View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

Prefatory Note

The attached document represents the most complete and accurate version available
based on original files from the FOMC Secretariat at the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System.
Please note that some material may have been redacted from this document if that
material was received on a confidential basis. Redacted material is indicated by
occasional gaps in the text or by gray boxes around non-text content. All redacted
passages are exempt from disclosure under applicable provisions of the Freedom of
Information Act.

Content last modified 02/07/2013.

CLASS I FOMC - RESTRICTED CONTROLLED (FR)
MARCH 15, 2007

MONETARY POLICY ALTERNATIVES

PREPARED FOR THE FEDERAL OPEN MARKET COMMITTEE
BY THE STAFF OF THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

March 15, 2007

MONETARY POLICY ALTERNATIVES
Recent Developments
(1)

The FOMC’s decision at its January meeting to leave the federal funds rate

target unchanged at 5¼ percent accorded with market expectations, but the
accompanying statement was reportedly read as a sign that the Committee was more
sanguine about inflation prospects than in December, and the expected path for
monetary policy later this year and beyond edged lower that day.1 Policy expectations
declined a bit more in the wake of the Chairman’s semiannual monetary policy
testimony, which apparently reinforced investors’ beliefs that the FOMC anticipated
contained inflation pressures as well as subdued GDP growth. The subsequent
release of the minutes of the January meeting elicited little reaction. Economic data
releases were somewhat weaker than expected on balance over the first few weeks of
the intermeeting period and, by mid-February, policy expectations had moved
appreciably lower (Chart 1).
(2)

Financial market volatility increased sharply in the second half of the

intermeeting period amid an apparent pullback from risk-taking that was reportedly
spurred by mixed news on domestic economic activity, mounting concerns about the
subprime mortgage sector, and significant declines in foreign equity prices. The first
downdraft in U.S. stock prices occurred on February 27, kicked off by a sharp
correction in the Chinese equity market. U.S. equity markets fell sharply from recent
highs, Treasury yields dropped, credit spreads widened, and the expected path of the
federal funds rate rotated down (Chart 2). Despite sharp increases in volatility on a
The effective federal funds rate averaged 5.26 percent over the intermeeting period.
During the period, the Desk purchased $1.9 billion of Treasury coupon securities in the
market. The volume of outstanding long-term RPs increased by $6 billion, to $21 billion,
reflecting a temporary increase in the foreign RP pool.
1

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 2 of 41

Chart 1
Interest Rate Developments

Expected Federal Funds Rates*

Implied Distribution of Federal Funds Rate about
Six Months Ahead*
Percent

Percent
6.0

40

Recent: 03/15/2007
Last FOMC: 01/30/2007

March 15, 2007
January 30, 2007
February 26,2007

35

5.5

30
25
20

5.0

15
10

4.5

5
0

4.0
2007

2.75

2008

3.75

4.25

4.75

5.25

5.75

Nominal Treasury Yields*

Implied Volatilities
Percent

Basis points

Daily

Jan.
FOMC

Ten-Year Treasury (left scale)
Six-Month Eurodollar (right scale)*

13

6.25

*Derived from options on Eurodollar futures contracts, with term premium
and other adjustments to estimate expectations for the federal funds rate.

*Estimates from federal funds and Eurodollar futures, with an allowance
for term premiums and other adjustments.

15

3.25

Percent
240

Jan.
FOMC

Daily

Ten-Year
Two-Year

200

11

7
6
5

160

9
7

4
3

120

5

2
80

3

1

1

40
2002

2003

2004

2005

0

2006

2004

2005

2006

*Width of a 90 percent confidence interval estimated from the term
structures for the expected federal funds rate and implied volatility.

*Par yields from a smoothed nominal off-the-run Treasury yield curve.

Change in Implied One-Year Forward Treasury Rates
since Last FOMC Meeting*
Basis points

Inflation Compensation and Oil Prices*
Percent

0

4.0

Daily

-10 3.5
-20

$/barrel

Next Five Years (left axis)
Five-to-Ten Year Forward (left axis)
Spot WTI (right axis)

Jan
FOMC

70
60
2.5
50

-50 2.0
-60

40

1.5

30
2004

1

2

3

5

Years Ahead

7

2005

2006

10

*Forward rates are the one-year rates maturing at the end of the year shown
on the horizontal axis that are implied by the smoothed Treasury yield curve.

80

3.0

-30
-40

90

*Estimates based on smoothed nominal and inflation-indexed
Treasury yield curves and adjusted for the indexation-lag (carry) effect.

Note: Vertical lines indicate January 30, 2007. Last daily observations are for March 15, 2007.

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Wilshire 5000 Index

Corporate Earnings Growth

Index(12/31/03=100)
Jan.
140
FOMC

Daily

Page 3 of 41

Chart 2
Asset Market Developments

Percent

Quarterly*

Q3

30

130

20
10

120

Q1e

0
110
-10

S&P 500 EPS
NIPA, economic
profits before tax

100

-20

90
2004

2005

2006

1989

1992

1995

1998

2001

-30
2007

2004

*Change from four quarters earlier.
Source. I/B/E/S for S&P 500 EPS.

Corporate Bond Spreads*

Implied Volatilities
Percent
Jan.
FOMC

Daily

S&P 500
Nasdaq

Basis points
40

30

280

Basis points
Jan.
FOMC

Daily

Ten-Year BBB (left scale)
Five-Year High-Yield (right scale)

240

750
625
500

200
20

375
160
250

10
120
0
2004

2005

2006

125

80

0
2004

2005

2006

*Measured relative to an estimated off-the-run Treasury yield curve.

Bond Default and C&I Loan Delinquency Rates

Expected Year-Ahead Defaults*
Percent of liabilities

Percent of outstandings
7
Monthly

2.0

6
5

1.5

4

C&I loan delinquency rate
(Call Report)

3

1.0

2
Q4

Bond default rate*

Feb.

0.5

1
Jan.

0
0.0
1990

1993

1996

1999

2002

*Six-month moving average, from Moody’s Investors Service.

2005

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

*Firm-level estimates of year-ahead defaults from KMV corporation, weighted
by firm liabilities as a percent of total liabilities, excluding defaulted firms.

Note: Vertical lines indicate January 30, 2007. Last daily observations are for March 15, 2007.

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 4 of 41

range of financial assets, markets operated smoothly, apart from some capacity-related
technical difficulties that day at Dow Jones and the NYSE. In the Treasury market,
bid-asked spreads remained in their recent ranges, and premiums for on-the-run twoand ten-year nominal Treasury securities relative to their off-the-run counterparts
widened only modestly. Subsequently, some positive economic data releases and
comments by Federal Reserve officials that were viewed as reassuring prompted a
partial recovery in some financial asset prices, but, in recent days, stock prices, yields,
and policy expectations took another step down as news of strains in the subprime
mortgage market accumulated and investors pondered their implications for economic
growth.
(3)

On net over the intermeeting period, investors tilted their anticipated path

for monetary policy down substantially. For the upcoming FOMC meeting, however,
federal funds futures quotes and the Desk’s survey of dealers indicate that the
Committee is expected to remain on hold. Most dealers expect only modest changes
to the rationale portion of the statement. Just a few noted a possibility that, in the risk
assessment, the Committee would cite the emergence of downside risks to growth.
According to options prices, the probability of at least 25 basis points of easing by
June now stands at almost one-third. Over the longer term, Eurodollar futures point
to an expectation of about 100 basis points of cumulative easing by the end of 2008,
about 50 basis points more than had been anticipated prior to the January meeting
and markedly more than foreseen by respondents to the most recent Desk survey.
The distribution of short-term interest rate expectations shows considerably more
skew to the downside than at the time of the January meeting.
(4)

Two- and ten-year nominal Treasury yields fell around 35 basis points on

balance over the intermeeting period. Most of the decline in yields was concentrated
in one-year forward rates ending in two to three years, consistent with market reports
pointing to a reappraisal of the robustness of aggregate spending. TIPS yields

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 5 of 41

generally declined somewhat less than their nominal counterparts, leaving inflation
compensation 5 to 10 basis points lower across the term structure.
(5)

Broad stock price indexes were off about 2 percent on net. Concern about

deteriorating conditions in the subprime mortgage market weighed on the valuations
of firms with significant exposures to that segment of the housing sector, and some
subprime lenders curtailed or ceased operations (see box, “Developments in the
Subprime Mortgage Market”). However, the handful of large financial firms reporting
with a February first-quarter end—some of which were perceived to have substantial
exposure to subprime mortgages—posted solid earnings. Yields on investment-grade
corporate bonds fell about in line with those on Treasury securities of comparable
maturity. In contrast, yields on speculative-grade bonds declined only modestly,
leaving risk spreads nearly 40 basis points wider, but still low by historical standards.
Corporate credit quality remained strong, with default rates staying low.
(6)

The foreign exchange value of the dollar dropped 1¼ percent against a

trade-weighted index of major foreign currencies but was little changed against an
index of currencies of other important U.S. trading partners (Chart 3). Market
participants reportedly reacted to indications of somewhat softer growth in the United
States and continued firmer expansion in key foreign countries. Both the Bank of
Japan and the European Central Bank raised their policy rates 25 basis points during
the period.2 Since the January FOMC meeting, the dollar has dropped more than
3 percent versus the yen, about 2 percent against the euro, and only slightly against the
Canadian dollar. Currencies linked to the funding leg of the carry trade, particularly
the yen and the Swiss franc, appeared to be most affected by the market turbulence in
the week of February 27, and volatilities in yen-dollar trading remained somewhat
above the low levels that prevailed earlier in the period (see box, “Risk and Return on
2

.

