighed on the economy significantly enough, and policymakers this week have reiterated that they are watching closely to see how the banking problems impact the broader economy.“I will be particularly focused on assessing the evolution of credit conditions and their effects on the outlook for growth, employment and inflation,” John C. Williams, the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, said during a speech on Friday.But inflation remains unusually rapid: While it is slowing, it is still more than double the Fed’s 2 percent target. And the turmoil at banks seems to be abating, with government officials in recent days saying that deposit flows have stabilized.“Even with this report, the U.S. macro data is still on a stronger and hotter trajectory than appeared to be the case at the start of this year,” Krishna Guha, head of the global policy and central bank strategy team at Evercore ISI, wrote in a note after the release.In fact, officials speaking this week have suggested that they might need to do more to wrangle price increases, and they have pushed back on market speculation that they could lower rates this year.“Inflation remains too high, and recent indicators reinforce my view that there is more work to do,” Susan Collins, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, said at a speech on Thursday. Ms. Collins does not vote on policy this year.The report on Friday also showed that consumer spending eased in February from the previous month. A measure of personal spending that is adjusted for inflation fell by 0.1 percent, matching what economists expected. But the data was revised up for January, suggesting that consumer spending climbed more rapidly than previously understood at the start of the year.And when it comes to prices, some economists warned against taking the February slowdown as a sign that the problem of rapid increases was close to being solved. A measure of inflation that excludes housing and energy — which the Fed monitors closely — has been firm in recent months.“That acceleration in underlying inflation measures is what has set off alarm bells at the Federal Reserve and prompted officials to stick to rate hikes, despite the recent credit market volatility,” Diane Swonk, chief economist at KPMG, wrote in an analysis Friday.And Omair Sharif, founder of Inflation Insights, said much of the February slowdown came from price categories that are estimated using statistical techniques — and that can sometimes give a poor signal of the true trend.“I really would not bank on this number,” he said in an interview. “My expectation would be that we’ll probably see some of this bounce back next month.” More

  • 150 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    Jobs Report Gives Fed a Mixed Signal Ahead of Its March Decision

