Inflation targeting is a monetary policy that focuses on changing monetary policy to achieve a predetermined yearly rate of inflation. Inflation targeting is founded on the assumption that preserving price stability, which is achieved by managing inflation, is the greatest way to generate long-term economic growth.
What does the term “inflation target” mean?
- Inflation targeting is a monetary policy technique in which a central bank sets an inflation target and adjusts monetary policy to meet that aim.
- Inflation targeting is primarily concerned with maintaining price stability, but proponents feel it also aids economic growth and stability.
- Other conceivable central banking policy goals, such as exchange rate, unemployment, or national income targeting, might be contrasted with inflation targeting.
Why is 2% inflation the target?
The government has established a target of 2% inflation to keep inflation low and stable. This makes it easier for everyone to plan for the future.
When inflation is too high or fluctuates a lot, it’s difficult for businesses to set the correct prices and for customers to budget.
However, if inflation is too low, or even negative, some consumers may be hesitant to spend because they believe prices will decline. Although decreased prices appear to be a good thing, if everyone cut back on their purchasing, businesses may fail and individuals may lose their employment.
What is the inflation target range?
On January 25, 2012, US Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke made a historic change by setting a target inflation rate of 2%, bringing the Fed in line with many other major central banks across the world. Until then, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) of the Federal Reserve did not have an explicit inflation target, but instead published a preferred target range for inflation (typically between 1.7 and 2 percent) as measured by the personal consumption expenditures price index on a regular basis.
Prior to the target’s implementation, several critics said that a target would limit the Fed’s ability to stabilize GDP and/or employment in the case of an external economic shock. Another concern was that an explicit target would encourage central bankers to become “inflation nutters,” as former Bank of England Governor Mervyn King dubbed them in 1997. Inflation nutters are central bankers who focus solely on the inflation target at the expense of stable growth, employment, and/or exchange rates. As did Chairman of the US Federal Reserve Ben Bernanke, who declared in 2003 that all inflation targeting at the time was of the flexible sort, in principle and practice, King went on to help create the Bank’s inflation targeting strategy and argues that the buffoonery has not occurred.
Previous Chairman Alan Greenspan, as well as other former FOMC members like Alan Blinder, generally agreed with the benefits of inflation targeting but were wary of the loss of discretion it entailed; Bernanke, on the other hand, was a vocal supporter.
Is targeting inflation a good idea?
Inflation targeting appears to have been successful in boosting the transparency of monetary policymaking and lowering the rate of inflation in these nations by a large margin, with no negative effects for output.
As we near the conclusion of the twentieth century, the most pressing question facing central banks is what monetary policy strategy they should adopt. Inflation targeting is a monetary policy that has grown in popularity in recent years. It entails the public publication of medium-term numerical inflation targets and a commitment by the monetary authorities to meet these targets. In countries that have used inflation targeting, how well has it worked?
Mishkin and Posen argue that Germany is best described as a “hybrid” inflation targeter, with an explicit numerical inflation target and more aspects in common with an inflation targeting regime than a rigid implementation of a monetary targeting rule. Flexibility and transparency, two key aspects of a successful targeting regime, were present in Germany and are also vital elements in inflation targeting regimes in other nations.
New Zealand was the first country to formally implement inflation targeting in 1990, and it has been a huge success: the country, which was prone to high and volatile inflation before the inflation-targeting regime was implemented, has emerged as a low-inflation country with high rates of economic growth as a result of the experience. However, the New Zealand experience shows that strict adherence to a narrow inflation target range can result in policy instrument movements that are greater than the central bank would like, resulting in instances where credibility is harmed unnecessarily, even when underlying trend inflation is contained.
The effectiveness of inflation targeting in Canada (first implemented in 1991) demonstrates that an inflation-targeting framework with a less rigid institutional structure can also be extremely effective. Even though accountability is to the general people rather than to the government through specific contracts, inflation targeting has kept inflation low and stable in Canada. A fundamental component of Canada’s success with inflation targeting, like in Germany and New Zealand, has been a strong and growing commitment to transparency and public communication of monetary policy strategy. Because the floor of the goal range is regarded as seriously as the ceiling, the Bank of Canada has stressed that inflation targeting can help mitigate business cycle variations as part of this strategy.
In the aftermath of a foreign exchange crisis in 1992, the United Kingdom implemented inflation objectives in order to restore a nominal anchor and lock in previous disinflationary successes. Until May 1997, inflation targeting was carried out under strict political limitations, i.e., under a system in which the government, rather than the central bank, determined the monetary policy instruments. Despite this handicap, inflation targeting in the United Kingdom contributed to lower and more stable inflation rates. The Bank of England’s focus on transparency is credited with the effectiveness of inflation targeting in the United Kingdom. The Bank of England, particularly through its Inflation Report, was a pioneer in developing novel ways of communicating with the public. Many other central banks pursuing inflation targeting have modeled their communication efforts after the Bank of England’s.