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 6 of 41

Developments
ExtenExad
fall in the Subprime Mortgage Market
Despite generally benign macroeconomic conditions, delinquencies on subprime variable-rate
mortgages—shown in the left panel below—rose sharply in 2006 as some borrowers faced large
upward adjustments to their monthly payments and house prices stalled or, in some areas, declined.
Subprime mortgages originated in 2006 are performing especially poorly this year, consistent with
reports that lenders loosened underwriting standards last year amid strong competition. Originators
who had sold subprime mortgages to securitizers have in many cases been contractually obligated to
buy back the loans that became delinquent shortly after origination. Difficulties in funding these
repurchases, as well as generally weaker mortgage demand, have led a number of monoline
subprime lenders to file for bankruptcy in recent months and others to withdraw from the market.
Stock prices of major subprime lenders have dropped markedly in recent weeks.
Reflecting these events as well as fears that the recent trend will continue or even worsen, spreads
on indexes of credit default swaps (CDS) written on pools of subprime mortgages have widened
dramatically since last November. These indexes started trading in January of last year, and a new
index vintage is created every six months to track the performance of CDS written on subprime
mortgages originated in the previous six months. Thus, for example, the January 2007 vintage of
the index references CDS on mortgages originated in the second half of 2006. Each index is divided
into five segments (AAA, AA, A, BBB, and BBB-) that are designed to mimic the performance of
corresponding tranches of subprime residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS). As shown in
the panel at the right, index spreads for CDS on mortgages originated in 2006—the July 2006 and
the January 2007 vintages—have widened much more than index spreads for CDS on mortgages
originated in the second half of 2005—the January 2006 vintage. Bid-asked spreads on these index
products have reportedly jumped in recent weeks, as demand has been predominantly on the
protection-buying side.
Issuance of subprime RMBS continued to slow in the first two months of 2007, and spreads on
newly issued BBB- tranches have risen this year from about 300 to about 700 basis points. Buyers
of subprime RMBS have increased their scrutiny of the underlying loans, and investment banks are
finding it more difficult to securitize some of the riskiest mortgages. In early March, bank
supervisors issued for comment expanded guidance to address safety and soundness and consumer
protection issues that stem from some types of subprime mortgage lending. In response to this
pressure from buyers and regulators alike, originators are reportedly tightening their standards for
subprime loans.

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 7 of 41

Chart 3
International Financial Indicators

Ten-Year Government Bond Yields (Nominal)

Nominal Trade-Weighted Dollar Indexes
Index(12/31/03=100)
Daily

112

6.0

Jan. FOMC
Broad
Major Currencies
Other Important Trading Partners

Percent
Daily
UK (left scale)
Germany (left scale)
Japan (right scale)

110
5.5

Jan. FOMC

2.5

108
106

5.0
2.0

104
102

3.0

4.5
1.5

100

4.0

98
96

1.0
3.5

94

0.5

3.0
92
90
2004

2005

Stock Price Indexes
Industrial Countries

Index(12/31/03=100)

Daily

2.5

0.0

2006

2004

Stock Price Indexes
Emerging Market Economies
180

Jan. FOMC

170
UK (FTSE-350)
Euro Area (DJ Euro)
Japan (Topix)

2005

2006

Index(12/31/03=100)

Daily
Jan. FOMC

Brazil (Bovespa)
Korea (KOSPI)
Mexico (Bolsa)

310

160

280

150

250

140

220

130

190

120

160

110

130

100

100

90
2004

2005

2006

340

70
2004

Note: Vertical lines indicate January 30, 2007. Last daily observations are for March 15, 2007.

2005

2006

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 8 of 41

Risk and Return
ExtenExad
fall on Japanese Yen Carry Trades
Even before the recent period of heightened financial market volatility, the business press and Wall
Street commentators had focused considerable attention on “carry trades” as a source of potential
risk in global financial markets. In the generic example of such a trade, funds borrowed in a lowinterest-rate currency, such as the Japanese yen or the Swiss franc, are invested in a high-interest-rate
currency, such as the Australian, New Zealand, or U.S. dollars, or various emerging market
currencies. Note that a carry trade exposes the investor to exchange rate fluctuations and is
therefore not a riskless arbitrage.
Indeed, some market participants who had engaged in yen-funded carry trades the week of
February 27 sustained substantial losses. That week’s return from one popular trade—borrowing
Japanese yen at one-week LIBOR denominated in yen and lending Australian dollars at the
corresponding one-week rate for Australian dollars—was about -4.5 percent, the ninth worst weekly
return over a sample beginning in mid-December 1997. Borrowing yen and lending other
currencies against which the yen appreciated more sharply would have produced even less favorable
results, and to compound some investors’ difficulties, global stock indexes and the prices of many
other risky assets tumbled that week.
Nonetheless, analyses of historical returns over a longer term suggest that, on average at least, the
strategy generally appears to have favorable risk, return, and covariance characteristics. The
distribution of returns on a very simple application of the strategy—the yen/Australian dollar
example discussed previously—has been fairly symmetric rather than particularly negatively skewed,
as shown to the lower left. Over this sample, the average carry-trade return is roughly equal to the
mean interest rate differential, and the Sharpe ratio of the strategy (the mean return divided by the
standard deviation) compares favorably with other broad asset classes. In addition, although the
week of February 27 was an exception, carry-trade returns have had a very low correlation with
most other asset returns, which suggests that the strategy might actually enhance portfolio
diversification. Indeed, investors likely conduct carry trades within a broader set of strategies.

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 9 of 41

Japanese Yen Carry Trades”). The Australian dollar, the New Zealand dollar, and
some emerging-market currencies, which have been prominent lately in the
investment leg of the carry trade, registered sharp downdrafts during the recent spate
of volatility.
(7)

The announcement in late February by Chinese authorities of steps to

curtail illegal stock trading and subsequent rumors of additional measures to control
speculation provoked a sharp decline in Chinese equity prices in the week of February
27. Stock prices in many other foreign markets also dropped abruptly. Although
global stock prices steadied briefly thereafter, they have declined further on balance in
recent days, and most headline stock price indexes are down 1 to 5 percent over the
intermeeting period. The global shift away from risky assets likely also contributed to
the widening of spreads on emerging-market bonds and to declines of about 10 to
20 basis points in yields on long-term government bonds in industrial countries.
(8)

Borrowing by businesses, households, and state and local governments

appears to be slowing somewhat in the current quarter (Chart 4). Nonfinancial
corporate debt, which expanded at an 11 percent annual rate in the fourth quarter of
2006, is projected to moderate to an 8 percent pace this quarter as merger and
acquisition financing steps down. Business debt growth slowed in January, but picked
back up in February; on average, business borrowing remained solid by historical
standards. Despite the recent turmoil in financial markets, funding in the corporate
bond and syndicated loan markets appears to have remained ample. In the household
sector, mortgage debt growth dropped to a 6½ percent rate in the fourth quarter and
is expected to edge down a bit further to a 6 percent pace in the first quarter, with the
slowing in large part associated with the cooling in home price appreciation.
Consumer credit growth in the first quarter is projected to remain at a moderate rate
of 4¾ percent, the same as its average in 2006. In contrast to the slower expansion of
debt in the private sector, federal debt is estimated to be accelerating, putting total

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 10 of 41

Chart 4
Debt and Money

Changes in Selected Components of Debt of
Nonfinancial Business

Growth of Debt of Nonfinancial Sectors
Percent, s.a.a.r.

Total
_____

Nonfederal
__________

9.4

9.9

7.9

8.8

9.5
6.8
6.5
7.9

9.1
8.8
7.2
8.8

2005
2006
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4

$Billions

Monthly rate

70
60

C&I Loans
Commercial Paper
Bonds

50
40

Sum

30
20
10
0

2007
Q1 p

7.8

-10

7.0
2005

Q1

Q2

p Projected.

Q3

Q4

Jan

2006

-20

Feb

2007

Note. Commercial paper and C&I loans are seasonally adjusted,
bonds are not.

Growth of Debt of Household Sector

Growth of House Prices
Percent

Percent

21

Quarterly

Quarterly, s.a.a.r.

12

18

Consumer
Credit

10
15
8

12
9
Q1p
Q1p

Home
Mortgage

6

6
3

Q4

4

OFHEO Purchase-Only Index (s.a.)

0

2

-3
0
1991

1993

1995

1997

1999

2001

2003

2005

2007

1993

p Projected.

1995

1997

1999

2001

2003

2005

Note. Four-quarter growth rate.

M2 Velocity and Opportunity Cost

Growth of M2
Percent
s.a.a.r.

10

8.00

Percent

Velocity

2.3

Quarterly
8

Opportunity Cost*
(left axis)

4.00

2.2
Q4

6

2.1

2.00

4
2.0

2
0

1.00

Q4

Velocity
(right axis)

1.9

0.50

-2

1.8

0.25

-4
2005

Q1

Q2

Q3
2006

Q4

Jan

Feb

2007

1993

1995

1997

*Two-quarter moving average.

1999

2001

2003

2005

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 11 of 41

debt of the domestic nonfinancial sectors on track for a 7¾ percent annual growth
pace this quarter, about the same as last quarter.
(9)

M2 growth slowed in February after four months of very strong advances.

