Sunday, November 9, 2014

Does the Fed need a third mandate?

The Fed has a dual mandate of managing inflation and domestic growth, but for the good of the global economy does it need a third mandate, an international liquidity mandate? 

As the reserve currency of the world, the policies of the Fed impact global liquidity. Regardless of the talk of alternative reserve currencies, the dollar is not going to be replaced in the near-term. There will be changes on the margin, but more Fed liquidity means more global liquidity and a cut in US liquidity will have an adverse impact on the rest of the world. 

When money flows to the US, it is flowing out of somewhere else. It does not matter if it based on a search for safe assets or better investment opportunities. With US rates higher than most G10 countries, money will flow to the US. If money flows are expected to tighten in the current post-QE period, funds will flow out of risky EM investments. We have seen this in both EM stock and bond markets.

If the Fed is truly interested in macro prudential policies, then it should start with its role as a global liquidity provider. This is not a new issue, but the view that EM economies would be independent Fed monetary cycles has proved to be wrong. "Benign neglect" of currencies implications by the Fed  is misguided. A benign neglect Treasury strategy misplaces where the power in currency determination exists. 

No comments:

Post a Comment