Mishkin and Posen argue that the inflation-targeting countries’ design choices have tended to converge over time, implying that a consensus on best practice in the operation of an inflation-targeting regime is emerging. Transparency and flexibility, when well-balanced in operational design, appear to be a solid foundation for a monetary strategy aimed at maintaining price stability. Countries have been able to sustain low inflation rates thanks to inflation targeting, which they have not always been able to accomplish in the past. Furthermore, central banks have not been forced to relinquish their concerns about other economic outcomes such as the level of the currency rate or the rate of economic growth because of inflation targeting. Indeed, there is little indication that inflation targeting has had negative long-term repercussions on the real economy; rather, it appears to have improved the environment for economic growth. Mishkin and Posen stress, however, that inflation targeting is not a panacea: it does not allow governments to eliminate inflation from their systems without incurring costs, and anti-inflation credibility does not emerge immediately after an inflation target is adopted. Indeed, the data suggests that the only way for the central bank to establish trust is to earn it.
What does low inflation mean?
A low rate of inflation encourages the most effective use of economic resources. When inflation is strong, a significant amount of time and resources from the economy are spent by individuals looking for ways to protect themselves from inflation.
What happens if inflation rises too quickly?
If inflation continues to rise over an extended period of time, economists refer to this as hyperinflation. Expectations that prices will continue to rise fuel inflation, which lowers the real worth of each dollar in your wallet.
Spiraling prices can lead to a currency’s value collapsing in the most extreme instances imagine Zimbabwe in the late 2000s. People will want to spend any money they have as soon as possible, fearing that prices may rise, even if only temporarily.
Although the United States is far from this situation, central banks such as the Federal Reserve want to prevent it at all costs, so they normally intervene to attempt to curb inflation before it spirals out of control.
The issue is that the primary means of doing so is by rising interest rates, which slows the economy. If the Fed is compelled to raise interest rates too quickly, it might trigger a recession and increase unemployment, as happened in the United States in the early 1980s, when inflation was at its peak. Then-Fed head Paul Volcker was successful in bringing inflation down from a high of over 14% in 1980, but at the expense of double-digit unemployment rates.
Americans aren’t experiencing inflation anywhere near that level yet, but Jerome Powell, the Fed’s current chairman, is almost likely thinking about how to keep the country from getting there.
The Conversation has given permission to reprint this article under a Creative Commons license. Read the full article here.
Photo credit for the banner image:
Prices for used cars and trucks are up 31% year over year. David Zalubowski/AP Photo
Why are banks so keen on inflation?
- Inflation is defined as an increase in the price of goods and services that results in a decrease in the buying power of money.
- Depending on the conditions, inflation might benefit both borrowers and lenders.
- Prices can be directly affected by the money supply; prices may rise as the money supply rises, assuming no change in economic activity.
- Borrowers gain from inflation because they may repay lenders with money that is worth less than it was when they borrowed it.
- When prices rise as a result of inflation, demand for borrowing rises, resulting in higher interest rates, which benefit lenders.
Governments seek inflation for what reason?
Question from a reader: Why does inflation make it easier for governments to repay their debts?
During the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s, when inflation was quite high, the national debt as a percentage of GDP dropped dramatically. Deflation and massive debt characterized the 1920s and 1930s.
Inflation makes it easier for a government to pay its debt for a variety of reasons, especially when inflation is larger than planned. In conclusion:
- Nominal tax collections rise as inflation rises (if prices are higher, the government will collect more VAT, workers pay more income tax)
- Higher inflation lowers the actual worth of debt; bondholders with fixed interest rates will see their bonds’ real value diminish, making it easier for the government to repay them.
- Higher inflation allows the government to lock income tax levels, allowing more workers to pay higher tax rates thereby increasing tax revenue without raising rates.
Why inflation can benefit the government at the expense of bondholders
- Let’s pretend that an economy has 0% inflation and that people anticipate it to stay that way.
- Let’s say the government needs to borrow 2 billion and sells 1,000 30-year bonds to the private sector. The government may give a 2% annual interest rate to entice individuals to acquire bonds.
- The government will thereafter be required to repay the full amount of the bonds (1,000) as well as the annual interest payments (20 per year at 2%).
- Investors who purchase the bonds will profit. The bond yield (2%) is higher than the inflation rate. They get their bonds back, plus interest.
- Assume, however, that inflation of 10% occurred unexpectedly. Money loses its worth as a result of this. As prices rise as a result of inflation, 1,000 will buy fewer products and services.
- As salaries and prices rise, the government will receive more tax money as a result of inflation (for example, if prices rise 10%, the government’s VAT receipts will rise 10%).