The growth of liquid deposits, by far the largest portion of M2, moderated to
4 percent from its outsized fourth-quarter pace. Retail money funds and small time
deposits also had been expanding rapidly through the end of last year, but have
decelerated as their rates of return became relatively less attractive. The currency
component of M2 was essentially flat over the past two months. Domestic demand
for currency has likely expanded at a modest pace, while international demand for
U.S. currency has continued to fall off in light of improving economic and political
stability abroad as well as an apparent expansion of the use of euro banknotes as a
store of value. Taken as a whole, the level of M2 remains significantly higher than
would be indicated by the long-run relationship between velocity and the opportunity
cost of M2.

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 12 of 41

Economic Outlook through 2008
(10)

The staff has read weaker-than-expected incoming data, higher spot and

futures prices for oil, lower equity prices, and increasing strains in the subprime
mortgage sector as reasons to mark down its projection for real growth. Real GDP is
projected to grow at a 1½ percent rate during the current quarter; the sluggish growth
primarily reflects the ongoing adjustment in the housing sector and a partial reversal
of last quarter’s large improvement in net exports. The staff expects that real GDP
growth will pick up to 2¼ percent during the remainder of the forecast period as the
housing adjustment moves toward completion. This pace of expansion would be
somewhat below the staff’s estimate of potential growth, which averages a bit above
2½ percent, so the unemployment rate is projected to climb above 5 percent by the
end of 2008. The increase in energy prices since January led the staff to revise up its
forecast for headline PCE inflation during the first half of this year. As in January,
however, the staff sees core PCE inflation edging down from just under 2¼ percent
in 2007 to 2 percent during 2008. Against this backdrop, the forecast assumes that
the Committee will cut the target federal funds rate to 5 percent in the middle of
2008, whereas no such easing was assumed in January. The Greenbook forecast is
again predicated on broad U.S. equity price indexes rising at a rate of 6½ percent,
albeit from a somewhat lower level than at the time of the January FOMC meeting.
Long-term Treasury yields are assumed to rise about 25 basis points as market
participants gradually conclude that policy will not be eased as quickly as they
currently expect. The dollar is projected to depreciate very slightly against foreign
currencies. The path of oil prices has been raised about $5 per barrel relative to the
previous Greenbook.

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 13 of 41

Medium-Term Strategies
(11)

To shed additional light on the economic outlook and possible monetary

policy strategies at a longer horizon, the FRB/US model was used to construct
an illustrative extension of the Greenbook forecast beyond 2008, based on a set of
medium-term assumptions together with some judgmental adjustments. Important
influences on the outlook include the assumptions of trend multifactor productivity
growth at about 1¾ percent per year, approximately flat energy prices, and a pickup
in the pace of depreciation of the real foreign exchange value of the dollar to an
average rate of 3 percent per year. Given the impetus to inflation from dollar
depreciation, the unemployment rate would need to be a bit above the staff’s assumed
long-run NAIRU of 5 percent to keep core PCE inflation stable at around
2 percent—the inflation rate consistent, in the staff’s estimation, with recent survey
measures of long-run inflation expectations. The contours of aggregate demand are
influenced by the unified federal budget deficit, which rises from 1¾ percent of GDP
next year to about 2½ percent by 2012, and by the current account deficit, which
widens slightly to nearly 7 percent of GDP in 2012 despite depreciation of the dollar
and steady growth abroad. Further assuming that term, credit, and equity risk
premiums gradually revert to historical norms, the real federal funds rate would need
to move below 2 percent by 2012 to keep output expanding along the path of its
potential.
(12)

As shown in Chart 5, the current level of the real funds rate, 3 percent, is

a touch higher than the Greenbook-consistent estimate of short-run r*—the value
of the real federal funds rate that would put the level of real GDP at its potential
twelve quarters ahead—and about 50 basis points higher than the three model-based
estimates of short-run r*. The Greenbook-consistent measure has been marked down
about 40 basis points relative to the previous Bluebook in response to incoming data
pointing to somewhat weaker business fixed investment as well as a lower path

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 14 of 41

Chart 5
Equilibrium Real Federal Funds Rate
Short-Run Estimates with Confidence Intervals

Percent
8

Actual real federal funds rate
Range of model-based estimates
70 percent confidence interval
90 percent confidence interval
Greenbook-consistent measure

7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
-1

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Short-Run and Medium-Run Measures
Current Estimate

Previous Bluebook

2.4
2.4
2.4

2.4
2.4
2.6

Short-Run Measures
Single-equation model
Small structural model
Large model (FRB/US)
Confidence intervals for three model-based estimates
70 percent confidence interval
90 percent confidence interval
Greenbook-consistent measure

(0.9 - 3.8(
(0.1 - 4.7(
2.9

3.3

2.3
2.2

2.3
2.3

Medium-Run Measures
Single-equation model
Small structural model
Confidence intervals for two model-based estimates
70 percent confidence interval
90 percent confidence interval
TIPS-based factor model

(1.4 - 3.2(
(0.8 - 3.8(
2.1

2.1

3.0

3.0

Memo
Actual real federal funds rate

Note: Appendix A provides background information regarding the construction of these measures and confidence intervals.

-2

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 15 of 41

of residential expenditures due to the recent rise in energy prices, the decline
in stock market wealth, and problems in the subprime mortgage sector. The modelbased estimates of medium-run r*—the value of the real funds rate consistent with
keeping output at potential at a seven-year horizon—are both close to 2¼ percent,
just above the TIPS-based measure of about 2 percent.
(13)

Outcomes obtained from optimal control simulations of the FRB/US

model, shown in Chart 6, are importantly influenced by the somewhat weaker outlook
for aggregate demand and slightly greater inflation pressures anticipated through the
end of the decade. In these simulations, policymakers are assumed to place equal
weight on three stabilization objectives: keeping core PCE inflation close to a
specified goal of either 1½ or 2 percent, keeping unemployment close to the long-run
NAIRU, and avoiding changes in the nominal funds rate.3 With policy aiming at
an inflation goal of 2 percent (the right-hand set of charts), the optimal path of the
federal funds rate over the next few years is about ¼ percentage point lower than
in the January Bluebook—reflecting the softer near-term outlook for aggregate
demand—but levels off at the same plateau of about 4 percent. Given the slight
increase in inflation pressures, the optimal policy does not completely offset the
decline in aggregate demand; as a result, the unemployment rate and core inflation
over the next few years are both a touch higher than in January. Similarly, with
an inflation goal of 1½ percent (the left-hand set of charts), the optimal funds rate
follows a trajectory over the next several years that is roughly ¼ percentage point
lower than in the previous Bluebook. In this case, the unemployment rate peaks at
about 5½ percent early in the next decade while core inflation declines very slowly
to about 1.8 percent by 2012. The pace of this disinflation primarily reflects the slow
adjustment of wage and price setters’ long-run inflation expectations, which in turn
It is also assumed that policymakers and participants in financial markets understand fully
the forces shaping the economic outlook whereas the expectations of households and firms
are formed using more limited information.
3

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 16 of 41

Chart 6
Optimal Policy Under Alternative Inflation Goals
1½ Percent Inflation Goal
Federal funds rate

2 Percent Inflation Goal
Percent
6.5

Percent
6.5

6.0

6.0

5.5

5.5

5.0

5.0

4.5

4.5

Current Bluebook
January Bluebook

Current Bluebook
January Bluebook

4.0

4.0

3.5

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Civilian unemployment rate

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

3.0

3.5

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

3.0

Percent
6.0

Percent
6.0

5.5

5.5

5.0

5.0

4.5

4.5

2012

4.0

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

4.0

Core PCE inflation
Percent
3.0

Four-quarter average

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

Percent
3.0

Four-quarter average

2.5

2.5

2.0

2.0

1.5

1.5

1.0

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

1.0

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 17 of 41

owes to the gradual evolution of their perceptions of policymakers’ inflation goal
(see box on “Inflation Expectations and Optimal Control Policies”).
(14)

The upper panels of Chart 7 depict model- and market-based assessments

of the policy outlook through the end of 2012. In the absence of shocks, the
outcome-based rule prescribes a funds rate path that declines gradually—though
slightly faster than in the January Bluebook—to about 4 percent by the end of 2012.
Stochastic simulations of the FRB/US model indicate a 70 percent probability that
the prescriptions of the outcome-based rule will fall in a range of 2½ to 6¼ percent
during 2012. Information from at-the-money interest rate caps also indicates
considerable uncertainty in financial markets regarding the prospective path of
policy at longer horizons.
(15)

The lower portion of Chart 7 reports near-term prescriptions of simple

policy rules embedding an inflation goal of either 1½ or 2 percent. The rule proposed
by Taylor (1999) calls for a funds rate of about 4½ to 5 percent for the current
quarter, whereas a funds rate of about 5½ percent is stipulated by a variant of that
rule incorporating a higher value of r*. In each of these cases, the rule is consistent
with a downward-sloping path of the federal funds rate going forward, with a cut
next quarter of about 25 basis points. In contrast to the Taylor rules, the firstdifference rule—which does not require estimates of the levels of the output gap
or the equilibrium real interest rate—prescribes setting the nominal federal funds
rate at about 5½ percent if the inflation goal is 1½ percent or at about 5 percent if
the inflation goal is 2 percent.