    by

    The Federal Reserve is anxiously parsing incoming data as it decides between a small or a large rate move this month.Federal Reserve officials received a complicated signal from February’s employment report, which showed that job growth retained substantial momentum nearly a year into the central bank’s campaign to slow the economy and cool rapid inflation. But it also included details hinting that the softening the Fed has been trying to achieve may be coming.Policymakers have raised interest rates from near zero to above 4.5 percent over the past year, and Jerome H. Powell, the Fed chair, signaled this week that the size of the central bank’s March 22 rate move would hinge on the strength of incoming data — making Friday’s employment report a critical focal point for investors.But the figures painted a complicated picture. Employers added 311,000 workers last month, which were more than the 225,000 expected and a sign that the pace of hiring has cooled little, if at all, over the past year. At the same time, wage growth moderated to its slowest monthly pace since February 2022, and the unemployment rate ticked up slightly.“It’s exactly what I wasn’t hoping for, which is a mixed report,” said Michael Feroli, chief U.S. economist at J.P. Morgan.That makes determining the Fed’s next steps more challenging.Officials raised rates in large three-quarter-point increments four times in 2022, making borrowing sharply more expensive in hopes of restraining a hot economy. But they had been slowing the pace of adjustment for months, stepping down to half a point in December and a quarter point in February. Policymakers thought they had reached the point where interest rates were high enough to significantly cool the economy, so they expected to soon stop raising rates and simply hold them at a high level for a while.But data from early 2023 have surprised the central bank. The labor market, inflation and consumer spending all showed unexpected signs of strength, which made policymakers question whether they might need to raise rates by more — or even return to a faster pace of adjustment. That’s why central bankers have been looking to incoming data from February for a sense of whether the robust January figures were a one-off or a genuine sign of strength.Employers added 311,000 workers last month, which were more than expected and a sign that the pace of hiring has cooled little.Hiroko Masuike/The New York Times“If the totality of the data were to indicate that faster tightening is warranted, we would be prepared to increase the pace of rate hikes,” Mr. Powell told lawmakers this week, emphasizing that “no decision has been made on this.”Friday’s figures suggested that hiring is genuinely resilient: Employers added more than half a million workers in the first month of the year, even after revisions.But the slowdown in wage growth could be good news for the central bank. Officials have been nervously eyeing rapid wage gains, fretting that it will be difficult for inflation to cool when employers are paying more and trying to make up for those climbing labor bills by passing the costs along to consumers.That said, a closely watched measure of wages for production workers who are not managers — rank-and-file employees, basically — held up. Wage data bounce around, and economists often watch that measure for a clearer reading of underlying momentum in pay gains.Priya Misra, head of global rates strategy at TD Securities, said she thought the report made the size of the Fed’s next rate move a “tossup.” The pace of hiring is likely to suggest to officials that the labor market is still hot, but the other details could give them some room to watch and wait.“It’s not an obvious slam dunk for 50,” Ms. Misra said, referring to a half-point move.The upshot, she said, is that investors will need to closely watch the Consumer Price Index report that is scheduled for release on Tuesday. The fresh figures will show how hot inflation was running in February, giving central bankers a final critical reading on where the American economy stands heading into their decision.“It makes this the most important C.P.I. report — again,” Ms. Misra said.Economists in a Bloomberg survey expect monthly inflation readings — which give a clearer sense of iterative progress on cooling price increases — to slow on an overall basis, but to hold steady at 0.4 percent after volatile food and fuel prices are stripped out.The State of Jobs in the United StatesThe labor market continues to display strength, as the Federal Reserve tries to engineer a slowdown and tame inflation.Mislabeling Managers: New evidence shows that many employers are mislabeling rank-and-file workers as managers to avoid paying them overtime.Energy Sector: Solar, wind, geothermal, battery and other alternative-energy businesses are snapping up workers from fossil fuel companies, where employment has fallen.Elite Hedge Funds: As workers around the country negotiate severance packages, employees in a tiny and influential corner of Wall Street are being promised some of their biggest paydays ever.Immigration: The flow of immigrants and refugees into the United States has ramped up, helping to replenish the American labor force. But visa backlogs are still posing challenges.One challenge is that the numbers will come out during the Fed’s pre-meeting quiet period, which is in place all of next week, so central bankers will not be able to tell the world how they are interpreting the new data.Further complicating the picture: Glimmers of stress are surfacing in the banking system, ones that are tied to the Fed’s rapid rate moves over the past 12 months. Silicon Valley Bank, which lent to tech start-ups and failed on Friday, was squeezed partly by the jump in interest rates.That development — and the possibility that it might herald trouble at other regional banks — could also matter to how the Fed understands the rate outlook.“It shows us: No, we haven’t really digested all of the effects of what the Fed has done so far,” said Aneta Markowska, chief financial economist at Jefferies. “There’s still a lot of policy pain in the pipeline that hasn’t hit the economy yet.”William Dudley, a former president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, said there are probably other banks that loaded up on longer-term assets when rates were low and are now suffering from that as short-term borrowing costs rise. That makes those older assets less attractive — and less valuable — if a bank has to sell them to raise cash.But he said that Silicon Valley Bank was probably an extreme example, and that it’s possible the whole situation will have blown over by the time the Fed meets next.“By a week and a half from now, this whole thing could be over,” he said. He added, though, that he didn’t have much clarity on how big the Fed’s next rate move would be, in any case.“I am totally confused about the Fed at this point,” he said. More