- As a result, inflation aids the government in collecting more tax income.
- Bondholders, on the other hand, lose out. The government still owes only 1,000 in repayment. However, inflation has lowered the value of that 1,000 bond (it now has a real value of 900). Because the inflation rate (ten percent) is higher than the bond’s interest rate (two percent), their funds are losing actual value.
- Because of inflation, repaying bondholders needs a lesser percentage of the government’s overall tax collection, making it easier for the government to repay the original loan.
As a result of inflation, the government (borrower) is better off, whereas bondholders (savers) are worse off.
Evaluation (index-linked bonds)
Some bondholders will purchase index-linked bonds as a result of this risk. This means that if inflation rises, the maturity value and interest rate on the bond will rise in lockstep with inflation, protecting the bond’s real value. The government does not benefit from inflation in this instance since it pays greater interest payments and is unable to discount the debt through inflation.
Inflation and benefits
Inflation is expected to peak at 6.2 percent in 2022 in the United Kingdom, resulting in a significant increase in nominal tax receipts. The government, on the other hand, has expanded benefits and public sector salaries at a lower inflation rate. In April 2022, inflation-linked benefits and tax credits will increase by 3.1%, as determined by the Consumer Price Index (CPI) inflation rate in September 2021.
As a result, public employees and benefit recipients will suffer a genuine drop in income their benefits will increase by 3.1 percent, but inflation might reach 6.2 percent. The government’s financial condition will improve in this case by increasing benefits at a slower rate than inflation.
Only by making the purposeful decision to raise benefits and wages at a slower rate than inflation can debt be reduced.
Inflation and bracket creep
Another approach for the government to benefit from inflation is to maintain a constant income tax level. The basic rate of income tax (20%), for example, begins at 12,501. At 50,000, the tax rate is 40%, and at 150,000, the tax rate is 50%. As a result of inflation, nominal earnings will rise, and more workers will begin to pay higher rates of income tax. As a result, even though the tax rate appears to be unchanged, the government has effectively raised average tax rates.
Long Term Implications of inflation on bonds
People will be hesitant to buy bonds if they expect low inflation and subsequently lose the real worth of their savings due to high inflation. They know that inflation might lower the value of bondholders’ money.
If bondholders are concerned that the government will generate inflation, greater bond rates will be desired to compensate for the risk of losing money due to inflation. As a result, the likelihood of high inflation may make borrowing more onerous for the government.
Bondholders may not expect zero inflation; yet, bondholders are harmed by unexpected inflation.
Example Post War Britain
Inflation was fairly low throughout the 1930s. This is one of the reasons why individuals were willing to pay low interest rates for UK government bonds (in the 1950s, the national debt increased to over 230 percent of GDP). Inflationary effects lowered the debt burden in the postwar period, making it simpler for the government to satisfy its repayment obligations.
In the 1970s, unexpected inflation (due to an oil price shock) aided in the reduction of government debt burdens in a number of countries, including the United States.
Inflation helped to expedite the decline of UK national debt as a percentage of GDP in the postwar period, lowering the real burden of debt. However, debt declined as a result of a sustained period of economic development and increased tax collections.
Economic Growth and Government Debt
Another concern is that if the government reflates the economy (for example, by pursuing quantitative easing), it may increase both economic activity and inflation. A higher GDP is a crucial component in the government’s ability to raise more tax money to pay off its debt.
Bondholders may be concerned about an economy that is expected to experience deflation and negative growth. Although deflation might increase the real value of bonds, they may be concerned that the economy is stagnating too much and that the government would struggle to satisfy its debt obligations.
What are the effects of high inflation on the economy?
In order to calm the economy and slow demand, the Federal Reserve may raise interest rates in response to rising inflation. If the central bank acts too quickly, the economy could enter a recession, which would be bad for stocks and everyone else as well.
Mr. Damodaran stated, “The worse inflation is, the more severe the economic shutdown must be to break the back of inflation.”
What is Canada’s goal inflation rate?
The Bank of Canada wants to keep inflation at the 2% midpoint of a 1 to 3% target range. The inflation objective is calculated as the growth in the entire consumer price index year over year (CPI). Because it includes products and services that most Canadians buy, such as food, housing, transportation, furniture, clothing, recreation, and other items, the CPI is the most relevant estimate of the cost of living for most Canadians.
The Bank also keeps an eye on a series of “core” inflation indicators that allow it to “see through” momentary variations in the total CPI and concentrate on the long-term trend of inflation. In this way, these core inflation metrics serve as an operational guide to assist the Bank in meeting the total CPI inflation objective. CPI-trim, CPI-median, and CPI-common have been the Bank’s favored core inflation indicators since January 2017.