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 18 of 41

Inflation Expectations and Optimal Control Policies1
For an inflation goal of 1½ percent, the optimal control policy
shown in Chart 6 is associated with glacial convergence of actual
inflation toward the goal. This feature does not primarily reflect
the specification of short-run wage and price dynamics in the
FRB/US model, but rather the slow adjustment of the long-run
inflation expectations of wage and price setters. Those agents’
expectations—which are determined by their understanding of the
inflation goal specified by policymakers—decline from a current
level of around 2 percent toward the true goal at a pace calibrated
to approximate the empirical behavior of survey measures of
long-run inflation expectations. To highlight the role of this
aspect of inflation expectations in shaping optimal policy, this
box compares the benchmark specification with two alternative
assumptions regarding the evolution of public perceptions of
policymakers’ inflation goal.

Benchmark specification
Immediate recognition
of π* = 1.5
Learning from policy
actions
Federal funds rate

Percent
6.5
6.0
5.5
5.0
4.5
4.0

In the benchmark specification of the FRB/US model (the solid line
in each panel to the right), it is assumed that wage and price setters
gradually update their beliefs about the inflation goal in response to
actual inflation outcomes. As a result, policymakers need to tighten
policy substantially in order to elevate the unemployment rate and
generate sufficient downward pressure on actual inflation. In this
scenario, long-run inflation expectations (not shown) decline by
only about ¼ percentage point through 2012.

3.5

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Unemployment rate

3.0

Percent
6.0

5.5

In contrast, in the case of immediate recognition, wage and price setters
are assumed to perceive the 1½ percent inflation goal starting in
the current quarter (dashed red lines). In this scenario, core inflation
declines rapidly and approaches the goal by the end of 2008, while
the unemployment rate remains close to its natural rate over the
next few years.2
In the final scenario—learning from policy actions—wage and price
setters infer the inflation goal from surprises in policymakers’
setting of the federal funds rate (dotted blue lines). In this case,
policymakers signal their commitment to a disinflation through
a substantial initial increase in the funds rate, which pushes the
unemployment rate about ¼ percentage point above its natural rate
later this decade. As a result, long-run inflation expectations
decline more rapidly than in the benchmark specification, and
core inflation converges to the 1½ percent goal by 2012.

5.0

4.5

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Core PCE inflation
Four-quarter average

Percent
3.0

2.5

______________________________

This box draws on the analysis provided in the memo to the
Committee by David Reifschneider and Robert Tetlow, “FRB/US Inflation
Dynamics, Policy Credibility, and Bluebook Optimal Control Simulations,”
March 8, 2007.
2 In principle, the speed of disinflation could be influenced by the baseline
assumption that agents do not form model-consistent expectations but
instead generate forecasts based on a small-scale VAR. However, the memo
reports roughly identical simulation paths under these two alternative
approaches, conditional on the same credibility of monetary policy.

4.0

2.0

1

1.5

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

1.0

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 19 of 41

Chart 7
The Policy Outlook in an Uncertain Environment
FRB/US Model Simulations of
Estimated Outcome-Based Rule

Information from Financial Markets
Percent
10

Current Bluebook
70 Percent confidence interval
90 Percent confidence interval
Previous Bluebook

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Percent
10

Expectations from forward contracts
70 Percent confidence interval
90 Percent confidence interval
Actual and Greenbook assumption

9
8

2012

7

6

6

5

5

4

4

3

3

2

2

1

1

0

2007

2008

2009

2010

1½ Percent
Inflation Objective

2 Percent
Inflation Objective

2007Q1 2007Q2

2007Q1 2007Q2

Taylor (1993) rule
Previous Bluebook

4.8
4.8

4.5
4.6

4.5
4.6

4.3
4.4

Taylor (1999) rule
Previous Bluebook

4.9
5.0

4.6
4.7

4.6
4.7

4.3
4.5

Taylor (1999) rule with higher r*
Previous Bluebook

5.6
5.7

5.3
5.5

5.4
5.5

5.1
5.2

First-difference rule
Previous Bluebook

5.4
5.4

5.5
5.7

5.1
5.2

5.0
5.2

Estimated outcome-based rule
Estimated forecast-based rule
Greenbook assumption
Market expectations

8

7

2011

2012

Near-Term Prescriptions of Simple Policy Rules

Memo

9

2007Q1 2007Q2
5.2
5.2
5.3
5.2

5.1
5.1
5.3
5.2

Note: Appendix B provides background information regarding the specification of each rule and the methodology used in
constructing confidence intervals and near-term prescriptions.

0

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 20 of 41

Monetary Policy Alternatives
(16)

This Bluebook presents three policy alternatives, summarized in Table 1, as

a starting point for the Committee’s deliberations. Under Alternative A, the
Committee would lower the intended federal funds rate 25 basis points, to 5 percent.
Alternative B would leave the target for the federal funds rate unchanged. Under
Alternative C, the Committee would tighten policy 25 basis points, bringing the target
to 5½ percent. The statement associated with Alternative A mentions factors that
suggest upside risks to inflation and retains the phrase “some inflation risks remain;”
it also mentions factors that suggest downside risks to growth and offers an explicit
assessment that the risks to growth are tilted to the downside. In addition, Alternative
A replaces the phrase “the extent and timing of any additional firming” with the more
general “future policy adjustments.” Alternative B, too, notes factors that suggest
downside risks to growth as well as factors that suggest upside risks to inflation, but
states explicitly that the risk that inflation will fail to moderate remains the
Committee’s principal concern. Alternative B also adopts more symmetric language
regarding future policy adjustments. Language for Alternative C not only states that
the risk that inflation will fail to moderate remains the Committee’s predominant
concern, it does not mention downside risks to growth and retains directional
language referring to “the extent and timing of any additional firming.” With the
report on consumer prices in February to be released on Friday, after the Bluebook
closes, the rationale portion of Alternative B includes language in brackets that may be
appropriate if inflation is disappointingly high.
(17)

In the staff’s analysis, the real federal funds rate is essentially equal to the

Greenbook-consistent estimate of its equilibrium value (Chart 5), suggesting that the
current stance of policy likely would be consistent with closing the small estimated
output gap over the next several years. Moreover, the current target for the funds rate
is very close to prescriptions for near-term policy from the optimal policy path

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 21 of 41

Table 1: Alternative Language for the March 2007 FOMC Announcement
January FOMC
Policy
Decision

Rationale

Assessment of
Risk

Alternative A

Alternative B

Alternative C

1. The Federal Open Market
Committee decided today to keep its
target for the federal funds rate at
5¼ percent.

The Federal Open Market Committee
decided today to lower its target for the
federal funds rate 25 basis points to
5 percent.

The Federal Open Market Committee
decided today to keep its target for the
federal funds rate at 5¼ percent.

The Federal Open Market Committee
decided today to raise its target for the
federal funds rate by 25 basis points to
5½ percent.

2. Recent indicators have suggested
somewhat firmer economic growth,
and some tentative signs of
stabilization have appeared in the
housing market. Overall, the
economy seems likely to expand at a
moderate pace over coming quarters.

The economy seems likely to expand at
a moderate pace over coming quarters,
supported in part by gains in personal
income and consumer spending.
However, sluggish business investment
and ongoing weakness in the housing
sector likely will exert a drag on growth.

Despite the ongoing adjustment in the
housing sector, the economy seems
likely to continue to expand at a
moderate pace over coming quarters,
supported in part by gains in personal
income and consumer spending.

The economy appears to be expanding
at a moderate pace and likely will
continue to do so in coming quarters,
supported in part by solid gains in
personal income and consumer
spending.

3. Readings on core inflation have
improved modestly in recent months,
and inflation pressures seem likely to
moderate over time. However, the
high level of resource utilization has
the potential to sustain inflation
pressures.

Readings on core inflation have
improved modestly in recent months,
and inflation pressures seem likely to
moderate over time. However, the
high level of resource utilization has the
potential to sustain inflation pressures.

Readings on core inflation have
improved modestly in recent months,
and inflation pressures seem likely to
moderate over time. [Or: Readings on
core inflation have been somewhat
elevated. Inflation pressures seem likely
to moderate over time.] However, the
high level of resource utilization has the
potential to sustain inflation pressures.

Core inflation remains somewhat
elevated. Inflation pressures seem
likely to moderate over time, but
considerable uncertainty surrounds
that judgment. Moreover, the high
level of resource utilization has the
potential to sustain inflation pressures.

4. The Committee judges that some
inflation risks remain. The extent and
timing of any additional firming that
may be needed to address these risks
will depend on the evolution of the
outlook for both inflation and
economic growth, as implied by
incoming information.

The Committee judges that the risks to
growth are tilted to the downside, even
after this policy action. However,
upside risks to inflation remain. Future
policy adjustments will depend on the
evolution of the outlook for both
inflation and economic growth, as
implied by incoming information.

In these circumstances, the Committee’s
principal policy concern remains the
risk that inflation will fail to moderate as
expected. Future policy adjustments
will depend on the evolution of the
outlook for both inflation and
economic growth, as implied by
incoming information.

In these circumstances, the
Committee’s predominant policy
concern remains the risk that inflation
will fail to moderate as expected. The
extent and timing of any additional
firming that may be needed to address
this risk will depend on the evolution
of the outlook for both inflation and
economic growth, as implied by
incoming information.