  • 150 Shares129 Views

    in Economy

    Jerome Powell Says Interest Rate Raises Likely to Be Higher Than Expected

    by

    In light of recent strong data, Jerome H. Powell said the Federal Reserve was likely to raise rates higher than expected.Jerome H. Powell, the Federal Reserve chair, made clear on Tuesday that the central bank is prepared to react to recent signs of economic strength by raising interest rates higher than previously expected and, if incoming data remain hot, potentially returning to a quicker pace of rate increases.Mr. Powell, in remarks before the Senate Banking Committee, also noted that the Fed’s fight against inflation was “very likely” to come at some cost to the labor market.His comments were the clearest acknowledgment yet that recent reports showing inflation remains stubborn and the job market remains resilient are likely to shake up the policy trajectory for America’s central bank.The Fed raised interest rates last year at the fastest pace since the 1980s, pushing borrowing costs above 4.5 percent, from near zero. That initially seemed to be slowing consumer and business demand and helping inflation to moderate. But a number of recent economic reports have suggested that inflation did not weaken as much as expected last year and remained faster than expected in January, while other data showed hiring remains strong and consumer spending picked up at the start of the year.While some of that momentum could have owed to mild January weather — conditions allowed for shopping trips and construction — Mr. Powell said the unexpected strength would probably require a stronger policy response from the Fed.“The process of getting inflation back down to 2 percent has a long way to go and is likely to be bumpy,” he told the committee. “The latest economic data have come in stronger than expected, which suggests that the ultimate level of interest rates is likely to be higher than previously anticipated.”Senator Elizabeth Warren suggested that the Fed was trying to “throw people out of work” and that millions of people stood to lose their jobs if unemployment rose as much as central bankers expected.Michael A. McCoy for The New York TimesFed officials projected in December that rates would rise to a peak of 5 to 5.25 percent, with a few penciling in a slightly higher 5.25 to 5.5 percent. Mr. Powell suggested that the peak rate would need to be adjusted by more than that, without specifying how much more.He even opened the door to faster rate increases if incoming data — which include a jobs report on Friday and a fresh inflation report due next week — remain hot. The Fed repeatedly raised rates by three-quarters of a point in 2022, but slowed to half a point in December and a quarter point in early February.The State of Jobs in the United StatesEconomists have been surprised by recent strength in the labor market, as the Federal Reserve tries to engineer a slowdown and tame inflation.Mislabeling Managers: New evidence shows that many employers are mislabeling rank-and-file workers as managers to avoid paying them overtime.Energy Sector: Solar, wind, geothermal, battery and other alternative-energy businesses are snapping up workers from fossil fuel companies, where employment has fallen.Elite Hedge Funds: As workers around the country negotiate severance packages, employees in a tiny and influential corner of Wall Street are being promised some of their biggest paydays ever.Immigration: The flow of immigrants and refugees into the United States has ramped up, helping to replenish the American labor force. But visa backlogs are still posing challenges.“If the totality of the data were to indicate that faster tightening is warranted, we would be prepared to increase the pace of rate hikes,” Mr. Powell said.Before his remarks, markets were heavily prepared for a quarter-point move at the Fed’s March 21-22 meeting. After his opening testimony, investors increasingly bet that the central bank would make a half-point move in March, stock prices lurched lower, and a closely watched Wall Street recession indicator pointed to a greater chance of a downturn. The S&P 500 ended the day down about 1.5 percent.While Mr. Powell predicated any decision to pick up the pace of rate increases on incoming data, even opening the door to the possibility made it clear that “it’s definitely a policy option they’re considering pretty actively,” said Michael Feroli, chief U.S. economist at J.P. Morgan.Mr. Feroli said a decision to accelerate rate moves might stoke uncertainty about what would come next: Will the Fed stick with half-point moves in May, for instance?“It raises a lot of questions,” he said.Blerina Uruci, chief U.S. economist at T. Rowe Price, previously thought the Fed would stop lifting interest rates around 5.75 percent but now thinks there is a growing chance they will rise above 6 percent, she said. She thinks that if Fed officials speed up rate increases in March, they may feel the need to keep the moves quick in May.“Otherwise, the Fed runs the risk of looking like they’re flip-flopping around,” Ms. Uruci said.While the Fed typically avoids making too much of any single month’s data, Mr. Powell signaled that recent reports had caused concern both because signs of continued momentum were broad-based and because revisions made a slowdown late in 2022 look less pronounced.“The breadth of the reversal along with revisions to the previous quarter suggests that inflationary pressures are running higher than expected at the time of our previous” meeting, Mr. Powell said.He reiterated that there were some hopeful developments: Goods inflation has slowed, and rent inflation, while high, appears poised to cool down this year.And Mr. Powell noted on Tuesday that officials knew it took time for the full effects of monetary policy to be felt, and were taking that into account as they thought about future policy.Still, he underlined that “there is little sign of disinflation thus far” in services outside of housing, which include purchases ranging from restaurant meals and travel to manicures. The Fed has been turning to that measure more and more as a signal of how strong underlying price pressures remain in the economy.“Nothing about the data suggests to me that we’ve tightened too much,” Mr. Powell said in response to lawmaker questions. “Indeed, it suggests that we still have work to do.”When the Fed raises interest rates, it slows consumer spending on big credit-based purchases like houses and cars and can dissuade businesses from expanding on borrowed money. As demand for products and demand for workers cool, wage growth eases and unemployment may even rise, further slowing consumption and causing a broader moderation in the economy.But so far, the job market has been very resilient to the Fed’s moves, with the lowest unemployment rate since 1969, rapid hiring and robust pay gains.Mr. Powell said wage growth — while it had moderated somewhat — remained too strong to be consistent with a return to 2 percent inflation. When companies are paying more, they are likely to charge more to cover their labor bills.“Strong wage growth is good for workers, but only if it is not eroded by inflation,” Mr. Powell said.Despite such explanations, some lawmakers grilled the Fed chair on Tuesday over what the central bank expected to do to the labor market with its policy adjustments.Senator Elizabeth Warren, Democrat of Massachusetts, suggested that the Fed was trying to “throw people out of work” and that millions of people stood to lose their jobs if unemployment rose as much as central bankers expected.“I would explain to people, more broadly, that inflation is extremely high, and that it is hurting the working people of this nation badly,” Mr. Powell said. “We are taking the only measures that we have to bring inflation down.”When Ms. Warren continued to press him on the Fed’s plan, Mr. Powell responded that the central bank was doing what policymakers believed was necessary.“Will working people be better off if we just walk away from our jobs and inflation remains 5, 6 percent?” Mr. Powell asked.He also underlined that the Fed does “not seek, and we don’t believe that we need to have,” a “very significant” downturn in the labor market, because there are many job openings, so it is possible that the labor market could cool quite a bit without outright job losses.“Other business cycles had quite different back stories than this one,” he said. “We’re going to have to find out whether that matters or not.”Joe Rennison More

