This post is a guest contribution by Paul Kasriel* of The Northern Trust Company.
In recent weeks two prominent economic commentators – Arthur Laffer and Alan Greenspan – have warned about the inflationary potential emanating from the unprecedented increase in the Fed’s balance sheet. Yes, as shown in Chart 1, reserves created by the Fed have increased by a staggering $858 billion in the 12 months ended May. But excess reserves on the books of depository institutions have increased by almost as much, $842 billion (see Chart 2). So, in the 12 months ended May, 98% of the increase in reserves created by the Fed has simply ended up as idle reserves on the books of depository institutions.
Yes, the bulk of the reserves the Fed has created are sitting idly on the books of depository institutions for now, but what if these institutions begin to lend them out in the future? Will this not result in an explosion of bank credit and the money supply, the raw ingredients of accelerating inflation – some might say the very definition of accelerating inflation? Why, yes, if the Fed were stand idly by.
If, however, the Fed wished to “neutralize” these excess reserves, it has the means to do so. The Fed now pays interest on reserves. If it observed an undesired “activation” of these hundreds of billions of dollars of excess reserves, it could hike the interest rate paid on excess reserves. Why would depository institutions lend more at the same loan rate when the risk-free rate they could earn from the Fed on excess reserves had risen?
They would not. So, the increase in the rate paid by the Fed on excess reserves would induce depository institutions to hike the interest rates charged on loans. All else the same, the quantity of credit demanded by the public would decrease and, therefore, bank credit and the money supply would not increase.
But what about the federal government? Its demand for credit is not sensitive to the level of interest rates. Yes, but the Fed could continue to raise the rate it pays on reserves until the quantity of credit demanded by the private sector falls sufficiently to offset the increased demand for credit by the federal government. But might this imply a substantial increase in interest rates? Yes, it might, depending on the sensitivity of private-sector credit demand and the amount of borrowing by the federal government.
Would not this “crowding out” of private sector borrowing by federal government borrowing be a negative for future productivity and economic growth? Yes. But that’s a different issue. The point I am attempting to make in this commentary is that the increase in the Fed’s balance sheet in the past year is not currently inflationary and need notlead to higher future inflation. Whether the Fed has the will or the skill to prevent the current increase in its balance sheet from manifesting itself in future higher inflation also is a different issue.
Source: Paul Kasriel, Northern Trust – Daily Global Commentary, June 29, 2009.
*Paul Kasriel is Senior Vice President and Director of Economic Research at The Northern Trust Company. The accuracy of the Economic Research Department’s forecasts has consistently been highly-ranked in the Blue Chip survey of about 50 forecasters over the years. To that point, Paul received the prestigious 2006 Lawrence R. Klein Award for having the most accurate economic forecast among the Blue Chip survey participants for the years 2002 through 2005. The accuracy of Paul’s 2008 economic forecast was ranked in the top five of The Wall Street Journal survey panel of economists. In January 2009, The Wall Street Journal and Forbes cited Paul as one of the few who identified early on the formation of the housing bubble and foresaw the economic and financial market havoc that would ensue after the bubble inevitably burst.