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 22 of 41

simulations of the FRB/US model for a 2 percent inflation goal (Chart 6). If the
Committee sees the combination of gradual convergence to potential output and a
2 percent inflation rate by the end of 2008 as a reasonable and desirable outcome,
given current conditions, it might favor no change in policy, as in Alternative B. In
that regard, the central tendency of the forecasts submitted by the Governors and
Reserve Bank presidents around the time of the January FOMC meeting suggested
that the Committee was more optimistic than the staff about potential output,
perhaps implying that keeping the funds rate constant is likely to generate both brisker
growth and a larger decline in core inflation than the staff projects. Although
members may think that dislocations in the subprime mortgage market will reduce
funding for home purchases in that sector, tending to deepen the slide in housing
construction, they may also be of the view that the drop in market yields in recent
weeks will mean lower mortgage rates for prime borrowers going forward, perhaps
spurring an earlier recovery in construction and sales of new homes. Given these
potentially offsetting forces, the Committee may be inclined to wait for more
information on consumer spending and housing demand before adjusting the stance
of policy.
(18)

The language associated with Alternative B could point to gains in personal

income and consumer spending as helping to sustain output in the face of weakness
in housing and business investment. If the Committee’s view on inflation has not
changed appreciably of late, it could choose to repeat the backward-looking language
that “readings on core inflation have improved modestly in recent months” along
with the forward-looking language that “inflation pressures seem likely to moderate
over time” and the qualification that high resource utilization could sustain inflation
pressures. The assessment of risk language for Alternative B contains no explicit
judgment about the balance of risks. However, by stating that the risk that inflation
will fail to moderate as expected remains its principal policy concern, the Committee

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 23 of 41

would implicitly acknowledge risks to growth. The proposed wording in Alternative
B replaces the reference to “additional firming” that was in the January statement with
a balanced characterization of “future policy adjustments,” thereby removing the
presumption that the next change in policy will be a tightening and providing greater
policy flexibility going forward.
(19)

Although economic and financial news during the intermeeting period

increased the perceived probability of a cut in the funds rate later this year, market
participants continue to see no chance of easing at this meeting. Market commentary
and surveys also suggest that participants would not be surprised if the statement were
to recognize downside risks to growth, but they see a lesser chance of a change in the
“tilt” in the assessment of risks. Thus, pointing to a “principal concern” might be
read as a more forceful assertion than the wording in January’s statement. Dropping
the reference to “additional firming” from the risk assessment should convey more
balanced odds on the direction of future policy changes and thus weigh against that
reading. On balance, the language for Alternative B seems likely to elicit little
reaction, but with markets apparently skittish, this judgment should be viewed as
more tentative than usual.
(20)

In contrast to the fairly benign scenario described in the staff forecast, the

Committee might be concerned that widening disruptions in the subprime market
point to greater weakness in housing and that lower equity prices will slow the growth
of consumer spending. The Committee also might see recent economic data as
indicating that weakness has spread from housing and motor vehicles to other goodsproducing sectors, perhaps along the lines of the “weak investment” alternative in the
Greenbook. If so, members might prefer the quarter-point policy easing in
Alternative A. This alternative offers an explicit judgment that risks to growth would
remain tilted to the downside even after this policy action, thereby conveying greater
concern about those risks than Alternative B. At the same time, it would continue to

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 24 of 41

point to upside risks to inflation. Members who consider 2 percent inflation an
appropriate goal might note that most of the policy rules shown in Chart 7 point to a
reduction in the target funds rate in the second quarter.
(21)

The rationale for Alternative A points to sluggish business investment and

ongoing weakness in housing as likely to exert a drag on growth, thus supporting a
judgment that risks to growth remain tilted to the downside even after a quarterpoint rate cut. By also pointing to remaining inflation risks and adopting a symmetric
characterization of possible future adjustments in the policy rate, the assessment of
risk in Alternative A is meant to convey that this policy action will not necessarily
commence a sequence of rate cuts.
(22)

Although investors apparently expect the Committee to begin easing by

mid-year, the immediate quarter-point rate cut envisioned in Alternative A would be a
considerable surprise and likely would lead to a significant easing of financial
conditions. Long-term yields might follow short-term rates down if markets conclude
that the Committee believes that prospects for growth have weakened appreciably,
reducing the equilibrium real interest rate consistent with sustainable growth. The
drop in longer-term yields could be small if markets conclude that the Committee is
easing sooner than expected but will not cut rates more over the next few years than
is already incorporated in financial quotes. But markets might read an announcement
along the lines of Alternative A as an indication that the Committee is willing to
forego a medium-term moderation in inflation in order to sustain economic growth.
In that case, measures of inflation compensation might rise.
(23)

Though much of the market commentary during the intermeeting period

focused on developments pointing to weaker-than-expected growth, the Committee
might see the recent data releases as only a bit weaker than expected and judge that
the fallout from developments in the subprime mortgage sector will be limited,
perhaps for the reasons given in Part I of the Greenbook. If so, the Committee might

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 25 of 41

place greater weight on the step-up in core inflation in January and the recent
depreciation of the dollar. Especially if Friday’s inflation report proves markedly
higher than expected, the Committee may be less confident than the staff that core
inflation will decline from its uncomfortably high level with no further increase in the
federal funds rate, inclining members toward the quarter-point policy firming of
Alternative C. A judgment that tighter policy is appropriate might be buttressed by
concerns about the extent to which the labor market currently is stretched thin and
the slow pace at which those pressures lessen in the staff forecast.
(24)

The rationale for Alternative C could indicate the Committee’s

fundamentally unchanged outlook for growth by stating that the economy “appears to
be expanding at a moderate pace and likely will continue to do so in coming quarters,
supported by solid growth in consumer spending” without mentioning areas of
weakness. The rationale could emphasize the Committee’s discomfort with inflation
by stating not only that “core inflation remains somewhat elevated,” but also that
“considerable uncertainty surrounds” the judgment that inflation will moderate and
that “the high level of resource utilization has the potential to sustain inflation
pressures.” If the Committee wished to make clear that the 25 basis point increase in
the funds rate did not entirely assuage its concern about inflation risks, the Committee
could replace the first sentence of January’s assessment of risk with language stating
that “the Committee’s predominant policy concern remains the risk that inflation will
fail to moderate as expected” while retaining the second sentence.
(25)

A decision to adopt Alternative C would come as a complete surprise to the

financial markets, likely leading to a sharp upward revision of investors’ expectations
for the federal funds rate over the next few quarters and thus an increase in shortterm interest rates. Longer-term rates might also jump if market participants were to
conclude that the inflation outlook is less benign than they had thought and that
short-term real rates will have to be persistently higher to keep inflation contained.

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 26 of 41

Upward pressure on long-term rates would be lessened if investors conclude that the
FOMC’s focus on reducing inflation will mean faster progress toward price stability.
Money and Debt Forecasts
(26)

Under the Greenbook baseline, M2 is expected to grow about 5¼ percent

in 2007 and 5 percent in 2008, a touch slower on average than in the January forecast,
consistent with the modest downward revision in nominal GDP growth in the staff
forecast. The opportunity cost of holding M2 edges down this year as deposit rates
continue to catch up to earlier increases in short-term interest rates. As a result, M2 is
projected to grow a bit faster than nominal income. In the forecast, liquid deposits
expand moderately and rapid growth in retail money funds offsets more sluggish
growth in small time deposits. Currency growth, however, continues to be restrained
by weak foreign demand.
(27)

The growth of domestic nonfinancial sector debt is projected to fall from

nearly 8 percent last year to 6½ percent in 2007 and 6 percent in 2008. In the
household sector, nearly flat housing prices likely will dampen mortgage borrowing
over the forecast horizon. Corporate debt is also projected to slow somewhat, as the
recent strong pace of merger-related debt issuance ebbs. With the unified budget
deficit expected to widen, federal debt growth is projected to step up this year and
next.

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 27 of 41

Table 2
Alternative Growth Rates for M2
(percent, annual rate)
25 bp Easing

No Change

25 bp Tightening

Greenbook Forecast*

Monthly Growth Rates
Sep-06
Oct-06
Nov-06
Dec-06
Jan-07
Feb-07
Mar-07
Apr-07
May-07
Jun-07

4.0
8.7
7.0
7.6
10.3
5.3
6.1
5.6
4.7
4.6

4.0
8.7
7.0
7.6
10.3
5.3
5.9
5.0
3.9
3.9

4.0
8.7
7.0
7.6
10.3
5.3
5.7
4.4
3.1
3.2

4.0
8.7
7.0
7.6
10.3
5.3
5.9
5.0
3.9
3.9

Quarterly Growth Rates
2006 Q1
2006 Q2
2006 Q3
2006 Q4
2007 Q1
2007 Q2
2007 Q3
2007 Q4

5.4
3.3
4.2
6.8
7.8
5.4
4.5
4.4

5.4
3.3
4.2
6.8
7.8
4.9
3.9
4.1

5.4
3.3
4.2
6.8
7.7
4.4
3.3
3.7

5.4
3.3
4.2
6.8
7.8
4.9
3.9
4.1

Annual Growth Rates
2007
2008

5.6
4.7

5.2
4.7

4.9
4.7

5.2
5.0

Growth From
Jan-07

To
Jun-07

5.3

4.8

4.4

4.8

2006 Q4

Jun-07

6.4

6.0

5.7

6.0

* This forecast is consistent with nominal GDP and interest rates in the Greenbook forecast.

