Search

Begin New Search Topic Economy Political Geography North America Publishing Institution Peterson Institute for International Economics Publication Year within 10 Years Publication Year within 5 Years

1. The case for a cautiously optimistic outlook for US inflation

Author:
David Reifschneider and David Wilcox
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
The Federal Reserve and most other analysts failed to anticipate the surge in inflation in 2021. Considerable debate now surrounds the question of whether the Fed is too sanguine in anticipating that too-high inflation will mostly take care of itself over the next few years, even as the unemployment rate remains low and monetary policy remains accommodative. This Policy Brief concludes that although the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) was too optimistic in the projections it issued in December 2021, the broad contour of its baseline inflation outlook for 2022 and beyond remains sensible. The authors find the 2021 surge in inflation resulted mainly from COVID-19-related sectoral developments rather than the classic situation of aggregate demand outstripping the overall economy's long-run productive potential. The statistical analysis in this Policy Brief was conducted before Russia invaded Ukraine. As a result of the war, the inflation situation will probably get worse before it gets better, and could do so in dramatic manner if Russian energy exports are banned altogether. Nonetheless, if the key considerations identified in this Policy Brief remain in place, and if monetary policymakers respond to evolving circumstances in a sensible manner, the inflation picture should look considerably better in the next one to three years.
Topic:
Federal Reserve, Economy, and Inflation
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

2. For inflation relief, the United States should look to trade liberalization

Author:
Gary Clyde Hufbauer, Megan Hogan, and Yilin Wang
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
With US inflation running at 40-year high rates, the Federal Reserve is signaling more interest rate hikes in 2022 and 2023. President Joseph R. Biden Jr. has also vowed to act against what he calls anticompetitive behavior by corporations. But policymakers are overlooking one set of actions that could make a meaningful contribution to taming inflation: trade liberalization. The data cited in this Policy Brief indicate that a feasible package of liberalization could deliver a one-time reduction in consumer price index (CPI) inflation of around 1.3 percentage points, amounting to $797 per US household, about half the size of pandemic relief in 2021. As a bonus, the embrace of trade liberalization would curb inflationary expectations taking hold in American firms now protected by trade barriers from foreign competition.
Topic:
Economy, Inflation, and Trade Liberalization
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

3. Bad news for the Fed from the Beveridge space

Author:
Olivier Blanchard, Alex Domash, and Lawrence H. Summers
Publication Date:
07-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
The Federal Reserve seeks to cool an overheated US labor market to ease wage hikes and reduce job vacancies, without a painful spike in unemployment. But empirical evidence indicates that these goals have never been accomplished together and remain unlikely now. In fact, fighting inflation will require a reduction in job vacancies and also an increase in unemployment. The inverse relationship between job vacancies and unemployment is measured by the Beveridge curve, named after a British economist. Blanchard, Domash, and Summers find that the Fed’s hope that vacancies can be decreased without increasing unemployment flies in the face of historical empirical evidence. The current low unemployment rate and the very high vacancy-to-unemployment ratio suggest that the labor market is overheating and the natural unemployment rate has increased. It has increased about 1.3 percentage points from its pre-COVID level, implying the labor market is even more overheated than suggested by the current unemployment rate.
Topic:
Economy, Unemployment, and Labor Market
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

4. Another reason to raise the Fed's inflation target: An employment and output boom

Author:
David Reifschneider and David Wilcox
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
In 2012, the Federal Reserve formally adopted an inflation target and set it at 2 percent, in line with the level chosen by many other central banks. In hindsight, this setting left policymakers with too little room to cut interest rates when they want to fight recessions. Many researchers have noted that if central banks raised their inflation targets—either individually or in concert—they could do a better job in the long run of keeping inflation near its target and the workforce fully employed. Reifschneider and Wilcox highlight an additional and less-noted consequence of raising the inflation target modestly: The economy could enjoy a temporary but substantial boom in employment and output as it adjusted to the increase in the target. Critical to generating this favorable outcome would be decisive action by monetary policymakers to ensure that the higher inflation target is achieved in a reasonably timely manner. In light of substantial transition benefits, as well as the long-run improvement in economic performance, the authors recommend that the Federal Reserve raise its inflation target to 3 percent as part of its next framework review.
Topic:
Federal Reserve, Employment, Economy, and Inflation
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

5. Do US firms have an incentive to comply with the FLSA and the NLRA?

Author:
Anna Stansbury
Publication Date:
06-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
To what extent do US firms have an incentive to comply with the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA)? Stansbury examines this question through a simple comparison of the expected costs of noncompliance (in terms of legal sanctions) to the profits firms can earn through noncompliance. In the case of the FLSA minimum wage and overtime provisions, typical willful violators are required to pay back wages owed and in some cases additional penalties, if detected by the Department of Labor (DOL). Based on available data on the penalties levied, a typical firm would need to expect a chance of at least 78-88 percent that its violation would be detected in order to have an incentive to comply with the FLSA. In practice, the probability of detection many firms can expect to face is likely much lower than this. In the case of the NLRA, a firm that fires a worker illegally is required to reinstate the worker with back pay if the violation is detected. Based on empirical estimates of the effect of unionization on firm profits, a typical firm may have an incentive to fire a worker illegally for union activities if this illegal firing would reduce the likelihood of unionization at the firm by as little as 0.15-2 percent. These analyses illustrate that neither the FLSA nor the NLRA penalty and enforcement regimes create sufficient incentive to comply for many firms. In this context, the substantial evidence of minimum wage and overtime violations, and of illegal employer behavior toward unions, is not surprising.
Topic:
Labor Issues, Regulation, and Economy
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

