ECB Forum on Central Banking, June 2018 1
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Email Not Displaying Correctly
The Euro Area Business Cycle Network would like to invite you to A discussion forum on Rethinking the Link Between Exchange Rates and Inflation: Misperceptions and New Approaches Keynote Speaker Kristin Forbes (Monetary Policy Committee, Bank of England) Discussants Frank Smets (ECB and CEPR) Giancarlo Corsetti (University of Cambridge and CEPR) Gianluca Benigno (London School of Economics and CEPR) Host Venue Bank of England Threadneedle Street London EC2R 8AH Date Monday, 28 September 2015 Presentation and discussions 14.00 – 16.00 Professor Forbes’ presentation will last about 45 minutes, and the guest speakers’ presentations will each be 15 minutes long. This will be followed by a discussion that will be open to the floor. Our aim is to have an informal, off-the-record discussion that will engage and involve all participants in response to the presentations. REGISTRATION Very limited spaces are still available. Please register by contacting Nadine Clarke at CEPR: [email protected] by 8 September. Should you require any further information about this event, please do not hesitate to get in touch. Looking forward to seeing you on 28 September. Yours faithfully Massimiliano Marcellino Scientific Chair, EABCN Kristin Forbes Kristin Forbes joined the Monetary Policy Committee of the Bank of England in July 2014. She is also the Jerome and Dorothy Lemelson Professor of Management and Global Economics at the Sloan School of Management at MIT. She served as a Deputy Assistant Secretary in the U.S. Treasury Department from 2001- 2002, as a Member of the White House’s Council of Economic Advisers from 2003-2005, and a Member of the Governor’s Council of Economic Advisers for Massachusetts from 2009-2014. -
Heteronomics Boe Preview: Hiking Cycle but Not
Heteronomics 28 July 2017 BoE preview: hiking cycle but not yet H1 GDP growth has disappointed by enough to leave live concerns about how weak • Philip Rush the economy currently is, which should encourage the MPC to leave Bank rate on +44 (0)7515 730675 hold in August. I expect two dissenters, with the new member joining the majority. +44 (0)2037 534656 • Falling unemployment is indicating a persistent and significant supply shock, [email protected] which is inherently inflationary and hawkish. I continue to expect the MPC to start raising Bank rate in May-18, with risks skewed earlier. • Most members may expect to hike sooner, but there is no need to commit. By clarifying that a rate increase would probably be the start of a slow cycle, the curve could steepen, strengthening Sterling, and easing the policy trade-off. That would buy time without risking a loss of credibility by failing to hike on schedule. At 12:00 BST on 3 August, the BoE will publish its latest Inflation Report along with its decision and minutes to the meeting. Since its last report on 11 May, there have been lots of surprise falls, including in unemployment, wage growth, GDP tracking estimates, Sterling, and the oil price (Figure 1). Naturally, the implications of those things are more varied, especially amid differently dated releases. At the BoE’s 15 June meeting, it turned surprisingly hawkish, with Ian McCafferty and Michael Saunders joining Kristin Forbes in voting for an immediate rate hike. The unemployment rate had fallen below the BoE’s forecast while inflation was overshooting, with the outlook stronger still amid Sterling devaluation. -
Emerging Markets Finance March 9–11, 2005
Emerging Markets Finance March 9–11, 2005 Thursday, March 10, 2005 7:00 a.m. Breakfast Abbott Center Dining Room 8:00 a.m. Welcome Classroom 50 Robert S. Harris, Dean, The Darden School Are Emerging Markets Cheap? C. Hayes Miller, Senior Vice President—Global Equities, Baring Asset Management, Inc. Hayes Miller is a member of both the Global Equity Group and the Strategic Policy Group at Baring Asset Management, and is the portfolio manager responsible for North American clients. He has developed quantitative models for Global and EAFE equity products and has been instrumental in creating a successful Active/Passive EAFE Equity product. Miller joined Baring Asset Management in 1994 as a portfolio manager with responsibility for global equities. In 2000 he became a member of the Strategic Policy Group, a five-member team which forms country, sector, asset, and currency strategy for Baring’s global client base. Miller has a B.A. in economics and political science from Vanderbilt University, and received his C.F.A. designation in 1989. He has spoken at numerous conferences, and has written numerous research pieces, including co- authoring a manuscript on the relative importance of country, sector, and company factors for the CFA Institute Research Foundation. 8:45 a.m. Refreshment Break 9:15 a.m. Market Synchronicity Classroom 50 Moderator: Campbell Harvey, Fuqua School of Business, Duke University Campbell Harvey is the J. Paul Sticht Professor of International Business at the Fuqua School of Business, Duke University. He is also a research associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research in Cambridge, Massachusetts. -