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 28 of 41

Directive and Balance of Risks Statement
(28)

Draft language for the directive and draft risk assessments identical to those

presented in Table 1 are provided below.

Directive Wording
The Federal Open Market Committee seeks monetary and financial
conditions that will foster price stability and promote sustainable growth
in output. To further its long-run objectives, the Committee in the
immediate future seeks conditions in reserve markets consistent with
maintaining/INCREASING/REDUCING the federal funds rate at/TO
an average of around _______________ 5¼ percent.

Risk Assessments
A. The Committee judges that the risks to growth are tilted to the
downside, even after this policy action. However, upside risks to
inflation remain. Future policy adjustments will depend on the evolution
of the outlook for both inflation and economic growth, as implied by
incoming information.
B. In these circumstances, the Committee’s principal policy concern
remains the risk that inflation will fail to moderate as expected. Future
policy adjustments will depend on the evolution of the outlook for both
inflation and economic growth, as implied by incoming information.
C. In these circumstances, the Committee’s predominant policy concern
remains the risk that inflation will fail to moderate as expected. The
extent and timing of any additional firming that may be needed to
address this risk will depend on the evolution of the outlook for both
inflation and economic growth, as implied by incoming information.

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 29 of 41

Appendix A: Measures of the Equilibrium Real Rate
The equilibrium real rate is the real federal funds rate that, if maintained, would be projected to return
output to its potential level over time. The short-run equilibrium rate is defined as the rate that would
close the output gap in twelve quarters given the corresponding model’s projection of the economy.
The medium-run concept is the value of the real federal funds rate projected to keep output at potential
in seven years, under the assumption that monetary policy acts to bring actual and potential output into
line in the short run and then keeps them equal thereafter. The TIPS-based factor model measure
provides an estimate of market expectations for the real federal funds rate seven years ahead.
The actual real federal funds rate is constructed as the difference between the nominal rate and realized
inflation, where the nominal rate is measured as the quarterly average of the observed federal funds rate,
and realized inflation is given by the log difference between the staff’s estimate of the core PCE price
index and its lagged value four quarters earlier. For the current quarter, the nominal rate is specified as
the target federal funds rate on the Bluebook publication date.
Confidence intervals reflect uncertainties about model specification, coefficients, and the level of
potential output. The final column of the table indicates the values for the current quarter based on
the estimation for the previous Bluebook, except that the TIPS-based measure and the actual real funds
rate are the values published in the previous Bluebook.
Measure

Description

Single-equation
Model

The measure of the equilibrium real rate in the single-equation model is based on an
estimated aggregate-demand relationship between the current value of the output gap and
its lagged values as well as the lagged values of the real federal funds rate.

Small Structural The small-scale model of the economy consists of equations for five variables: the output
gap, the equity premium, the federal budget surplus, the trend growth rate of output, and
Model
the real bond yield.
Large Model
(FRB/US)

Estimates of the equilibrium real rate using FRB/US—the staff’s large-scale econometric
model of the U.S. economy—depend on a very broad array of economic factors, some of
which take the form of projected values of the model’s exogenous variables.

Greenbookconsistent

The FRB/US model is used in conjunction with an extended version of the Greenbook
forecast to derive a Greenbook-consistent measure. FRB/US is first add-factored so that
its simulation matches the extended Greenbook forecast, and then a second simulation is
run off this baseline to determine the value of the real federal funds rate that closes the
output gap.

TIPS-based
Factor Model

Yields on TIPS (Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities) reflect investors’ expectations of
the future path of real interest rates, but also include term and liquidity premiums. The
TIPS-based measure of the equilibrium real rate is constructed using the seven-year-ahead
instantaneous real forward rate derived from TIPS yields as of the Bluebook publication
date. This forward rate is adjusted to remove estimates of the term and liquidity
premiums based on a three-factor arbitrage-free term-structure model applied to TIPS
yields, nominal yields, and inflation. Because TIPS indexation is based on the total CPI,
this measure is also adjusted for the medium-term difference—projected at 40 basis
points—between total CPI inflation and core PCE inflation.

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 30 of 41

Appendix B: Analysis of Policy Paths and Confidence Intervals
Rule Specifications: For the following rules, it denotes the federal funds rate for quarter t, while
the explanatory variables include the staff’s projection of trailing four-quarter core PCE inflation (πt),
inflation two and three quarters ahead (πt+2|t and πt+3|t), the output gap in the current period and one
quarter ahead ( yt − yt* and yt +1|t − yt*+1|t ), and the three-quarter-ahead forecast of annual average GDP
growth relative to potential ( Δ 4 yt +3|t − Δ 4 yt*+3|t ), and π * denotes an assumed value of policymakers’
long-run inflation objective. The outcome-based and forecast-based rules were estimated using realtime data over the sample 1988:1-2006:4; each specification was chosen using the Bayesian information
criterion. Each rule incorporates a 75 basis point shift in the intercept, specified as a sequence of
25 basis point increments during the first three quarters of 1998. The first two simple rules were
proposed by Taylor (1993, 1999), while the third is a variant of the Taylor (1999) rule—introduced
in the August Bluebook—with a higher value of r*. The prescriptions of the first-difference rule do
not depend on assumptions regarding r* or the level of the output gap; see Orphanides (2003).
Outcome-based rule

it = 1.20it-1–0.39it-2+0.19[1.17 + 1.73 πt + 3.66( yt − yt* ) – 2.72( yt −1 − yt*−1 )]

Forecast-based rule

it = 1.18it-1–0.38it-2+0.20[0.98 +1.72 πt+2|t+2.29( yt +1|t − yt*+1|t )–1.37( yt −1 − yt*−1 )]

Taylor (1993) rule

it = 2 + πt + 0.5(πt – π * ) + 0.5( yt − yt* )

Taylor (1999) rule

it = 2 + πt + 0.5(πt – π * ) + ( yt − yt* )

Taylor (1999) rule
with higher r*

it = 2.75 + πt + 0.5(πt – π * ) + ( yt − yt* )

First-difference rule

it = it-1 + 0.5(πt+3|t – π * ) + 0.5( Δ 4 yt +3|t − Δ 4 yt*+3|t )

FRB/US Model Simulations: Prescriptions from the two empirical rules are computed using dynamic
simulations of the FRB/US model, implemented as though the rule is followed starting at this FOMC
meeting. The dotted line labeled “Previous Bluebook” is based on the current specification of the policy
rule, applied to the previous Greenbook projection. Confidence intervals are based on stochastic
simulations of the FRB/US model with shocks drawn from the estimated residuals over 1986-2005.
Information from Financial Markets: The expected funds rate path is based on forward rate
agreements, and the confidence intervals for this path are constructed using prices of interest rate caps.
Near-Term Prescriptions of Simple Policy Rules: These prescriptions are calculated using Greenbook
projections for inflation and the output gap. Because the first-difference rule involves the lagged funds
rate, the value labeled “Previous Bluebook” for the current quarter is computed using the actual value
of the lagged funds rate, and the one-quarter-ahead prescriptions are based on this rule’s prescription for
the current quarter.
References:
Taylor, John B. (1993). “Discretion versus policy rules in practice,” Carnegie-Rochester Conference
Series on Public Policy, vol. 39 (December), pp. 195-214.
————— (1999). “A Historical Analysis of Monetary Policy Rules,” in John B. Taylor, ed.,
Monetary Policy Rules. The University of Chicago Press, pp. 319-341.
Orphanides, Athanasios (2003). “Historical Monetary Policy Analysis and the Taylor Rule,” Journal of
Monetary Economics, vol. 50 (July), pp. 983-1022.

Appendix C Table 1

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 31 of 41

Selected Interest Rates
(Percent)
Short-term
Treasury bills
secondary market

Federal
funds
1

Long-term
CDs
secondary
market

Comm.
paper

Off-the-run Treasury yields

Indexed yields

Moody’s
Baa

Municipal
Bond
Buyer

Conventional home
mortgages
primary market

4-week

3-month

6-month

3-month

1-month

2-year

5-year

10-year

20-year

5-year

10-year

Fixed-rate

ARM

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

06 -- High
-- Low

5.34
4.22

5.27
3.91

5.13
4.17

5.33
4.37

5.50
4.50

5.32
4.22

5.32
4.34

5.20
4.28

5.32
4.42

5.45
4.59

2.63
1.82

2.68
1.94

6.94
6.08

5.31
4.52

6.80
6.10

5.83
5.15

07 -- High
-- Low
Monthly
Mar 06
Apr 06
May 06
Jun 06
Jul
06
Aug 06
Sep 06
Oct 06
Nov 06
Dec 06