6. Raising a caution flag on US financial sanctions against China

Author:
Jeffrey J. Schott
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
China’s policies in Xinjiang, Hong Kong, and the South China Sea and its ongoing support for Iran, North Korea, and Venezuela pose major challenges for the United States, where bipartisan pressure is growing to ramp up punitive sanctions against leading Chinese firms and financial institutions. Financial sanctions freeze the US assets or bar US entry of the targeted individuals and firms and prohibit US financial firms from doing business with them. Schott explains why US officials should carefully weigh the risks to international financial markets and US economic interests before imposing punitive sanctions on major financial institutions engaged with China. The collateral costs of such sanctions would be sizable, damaging US producers, financial institutions, and US alliances. By restricting access of major banks to international payments in US dollars and barring use of messaging systems like SWIFT, tougher US financial sanctions would effectively “weaponize” the dollar; friends and foes alike would be pushed to seek alternatives to dollar transactions that, over time, would weaken the international role of the dollar. Instead of doubling down on current unilateral financial sanctions, US policy should deploy sanctions in collaboration with allies and calibrate trade and financial controls to match the expected policy achievements.
Topic:
Human Rights, Sanctions, Finance, and Economy
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

7. What US strategy gets wrong about China in Africa

Author:
Cullen S. Hendrix
Publication Date:
03-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
The Trump administration’s Africa strategy is rooted in three misconceptions about China’s African footprint—and a fourth about US-Africa economic relations—that are either factually incorrect or overstated in terms of the broader strategic challenges they pose to US interests: (1) Chinese engagement in Africa crowds out opportunities for trade and investment with and from the United States; (2) Chinese engagement in Africa is resource-seeking—to the detriment of US interests; (3) Chinese engagement in Africa is designed to foster debt-based coercive diplomacy; and (4) US-Africa economic linkages are all one-way and concessionary (i.e., aid-based). Hendrix finds little evidence to suggest Chinese trade and investment ties crowd out US trade and investment opportunities. China’s resource-seeking bent is evident in investment patterns, but it is more a function of Africa’s having comparatively large, undercapitalized resource endowments than China’s attempt to corner commodity markets. Chinese infrastructural development—particularly large projects associated with the Belt and Road Initiative—may result in increased African indebtedness to the Chinese, but there is little reason to think debt per se will vastly expand Chinese military capacity in the region. And finally, US-Africa economic relations are much less one-sided and concessionary (i.e., aid-based) than conventional wisdom suggests.
Topic:
Bilateral Relations, Infrastructure, Economy, Trade, and Donald Trump
Political Geography:
Africa, China, North America, and United States of America

8. Harry Johnson's "case for flexible exchange rates"—50 years later

Author:
Maurice Obstfeld
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
Fifty years ago, Harry G. Johnson published "The Case for Flexible Exchange Rates, 1969," its title echoing Milton Friedman’s classic essay of 1953. Though somewhat overlooked today, Johnson’s reprise was an important element in the late 1960s debate over the future of the international monetary system. In this Working Paper, Obstfeld lays out the historical context in which Johnson’s “Case” was written and read and then examines Johnson’s main points and sees how they stand up to nearly five decades of experience with floating exchange rates since the end of the Bretton Woods system. He also reviews the most recent academic critiques of exchange rate flexibility and asks how fatal they are to Johnson’s basic argument. He concludes that the essential case for exchange rate flexibility still stands strong.
Topic:
History, Monetary Policy, Economy, Central Bank, and Currency
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

9. Are Central Banks Out of Ammunition to Fight a Recession? Not Quite.

Author:
Joseph E. Gagnon and Christopher G. Collins
Publication Date:
11-2019
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
Central banks in the three largest advanced economies (the United States, Japan, and the eurozone) have only limited ammunition to fight a recession based on the tools used to date. The Federal Reserve has the most amount of tried and tested ammunition in this group. If a recession were to hit the US economy now, the Fed would be able to deliver monetary stimulus equivalent to a cut in the short-term policy interest rate of about 5 percentage points, which is sufficient to fight a mild but not severe recession. The European Central Bank and the Bank of Japan have little ability to ease policy with tools used to date, about the equivalent of a 1 percentage point cut in the policy rate. But they can engage in more exotic forms of monetary policy, such as large-scale purchases of equity and real estate and direct transfers to households, which the Fed cannot do. These tools, however, are largely untested and face political resistance. An important implication of this analysis is that raising expected inflation before a recession hits has a much larger benefit than has been widely recognized. A higher long-run inflation rate gives central banks more room to not only cut their policy rates but also use forward guidance and quantitative easing to reduce longer-term rates.
Topic:
Global Recession, Economy, and Central Bank
Political Geography:
Japan, Europe, North America, and United States of America

10. Protectionism under Trump: The China Shock, Intolerance, and the "First White President"

Author:
Marcus Noland
Publication Date:
06-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
In 2016, the United States elected an avowedly protectionist president. This paper uses US county-level electoral data to examine this outcome. The hypothesis that support for protectionism was purely a response to globalization is rejected. Exposure to trade competition encouraged a shift to the Republican candidate, but this effect is mediated by race, diversity, education, and age. If the turn toward protectionism is due to economic dislocation, then public policy interventions could mitigate the impact and support the reestablishment of a political consensus for open trade. If, however, the drivers are identity or cultural values, then the scope for constructive policy intervention is unclear.
Topic:
Economy, Trade, Donald Trump, and Protectionism
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America