The Labour Market
The labour market Speech given by Michael Saunders, External MPC Member, Bank of England Resolution Foundation, London 13 January 2017 I would like to thank William Abel, Stuart Berry, Ben Broadbent, Ambrogio Cesa-Bianchi, Vivek Roy-Chowdhury, Matt Corder, Pavandeep Dhami, Kristin Forbes, Andy Haldane, Chris Jackson, Clare Macallan, Jack Marston, Alex Tuckett, Chris Redl, Steve Millard, Minouche Shafik, Bradley Speigner, and Arthur Turrell for their help in preparing this speech. The views expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of the other members of the Monetary Policy Committee 1 All speeches are available online at www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Pages/speeches/default.aspx This talk focusses on the labour market, and in particular the limited response of wage growth to falling unemployment. At first glance, the labour market now looks very tight. The jobless rate is down to 4.8%, slightly below both the 2000-07 average and the MPC’s estimate of the equilibrium rate, which are about 5%1 (see figure 1). The jobless rate has only been below current levels for a few months in the last 40 years2. The short-term jobless rate is the lowest since data began in 1992. The number of job vacancies is around a record high, and the ratio of unemployment to vacancies matches the 2005 low (see figure 2). However, even with relatively low unemployment, average weekly earnings growth remains modest, at 2-3% YoY3. Unit labour cost growth is perhaps still slightly below the pace consistent with the inflation target over time4. There is little sign of significantly higher pay growth for 2017 (see figure 3). -
2020Usdaexplanatory Notes –Agricultural Marketing Service
2020 USDA EXPLANATORY NOTES – AGRICULTURAL MARKETING SERVICE Agency-Wide ................................................................................................................................................................. 3 Purpose Statement.....................................................................................................................................................3 Available Funds and Staff Years ............................................................................................................................ 11 Permanent Positions by Grade and Staff Years ...................................................................................................... 13 Vehicle Fleet ........................................................................................................................................................... 14 Shared Funding Projects ......................................................................................................................................... 15 Account 1: Marketing Services ................................................................................................................................... 17 Appropriations Language........................................................................................................................................ 17 Lead-Off Tabular Statement ................................................................................................................................... 17 Project Statement -
State Constitutional and Statutory Provisions and Municipal Ordinances Held Unconstitutional Or Held to Be Preempted by Federal Law
STATE CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY PROVISIONS AND MUNICIPAL ORDINANCES HELD UNCONSTITUTIONAL OR HELD TO BE PREEMPTED BY FEDERAL LAW 2317 STATE CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY PROVI- SIONS AND MUNICIPAL ORDINANCES HELD UN- CONSTITUTIONAL OR HELD TO BE PREEMPTED BY FEDERAL LAW Three separate lists of Supreme Court decisions appear below: part I lists cases holding state constitutional or statutory provisions unconstitu- tional, part II lists cases holding local laws unconstitutional, and part III lists cases holding that state or local laws are preempted by federal law. As Congress acted as the legislature for the District of Columbia until passage of the Home Rule Act on December 24, 1973, District of Columbia statutes that were enacted by Congress are treated as federal statutes (and included in a prior appendix), and District of Columbia statutes en- acted by the District of Columbia government are treated as state stat- utes. Each case is briefly summarized, and the votes of Justices are indi- cated unless the Court’s decision was unanimous. Justices who write or join the majority or plurality opinion are listed under “Justices concur- ring”, whether or not they write separate concurring opinions, and Jus- tices who do not join the majority or plurality opinion, but write separate opinions concurring in the result, are listed under “Justices specially con- curring.” Previous editions contained only two lists, one for cases holding state laws unconstitutional or preempted by federal law, and one for unconsti- tutional or preempted local laws. The 2002 edition added the third cat- egory because of the different nature of preemption cases. State or local laws held to be preempted by federal law are void not because they con- travene any provision of the Constitution, but rather because they conflict with a federal statute or treaty, and through operation of the Supremacy Clause. -
