Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 173

Unconventional monetary policy is now conventional

The speech delivered by Janet Yellen, Chair of the Federal Reserve, on 26 August 2016 at the Jackson Hole symposium titled The Federal Reserve’s Monetary Policy Toolkit: Past, Present, and Future offered a unique insight into how the Fed (and by implication how other global central banks) will conduct monetary policy in the years ahead.

‘Equilibrium’ cash rate lowest in 50 years

There is a need to build policy resiliency and flexibility, which is especially important with the equilibrium or normal real cash rate materially lower than it has been over the 40 years leading up to the GFC. In practical terms, the normal real cash rate is where inflation is seen to be stable and output on average is close to potential. It is entirely plausible the normal real cash rate is now close to zero, compared to around 2.5% in the past. Significantly, the result is that the scope to raise nominal interest rates to levels that prevailed in past cycles will be very limited and unnecessary given the future prospects for growth and inflation.

The subdued medium-term growth and inflation outlook reflects weaker employment and productivity outcomes inhibiting consumption, a lack of attractive projects for capital investment, and demographic factors such as declining population growth. In some countries such as Japan and across Europe, the issue is more acute and this is where official cash rates have been moved into negative territory. There is strong evidence that negative rates have arrested a steeper decline in output and growth than otherwise – especially in the absence of the political and economic power to expand fiscal policy when sovereign debt burdens were so high.

Janet Yellen has messaged several important thematics shaping the Fed‘s thinking, including the future monetary policy framework which will include an expanded monetary policy toolkit. There is no going back to the conventional and simple adjustments to the policy cash rate. The so-called unconventional monetary policy measures will remain in scope for years to come. This means central banks will have much larger balance sheets, they will continue to use forward guidance, make targeted asset purchases and, as required, change the level of interest rate paid on excess reserves banks hold with the central bank.

Negative rates counterproductive

By its omission, it may be concluded that the US toolkit does not contemplate negative official cash rates. There is mounting evidence that negative rates adversely impact bank profitability which could ultimately weaken the stability of the financial system and at its extreme becomes a tax on savers. In parts of Europe, depositors are paying banks to leave their money on deposit, with a potential adverse impact on investor and consumer confidence. It can encourage distortions in other asset prices as investors hunt for yield.

We are also seeing a divergence in approach across central banks in the tools employed. This reflects a few factors – including weaker inflation and economic performance and the way the credit channel operates in different economies. For example, the European Central Bank, having moved to negative rates and purchased significant proportions of the European sovereign debt market, are now buying corporate debt. This reduces the cost of corporate borrowing by driving yields lower. Yellen’s speech alluded to this approach: the ability if required to expand the types of assets purchased to be added to the toolkit. The Bank of Japan seems set to continue its expansion of balance sheets and further moves into negative rates, although clearly mindful of unintended consequences.

Even if rates rise, the peak will be very low

So where does this end? Not any time soon because there is no real alternative. Rates are set to remain very low for a long time with punctuations of volatility but not a sustained rise. We continue to look for a handoff to fiscal policy and even a recognition that some bank regulation is a disincentive to capital investment and inhibits the free flow of capital. For the Fed, a further policy tightening is likely before end 2016. Yellen refers to the asymmetry of risks and that there is no pre-set path. This is why the Fed’s approach will be gradual and data dependent. The nominal Fed funds rate peak in this cycle may be as low as 2%.

 

Anne Anderson is Head of Fixed Income at UBS Australia. This article is general information and does not consider any investor’s circumstances.

 

  •   15 September 2016
  •      
  •   

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

Shares rebound on hopes of war ending, but stalemate the likely outcome

Five simple reasons why Australian cash rates are highest

Trusting the process in a high-rate environment

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Why spending more in early retirement can improve lifetime income

Conventional wisdom encourages retirees to preserve superannuation. But if those likely to qualify for the Age Pension later in life spend a little more today, it may deliver higher lifetime income and a more stable retirement.

It’s time for LICs to die

A high-profile dividend cut and a prominent fund manager’s apology have reignited a long-running debate. If investors can access similar exposures more cheaply and efficiently elsewhere, what exactly is keeping LICs alive?

Testamentary trusts survived the trust tax. The drafting battle has just begun.

The fight over testamentary trusts looked settled. Then the draft legislation arrived. Hidden in a technical detail is a question that could force many families to rethink wills they thought were already future-proof.

Is it time to bail on Australian stocks?

For generations, Australian investors have backed banks, miners and dividends. But has that loyalty come at a cost? A look at the numbers raises an uncomfortable question about where future returns will come from.

The new capital gains tax trap for your portfolio

Investors have long accepted one portfolio rule without much question. A major tax shift could change that calculation entirely, forcing difficult trade-offs between risk, discipline and an overlooked cost lurking beneath.

The investing rule that explains the next market crash

What if investment success depends less on picking the right assets and more on understanding the decisions of other investors? A principle borrowed from game theory offers a different perspective on markets.

Latest Updates

Fixed interest

Higher yields are creating opportunities in global bonds

Bond markets are adjusting to a new reality, but not in the ways investors expect. With markets repricing and capital competing for attention, investors may need to rethink where resilience and opportunity lie. 

Economy

Are we in a recession?

What if the warning signs are already everywhere? From supermarket aisles to company failures, investors are being bombarded with recession signals. But most face a different risk that can be just as dangerous for portfolios. 

SMSF strategies

Meg on SMSFs - Division 296 actuarial certificates

The tax bill might be yours, but the event that caused it may not be. A key Division 296 calculation can sometimes attribute earnings in ways that many SMSF trustees won't instinctively expect or fully appreciate.

Property

The first impact of negative gearing reform is not the tax bill

Negative gearing changes formally begin in 2027, but the first consequences may already be here. A subtle shift is quietly influencing who can borrow, how much they can access and which property strategies still stack up.

Economy

The oil market is running out of easy answers

The biggest threat to markets may not be what investors are watching. The numbers have stopped adding up and supply is harder to measure, with forecasts becoming simple guesses. A more fragile reality is being masked.

Investment strategies

The state of investor knowledge in Australia

Australians are investing more than ever, yet a surprising divide is emerging between those building wealth effectively and those making costly mistakes. Surprisingly, the gap has little to do with income, age or starting capital.

Taxation

Complexity and capital gains

A case study shows that the ‘30% minimum CGT’ is a poorly conceived tax that adds significant complexity to an already over-complex system. A less complicated model would create a much fairer progressive tax scale.

Sponsors

Alliances

  • ASA-Logo-RGB-ActiveGreen-web.png

© 2026 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.