5.41
5.21

5.27
4.74

5.19
5.04

5.19
5.07

5.32
5.28

5.26
5.18

5.00
4.56

4.86
4.40

4.96
4.58

5.10
4.74

2.52
2.01

2.53
2.17

6.45
6.09

4.59
4.39

6.34
6.14

5.54
5.42

4.59
4.79
4.94
4.99
5.24
5.25
5.25
5.25
5.25
5.24

4.55
4.60
4.69
4.71
4.89
5.17
4.76
4.97
5.22
4.86

4.63
4.72
4.84
4.92
5.08
5.09
4.93
5.05
5.07
4.98

4.79
4.90
5.01
5.18
5.27
5.17
5.08
5.12
5.15
5.07

4.88
5.03
5.15
5.35
5.46
5.38
5.34
5.33
5.32
5.32

4.61
4.80
4.95
5.12
5.24
5.22
5.21
5.20
5.21
5.23

4.77
4.92
5.00
5.15
5.15
4.93
4.78
4.81
4.74
4.68

4.72
4.90
4.98
5.04
5.02
4.79
4.64
4.66
4.54
4.50

4.82
5.07
5.19
5.18
5.15
4.94
4.80
4.80
4.66
4.63

4.93
5.24
5.36
5.30
5.26
5.09
4.94
4.95
4.79
4.79

2.08
2.25
2.26
2.41
2.43
2.24
2.35
2.49
2.39
2.27

2.21
2.41
2.45
2.54
2.52
2.32
2.35
2.43
2.30
2.27

6.41
6.68
6.75
6.78
6.76
6.59
6.43
6.42
6.20
6.22

5.10
5.19
5.24
5.24
5.21
4.98
4.82
4.78
4.59
4.54

6.32
6.51
6.60
6.68
6.76
6.52
6.40
6.36
6.24
6.14

5.42
5.62
5.63
5.71
5.79
5.64
5.56
5.55
5.51
5.45

Jan
Feb
Weekly
Jan
Jan
Jan
Feb
Feb
Feb
Feb
Mar
Mar
Mar
Daily
Feb
Feb
Mar
Mar
Mar
Mar
Mar
Mar
Mar
Mar
Mar
Mar
Mar

5.25
5.26

4.92
5.18

5.11
5.16

5.15
5.16

5.32
5.31

5.22
5.22

4.88
4.85

4.72
4.68

4.83
4.80

4.96
4.94

2.45
2.33

2.45
2.38

6.34
6.28

4.55
4.53

6.22
6.29

5.47
5.51

07
07
12
19
26
2
9
16
23
2
9
16

07
07
07
07
07
07
07
07
07
07

5.24
5.24
5.26
5.27
5.24
5.26
5.25
5.29
5.24
--

4.92
4.97
4.97
4.98
5.13
5.22
5.26
5.24
5.24
5.24

5.09
5.12
5.13
5.13
5.15
5.17
5.19
5.15
5.11
5.07

5.14
5.16
5.18
5.17
5.16
5.16
5.17
5.12
5.10
5.11

5.32
5.32
5.32
5.32
5.32
5.31
5.32
5.30
5.29
5.30

5.24
5.20
5.21
5.19
5.24
5.23
5.21
5.21
5.23
5.23

4.84
4.90
4.95
4.96
4.90
4.88
4.84
4.65
4.61
4.60

4.66
4.73
4.79
4.82
4.73
4.71
4.65
4.48
4.45
4.43

4.77
4.84
4.89
4.92
4.84
4.83
4.78
4.64
4.62
4.62

4.89
4.96
5.03
5.06
4.98
4.97
4.92
4.79
4.77
4.79

2.44
2.51
2.47
2.43
2.38
2.40
2.31
2.10
2.08
2.05

2.46
2.49
2.46
2.45
2.42
2.43
2.35
2.20
2.21
2.21

6.29
6.35
6.39
6.42
6.32
6.30
6.24
6.15
6.19
--

4.55
4.55
4.59
4.59
4.53
4.51
4.48
4.41
4.39
--

6.21
6.23
6.25
6.34
6.28
6.30
6.22
6.18
6.14
6.14

5.44
5.51
5.49
5.54
5.49
5.52
5.49
5.49
5.47
5.42

27
28
1
2
5
6
7
8
9
12
13
14
15

07
07
07
07
07
07
07
07
07
07
07
07
07

5.27
5.41
5.31
5.23
5.27
5.22
5.24
5.24
5.24
5.25
5.25
5.27
5.27 p

5.22
5.24
5.26
5.24
5.24
5.24
5.25
5.25
5.23
5.24
5.23
5.25
5.23

5.14
5.16
5.15
5.12
5.10
5.14
5.12
5.10
5.10
5.09
5.09
5.06
5.05

5.10
5.12
5.11
5.07
5.08
5.10
5.09
5.09
5.14
5.13
5.10
5.10
5.12

5.31
5.30
5.30
5.29
5.28
5.29
5.29
5.29
5.29
5.30
5.30
5.30
5.30

5.20
5.21
5.20
5.21
5.24
5.21
5.24
5.23
5.22
5.25
5.23
5.21
--

4.61
4.66
4.64
4.58
4.57
4.62
4.58
4.59
4.70
4.66
4.56
4.58
4.61

4.43
4.49
4.48
4.44
4.44
4.46
4.42
4.43
4.52
4.47
4.40
4.42
4.43

4.58
4.64
4.64
4.61
4.60
4.62
4.59
4.60
4.67
4.64
4.59
4.62
4.62

4.74
4.79
4.80
4.77
4.76
4.77
4.75
4.76
4.83
4.80
4.76
4.80
4.80

2.07
2.10
2.09
2.04
2.07
2.08
2.06
2.06
2.14
2.11
2.01
2.02
2.05

2.17
2.21
2.20
2.17
2.19
2.20
2.19
2.20
2.27
2.24
2.18
2.19
2.19

6.09
6.16
6.18
6.16
6.19
6.19
6.16
6.18
6.24
6.21
6.20
6.25
--

--------------

--------------

--------------

NOTE: Weekly data for columns 1 through 13 are week-ending averages. Columns 2 through 4 are on a coupon equivalent basis. Data in column 6 are interpolated from data on certain commercial paper trades settled by the
Depository Trust Company. Column 14 is the Bond Buyer revenue index, which is a 1-day quote for Thursday. Column 15 is the average contract rate on new commitments for fixed-rate mortgages (FRMs) with 80 percent
loan-to-value ratios at major institutional lenders. Column 16 is the average initial contract rate on new commitments for 1-year, adjustable-rate mortgages (ARMs) at major institutional lenders offering both FRMs and
ARMs with the same number of discount points.
MFMA
p - preliminary data

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 32 of 41
Appendix C Table 2

Money Aggregates
Seasonally Adjusted

M2

1

2

Annual growth rates (%):
Annually (Q4 to Q4)
2004
2005
2006

5.4
0.3
-0.5

5.4
4.1
5.0

5.3
5.1
6.4

Quarterly (average)
2006-Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4

1.3
0.5
-3.5
-0.1

5.4
3.3
4.2
6.8

6.4
4.0
6.2
8.5

-3.2
7.5
-3.2
6.3
-10.1
-3.9
0.4
-6.6
4.6
1.2
-4.3

4.2
3.3
3.4
1.9
4.5
4.3
4.8
4.0
8.7
7.0
7.6

6.1
2.3
5.1
0.8
8.3
6.4
6.0
6.7
9.7
8.5
10.4

5.1
-10.4

10.3
5.3

11.5
9.0

1369.1
1370.5
1365.6
1371.4
1359.5

6936.3
6977.0
7021.0
7081.0
7112.1

5567.1
5606.6
5655.4
5709.6
5752.6

5
12
19
26p

1390.3
1361.5
1351.0
1347.6

7092.4
7097.9
7110.1
7144.3

5702.1
5736.4
5759.1
5796.7

5p

1379.2

7127.5

5748.3

Monthly
2006-Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sep.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
2007-Jan.
Feb. p
Levels ($billions):
Monthly
2006-Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
2007-Jan.
Feb. p
Weekly
2007-Feb.

Mar.

p

Nontransactions
Components in M2
3

M1

Period

preliminar y

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 33 of 41
Appendix C Table 3
Changes in System Holdings of Securities 1
(Millions of dollars, not seasonally adjusted)

March 15, 2007
Treasury Bills

Treasury Coupons
Net Purchases 3

Net

Redemptions

Net

Purchases 2

(-)

Change

<1

1-5

5-10

Redemptions
(-)

Over 10

Net
Change

Federal

Net change

Agency

total

Redemptions
(-)