PDF | UK Rates to Stay Firmly on Hold, Despite 3
Economic and Financial Analysis 15 June 2017 UK rates to stay firmly on hold, despite 3 votes for Snap hike Three MPC members voted for a hike, but we doubt there will be a consensus backing higher rates until there is much greater clarity on Brexit. Source: Bank of England The Bank of England has left interest rates unchanged, but it was closer than predicted with three MPC members voting for a rate hike. Kristin Forbes had already been voting for such action, but she was joined by Michael Saunders and Ian McCafferty who also wanted an immediate increase in Bank Rate to 0.5%. This is the biggest vote in favour of a hike since 2007. Number of MPC members voting Three for a rate hike They felt such action was justified because inflation was accelerating faster than they had expected and that slack in the labour market appears to have diminished. However, the other five members of the MPC thought that despite inflation likely remaining “above the target for an extended period” there was no justification for action. We think the committee as a whole will look through this inflation spike They pointed to the fact “pay growth has moderated further from already subdued rates” and were worried because “GDP growth declined markedly in the first quarter”. They also warned of the uncertainty over “how large and persistent this slowdown in consumption will prove”. Moreover, they stated that reacting to inflation with higher interest rates “would be achievable only at the cost of higher unemployment and, in all likelihood, even weaker income growth”. -
State Constitutional and Statutory Provisions and Municipal Ordinances Held Unconstitutional Or Held to Be Preempted by Federal Law (1789–2002)
STATE CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY PROVISIONS AND MUNICIPAL ORDINANCES HELD UNCONSTITUTIONAL OR HELD TO BE PREEMPTED BY FEDERAL LAW (1789–2002) 2161 VerDate Aug<04>2004 12:57 Aug 23, 2004 Jkt 077500 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 8221 Sfmt 8221 C:\CONAN\CON064.SGM PRFM99 PsN: CON064 VerDate Aug<04>2004 12:57 Aug 23, 2004 Jkt 077500 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 8221 Sfmt 8221 C:\CONAN\CON064.SGM PRFM99 PsN: CON064 STATE CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY PRO- VISIONS AND MUNICIPAL ORDINANCES HELD UNCONSTITUTIONAL OR HELD TO BE PRE- EMPTED BY FEDERAL LAW Three separate lists of Supreme Court decisions appear below: part I lists cases holding state constitutional or statutory provisions unconstitu- tional, part II lists cases holding local laws unconstitutional, and part III lists cases holding that state or local laws are preempted by federal law. Each case is briefly summarized, and the votes of Justices are indicated un- less the Court’s decision was unanimous. Previous editions contained only two lists, one for cases holding state laws unconstitutional or preempted by federal law, and one for unconstitutional or preempted local laws. The 2002 edition adds the third category because of the different nature of preemption cases. State or local laws held to be preempted by federal law are void not due to repugnancy with any provision of the Constitution, but rather due to conflict with a federal statute or treaty, and through operation of the Su- premacy Clause. Preemption cases formerly listed in one of the first two cat- egories have been moved to the third. A few cases with multiple holdings are listed in more than one category. -
State Constitutional and Statutory Provisions and Municipal Ordinances Held Unconstitutional Or Held to Be Preempted by Federal Law
STATE CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY PROVISIONS AND MUNICIPAL ORDINANCES HELD UNCONSTITUTIONAL OR HELD TO BE PREEMPTED BY FEDERAL LAW 2377 STATE CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY PROVI- SIONS AND MUNICIPAL ORDINANCES HELD UN- CONSTITUTIONAL OR HELD TO BE PREEMPTED BY FEDERAL LAW Three separate lists of Supreme Court decisions appear below: part I lists cases holding state constitutional or statutory provisions unconstitu- tional, part II lists cases holding local laws unconstitutional, and part III lists cases holding that state or local laws are preempted by federal law. As Congress acted as the legislature for the District of Columbia until passage of the Home Rule Act on December 24, 1973, District of Columbia statutes that were enacted by Congress are treated as federal statutes (and included in a prior appendix), and District of Columbia statutes en- acted by the District of Columbia government are treated as state stat- utes. Each case is briefly summarized, and the votes of Justices are indi- cated unless the Court’s decision was unanimous. Justices who write or join