  • 113 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Why Companies Are Pushing Premium Products With Higher Prices

    by

    Companies are trying to maintain fat profits as the economy changes, making “premiumization” their new favorite buzzword.Big companies are prodding their customers toward fancier, and often pricier, versions of everything from Krispy Kreme doughnuts to cans of WD-40.It’s evidence of the corporate world’s new favorite buzzword: “premiumization.”Businesses are hoping to keep the good times rolling after several years in which they seized on strong spending by consumers and rapid inflation to raise prices and pump up profit margins. Many firms are embracing offerings that cater to higher-income customers — people who are willing and able to pay more for products and services.One sign of the trend: the notion of premiumization was raised in nearly 60 earnings calls and investor meetings over the past three weeks.It is an indication of a changing economic backdrop. Inflation and consumer spending are expected to moderate this year, which could make it more difficult for firms to sustain large price increases without some justification.The premiumization trend also reflects a divide in the American economy. The top 40 percent of earners are sitting on more than a trillion dollars in extra savings amassed during the early part of the pandemic. Lower-income households, on the other hand, have been burning through their savings, partly as they contend with the higher costs of the food, rent and other necessities that make up a bigger chunk of their spending.“The pool of people willing to spend on small to large premium offers remains strong,” said David Mayer, a senior partner in the brand strategy practice of Lippincott, a consultancy.As products grow more expensive and exclusive, big swaths of the economy are at risk of becoming gentrified, raising the possibility that poorer consumers will be increasingly underserved.Inflation F.A.Q.Card 1 of 5What is inflation? More

  • 88 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    Inflation Cooled Just Slightly, With Worrying Details

    by

    WASHINGTON — Inflation has slowed from its painful 2022 peak but remains uncomfortably rapid, data released Tuesday showed, and the forces pushing prices higher are proving stubborn in ways that could make it difficult to wrestle cost increases back to the Federal Reserve’s goal.The Consumer Price Index climbed by 6.4 percent in January compared with a year earlier, faster than economists had forecast and only a slight slowdown from 6.5 percent in December. While the annual pace of increase has cooled from a peak of 9.1 percent in summer 2022, it remains more than three times as fast as was typical before the pandemic.And prices continued to increase rapidly on a monthly basis as a broad array of goods and services, including apparel, groceries, hotel rooms and rent, became more expensive. That was true even after stripping out volatile food and fuel costs.Taken as a whole, the data underlined that while the Federal Reserve has been receiving positive news that inflation is no longer accelerating relentlessly, it could be a long and bumpy road back to the 2 percent annual price gains that used to be normal. Prices for everyday purchases are still climbing at a pace that risks chipping away at economic security for many households.“We’re certainly down from the peak of inflation pressures last year, but we’re lingering at an elevated rate,” said Laura Rosner-Warburton, senior economist at MacroPolicy Perspectives. “The road back to 2 percent is going to take some time.”Stock prices sank in the hours after the report, and market expectations that the Fed will raise interest rates above 5 percent in the coming months increased slightly. Central bankers have already lifted borrowing costs from near zero a year ago to above 4.5 percent, a rapid-fire adjustment meant to slow consumer and business demand in a bid to wrestle price increases under control.Moderating price increases for goods and commodities have driven the overall inflation slowdown in recent months.Casey Steffens for The New York TimesBut the economy has so far held up in the face of the central bank’s campaign to slow it down. Growth did cool last year, with the rate-sensitive housing market pulling back and demand for big purchases like cars waning, but the job market has remained strong and wages are still climbing robustly.That could help to keep the economy chugging along into 2023. Consumption overall had shown signs of slowing meaningfully, but it may be poised for a comeback. Economists expect retail sales data scheduled for release on Wednesday to show that spending climbed 2 percent in January after falling 1.1 percent in December, based on estimates in a Bloomberg survey.Signs of continued economic momentum could combine with incoming price data to convince the Fed that it needs to do more to bring inflation fully under control, which could entail pushing rates higher than expected or leaving them elevated for longer. Central bankers have been warning that the process of wrangling cost increases might prove bumpy and difficult.Inflation F.A.Q.Card 1 of 5What is inflation? More