outright
holdings 4

Net RPs 5
ShortTerm 6

LongTerm 7

Net
Change

2004
2005

18,138
8,300

-----

18,138
8,300

7,994
2,894

17,249
11,309

5,763
3,626

1,364
2,007

--2,795

32,370
17,041

-----

50,507
25,341

-2,522
-2,415

-331
-192

-2,853
-2,607

2006

5,748

---

5,748

4,967

26,354

4,322

3,299

10,552

28,390

---

34,138

-2,062

-556

-2,618

2005 QIV

1,512

---

1,512

1,596

2,789

800

902

189

5,897

---

7,410

-1,202

-1,293

-2,496

2006 QI
QII

4,099
---

-----

4,099
---

1,200
1,375

7,443
6,063

1,704
1,181

1,219
---

1,321
1,217

10,245
7,402

-----

14,345
7,402

793
-627

1,839
-4,413

2,631
-5,040

QIII
QIV

1,649
---

-----

1,649
---

415
1,977

3,323
9,525

548
889

228
1,852

3,931
4,084

583
10,159

-----

2,232
10,159

-3,229
-2,379

-839
4,848

-4,068
2,469

2006 Jul
Aug

1,649
---

-----

1,649
---

--415

549
1,454

-----

-----

3,931
---

-3,382
1,869

-----

-1,733
1,869

-909
-231

110
548

-800
318

Sep
Oct

-----

-----

-----

--1,757

1,320
1,395

548
33

228
---

--3,749

2,096
-564

-----

2,096
-564

-469
-2,037

-2,291
1,195

-2,761
-842

Nov
Dec

-----

-----

-----

220
---

3,151
4,979

411
445

780
1,072

335
---

4,227
6,496

-----

4,227
6,496

-1,370
2,851

7,639
-155

6,268
2,696

2007 Jan
Feb

-----

-----

-----

--817

--1,061

-----

-----

-----

--1,878

-----

--1,878

-428
-6,853

-3,806
3,911

-4,234
-2,941

2006 Dec 20
Dec 27

-----

-----

-----

-----

1,329
1,342

-----

748
---

-----

2,077
1,342

-----

2,077
1,342

8,005
-6,860

-3,000
10,000

5,005
3,140

2007 Jan 3
Jan 10

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

6,785
-5,400

2,000
-9,000

8,785
-14,400

Jan 17
Jan 24

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

1,101
-4,817

-1,000
-3,000

101
-7,817

Jan 31
Feb 7

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

4,597
-8,890

--2,000

4,597
-6,890

Feb 14
Feb 21

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

1,718
2,841

2,000
4,000

3,718
6,841

Feb 28
Mar 7

-----

-----

-----

817
---

1,061
---

-----

-----

-----

1,878
---

-----

1,878
---

-4,889
-845

5,000
-2,000

111
-2,845

Mar 14

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

2,719

-2,000

719

2007 Mar 15

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

726

-3,000

-2,274

---

---

---

817

1,061

---

---

---

1,878

---

1,878

3,729

6,000

9,729

277.0

130.2

224.6

66.5

82.5

503.8

---

730.8

-20.0

21.0

1.0

Intermeeting Period
Jan 31-Mar 15
Memo: LEVEL (bil. $)
Mar 15

1. Change from end-of-period to end-of-period. Excludes changes in compensation for the effects of
inflation on the principal of inflation-indexed securities.
2. Outright purchases less outright sales (in market and with foreign accounts).
3. Outright purchases less outright sales (in market and with foreign accounts). Includes short-term notes
acquired in exchange for maturing bills. Excludes maturity shifts and rollovers of maturing issues,
except the rollover of inflation compensation.

4.
5.
6.
7.

Includes redemptions (-) of Treasury and agency securities.
RPs outstanding less reverse RPs.
Original maturity of 13 days or less.
Original maturity of 14 to 90 days.
MRA:BEW

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 34 of 41

Appendix C Chart 1

Treasury Yield Curve

Spread Between Ten−Year Treasury Yield and Federal Funds Rate
Percentage points
4

Quarterly

2

0

+
−2

−4
1960

1964

1968

1972

1976

1980

1984

1988

1992

1996

2000

2004

+ Denotes most recent weekly value.
Note. Blue shaded regions denote NBER−dated recessions.

Treasury Yield Curve*
Percent
6.0

March 15, 2007
January 30, 2007
5.5

5.0

4.5

4.0

3.5

1

3

5

7

10

20

Maturity in Years
*Smoothed yield curve estimated from off−the−run Treasury coupon securities. Yields shown are those on notional par
Treasury securities with semi−annual coupons.

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 35 of 41

Appendix C Chart 2

Dollar Exchange Rate Indexes

Nominal

Ratio scale
March 1973=100
150

Monthly

140
130
120
Major
Currencies

110

100

90

+
1972

1975

1978

1981

1984

1987

1990

1993

1996

1999

2002

2005

80
2008

+ Denotes most recent weekly value.

Ratio scale
March 1973=100

Real

140

Monthly

130
120
Other Important
110

100
Broad
90

Major
Currencies

80
1973

1976

1979

1982

1985

1988

1991

1994

1997

2000

2003

2006

Note. The major currencies index is the trade−weighted average of currencies of the euro area, Canada, Japan,
the U.K., Switzerland, Australia, and Sweden. The other important trading partners index is the trade−weighted
average of currencies of 19 other important trading partners. The Broad index is the trade−weighted average of
currencies of all important trading partners. Real indexes have been adjusted for relative changes in U.S. and
foreign consumer prices. Blue shaded regions denote NBER−dated recessions. The most recent monthly
observations are based on staff forecasts of CPI inflation for those countries where actual data are not yet available.

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 36 of 41

Appendix C Chart 3

Stock Indexes

Nominal

Ratio scale
1941−43=10

Ratio
45

2000

Monthly

+

40
S&P 500

1500
1000

35
30

500

25
P/E Ratio*
250

20

+
15
125
10
5
0
1960

1964

1968

1972

1976

1980

1984

1988

1992

1996

2000

2004

2008

* Based on trailing four−quarter earnings.
+ Denotes most recent weekly value.

Real

Ratio scale
1941−43=10
160
140

Monthly

120

+

100
80
60

S&P 500*

40

20
1960

1964

1968

1972

1976

1980

* Deflated by the CPI.
+ Denotes most recent weekly value.
Note. Blue shaded regions denote NBER−dated recessions.

1984

1988

1992

1996

2000

2004

2008

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 37 of 41

Appendix C Chart 4

One−Year Real Interest Rates

One−Year Treasury Constant Maturity Yield Less One−Year Inflation Expectations (Michigan Survey)*
Percent
8

Monthly

4

+
0

−4
1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

* Mean value of respondents.

One−Year Treasury Constant Maturity Yield Less One−Year Inflation Expectations (Philadelphia Fed)*
Percent
8

Monthly
GDP Deflator

4

+
+
CPI

0

−4
1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

* ASA/NBER quarterly survey until 1990:Q1; Philadelphia Federal Reserve Bank Survey of Professional Forecasters
thereafter. Median value of respondents.

One−Year Treasury Constant Maturity Yield Less Change in the Core CPI from Three Months Prior
Percent
8

Monthly

4

+
0

−4
1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

+ Denotes most recent weekly Treasury constant maturity yield less most recent inflation expectation.
Note. Blue shaded regions denote NBER−dated recessions.

2006

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 38 of 41

Appendix C Chart 5

Long−Term Real Interest Rates*

Real Ten−Year Treasury Yields
Percent
10

Monthly

8
Real rate using
Philadelphia Fed Survey
6
Ten−year TIPS yield
4

+

Real rate using
Michigan Survey

2

+
0

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

Nominal and Real Corporate Bond Rates
Percent
14

Monthly

12

Nominal rate on Moody’s
A−rated corporate bonds

10

Real rate using
Philadelphia Fed Survey

8

+

6

4
Real rate using
Michigan Survey

1984

1986

1988

1990

+
+
1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

* For real rates, measures using the Philadelphia Fed Survey employ the ten−year inflation expectations from the
Blue Chip Survey until April 1991 and the Philadelphia Federal Reserve Bank Survey of Professional Forecasters
thereafter (median value of respondents). Measures using the Michigan Survey employ the five− to ten−year
inflation expectations from that survey (mean value of respondents).
+ For TIPS and nominal corporate rate, denotes the most recent weekly value. For other real rate series, denotes
the most recent weekly nominal yield less the most recent inflation expectation.
Note. Blue shaded regions denote NBER−dated recessions.

2

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 39 of 41

Appendix C Chart 6

Commodity Price Measures

Journal of Commerce Index
Ratio scale, index (1980=100)
Weekly

200
180
160
140
120
Metals

100

Total

80

1985

1987

1989

1991

1993

1995

1997

1999

2001

2003

2005

2007

CRB Spot Industrials
Ratio scale, index (1967=100)
500

Weekly

450
400
350
300
250

1985

1987

1989

1991

1993

1995

1997

1999

2001

2003

2005

2007

CRB Futures
Ratio scale, index (1967=100)
450

Weekly

400
350
300
250

200
1985

1987

1989

1991

1993

1995

Note. Blue shaded regions denote NBER−dated recessions.

1997

1999

2001

2003

2005

2007

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 40 of 41

Appendix C Chart 7

Growth of M2

Nominal M2
Percent
14

Quarterly

12

10

8

6

4

2

0
1960

1963

1966

1969

1972

1975

1978

1981

1984

1987

1990

1993

1996

1999

2002

2005

2008

Real M2
Percent
10

Quarterly

5

0

−5

1960

1963

1966

1969

1972

1975

1978

1981

1984

1987

1990

1993

1996

1999

2002

2005

2008

Note. Four−quarter moving average. Blue shaded regions denote NBER−dated recessions. Gray areas denote
projection period. Real M2 is deflated by CPI.

Class I FOMC - Restricted Controlled (FR)

Page 41 of 41

Appendix C Chart 8

Inflation Indicator Based on M2
Price Level

Ratio scale
140

Quarterly

120
100
Implicit GDP
price deflator (P)

80

Long-run equilibrium
price level (P*)

60

40

1965

1968

1971

1974

1977

1980

1983

1986

1989

1992

1995

1998

2001

2004

Inflation 1

2007

Percent
12

Quarterly

10

8

6

4

2

1965

1968

1971

1974

1977

1980

1983

1986

1989

1992

1995

1998

2001

2004

2007

1. Change in the implicit GDP price deflator over the previous four quarters.
Note: P* is defined to equal M2 times V* divided by potential GDP. V*, or long-run velocity, is estimated
using average velocity over the 1959:Q1-to-1989:Q4 period and then, after a break, over the interval from
1993:Q1 to the present. For the forecast period, P* is based on the staff M2 forecast and P is simulated using a
short-run dynamic model relating P to P*. Blue areas indicate periods in which P* is notably less than P.
Gray areas denote the projection period.