the majority or plurality opinion are listed under “Justices concur- ring”, whether or not they write separate concurring opinions, and Jus- tices who do not join the majority or plurality opinion, but write separate opinions concurring in the result, are listed under “Justices specially con- curring.” Previous editions contained only two lists, one for cases holding state laws unconstitutional or preempted by federal law, and one for unconsti- tutional or preempted local laws. The 2002 edition added the third cat- egory because of the different nature of preemption cases. State or local laws held to be preempted by federal law are void not because they con- travene any provision of the Constitution, but rather because they conflict with a federal statute or treaty, and through operation of the Supremacy Clause. -
Macroprudential Policy After the Crisis: Forging a Thor's Hammer For
Macroprudential Policy after the Crisis: Forging a Thor’s Hammer for Financial Stability in Iceland By Kristin J. Forbes* Jerome and Dorothy Lemelson Professor of International Economics and Management MIT-Sloan School of Management, NBER and CEPR June 3, 2018 Report prepared at the request of the Task Force dedicated to reviewing monetary and currency policies for Iceland** Acknowledgements: This report benefits from conversations with members of the Task Force**, people from various institutions within Iceland, and experts on Iceland and/or macroprudential policy from outside the country. Please see Appendix A for a list of people to whom I spoke at some point in the preparation of this report and to whom I am grateful for their time and insights. I am particularly grateful to members of the Task Force and Harpa Jónsdóttir for answering my many questions. Further thanks to staff at the Central Bank of Iceland for comments on an earlier draft of this report. All views in this report, however, are my own and do not necessarily reflect the comments from these discussions or the views of anyone with whom I have spoken. * The author can be contacted at [email protected] ** For information on the task force, see: https://www.ministryoffinance.is/news/iceland-lifts-capital-controls. The members of the Task Force are: Mr. Ásgeir Jónsson, Mr. Illugi Gunnarsson, Ms. Ásdis Kristjánsdóttir. I. Introduction In Norse mythology, the god Thor wielded a fearsome hammer named Mjölnir—a tool that created thunder when struck and was critical to Thor’s victories over his many rivals. -
Monetary Policy and Financial Stability Update
Monetary policy and financial stability update Raakhi Odedra Bank of England 20 October 2016 Off the record Agency for Yorkshire & the Humber 2 - “This is not (underlined, italicised, capitalised and repeated in bold) a re-run of the financial crisis of 2008/09.” - Andy Haldane, Chief Economist, 15 July 2016 - “The UK can handle change… The question is not whether the UK will adjust but rather how quickly and how well.” - Mark Carney, Governor, 30 June 2016 Agency for Yorkshire & the Humber 3 The Bank of England’s Agencies Yorkshire & Humber • Northallerton • Scarborough • Harrogate • Skipton • York • Leeds • Bradford • Hull • Scunthorpe • Grimsby • Doncaster • Sheffield Agency for Yorkshire & the Humber 4 What I will cover 1. MPC and FPC policy actions 2. Prospects for growth and inflation 3. Financial Stability – Risks and Resilience Agency for Yorkshire & the Humber 5 The Monetary Policy Committee Last meeting: 14th Sept 2016 Next meeting: 2nd Nov 2016 Mark Carney Sir Jon Cunliffe Ben Broadbent Minouche Shafik Andy Haldane Kristin Forbes Jan Vlieghe Martin Weale Ian McCafferty Agency for Yorkshire & the Humber 6 Monetary Policy Committee 1. Bank Rate: cut from 0.5% to 0.25% 2. ‘Term Funding Scheme’ to maximise pass-through 3. Government bond purchases of £60bn (‘QE’) 4. Corporate bond purchases of £10bn (‘QE’) Agency for Yorkshire & the Humber 7 Policy actions 1. Bank Rate: cut from 0.5% to 0.25% 2. ‘Term Funding Scheme’ to maximise pass-through 3. Corporate bond purchases of £10bn (‘QE’) 4. Government bond purchases of £60bn (‘QE’) Agency for Yorkshire & the Humber 8 Bank Rate since 1694 Agency for Yorkshire & the Humber Variable vs fixed rate loans Proportion of stock of UK loans at variable and fixed rates Agency for Yorkshire & the Humber Policy actions 1. -
Monetary Mechanics: a Financial View
A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Tymoigne, Éric Working Paper Monetary mechanics: A financial view Working Paper, No. 799 Provided in Cooperation with: Levy Economics Institute of Bard College Suggested Citation: Tymoigne, Éric (2014) : Monetary mechanics: A financial view, Working Paper, No. 799, Levy Economics Institute of Bard College, Annandale-on-Hudson, NY This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/110023 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. www.econstor.eu Working Paper No. 799 Monetary Mechanics: A Financial View by Éric Tymoigne* Levy Economics Institute of Bard College May 2014 * Correspondence: [email protected]. The author thanks John F. Henry, Charles A.E. Goodhart, Yan Liang, Perry Mehrling, and L.