Skip to content

This article, authored by Sonal Desai, Ph.D., Chief Investment Officer, Franklin Templeton Fixed Income, was first published in The Economist on May 23, 2022.

Inflation at 40-year highs poses the toughest of policy challenges. Yet America’s Federal Reserve (Fed) still hopes to meet it with an easy solution: bring the policy rate close to 3%, and as adverse supply shocks fade inflation will revert to the Fed’s 2% target. No need for a sharp monetary tightening à la Paul Volcker. No need to risk a recession or to trigger a significant rise in unemployment.

Its hope rests on two shaky assumptions. First, it insists that the neutral rate of interest stands between 2% and 3%. (The neutral rate is defined as the rate at which monetary policy would be neither expansionary nor contractionary, when inflation is at the Fed’s 2% target and the economy is at full employment.) This implies that in real terms—subtracting inflation—the neutral rate is at 0-1%.

Yet this assumption might be well off the mark. Economists Thomas Laubach and John C. Williams have estimated that the real neutral rate of interest averaged around 2.5% during the 1990s and 2000s, before dropping to a 0-1% range after the financial crisis of 2007-09.1 A drop in America’s productivity growth and higher demand for safe financial assets may explain the decline. Productivity growth, however, has rebounded and averaged 2.4% during 2019-21—the same as the average of 1991-2007.2

Quantitative easing, by the Fed’s own admission, is on its way out. This reduces demand for safe assets. So the real neutral rate of interest might be significantly higher than the Fed assumes—closer to a 2-3% range than 0-1%. Once inflation drops back to 2%, the nominal neutral interest rate should then be in a 4-5% range, not the 2-3% the Fed is aiming for. (And inflation is still a long way from 2%.) If that is the case, the Fed’s targeted long-term policy setting would still be expansionary. The current inflation problem has been caused partly by the Fed keeping monetary policy too loose for too long. Maintaining an expansionary policy seems more likely to entrench high inflation than to bring it back to target.

The second of the Fed’s shaky assumptions is that inflation expectations are still well anchored and that there is no sign of a wage-price spiral. In this telling, price growth reverts to a “healthy” pace once exogenous shocks have dissipated. But much evidence already points in the opposite direction. Although wages have not kept up with surging inflation, they are growing at the fastest pace in 40 years, about 4-5%.3 Employers face persistent labour shortages in an extremely tight market; new employees can secure substantial wage premiums. Companies in turn respond to rising wage and input costs by exercising their pricing power more aggressively.

Increasingly, surveys indicate that inflation expectations have moved up. Consumers and businesses do recognise that recent inflation has been charged by temporary supply shocks, and they do not expect inflation to stay at 8-9%. But they reckon that on a three-year horizon, it is more likely to run at around 4% than 2%. Inflation expectations, in other words, are already lodged on a higher plateau. The longer inflation remains elevated, the more firmly these will become entrenched and self-sustaining. The demise of supply shocks, then, will not suffice to bring inflation back to 2%.

If these premises are correct, the Fed’s current stance and messaging could damage its credibility—which could affect inflation expectations in turn. Financial markets already expect this hiking cycle to be moderate and short. They anticipate that as soon as economic growth flags, the Fed will promptly ease policy again, following the playbook of recent decades. This might have seemed relatively costless when inflation remained subdued. No longer. The Fed kept policy too loose as America’s economy roared back from COVID-19 shutdowns and enjoyed massive fiscal stimulus.

The Fed needs to tighten decisively both because the equilibrium interest rate is most likely higher than it thinks, and because the policy rate will need to rise above this level in order to bring inflation, and inflation expectations, back to target. The Fed must explain all this openly and rebuild credibility by pushing monetary policy to a truly restrictive setting. Failure to do so will cause high inflation to persist and inflation expectations to drift higher, meaning a deeper recession would become the only viable path to price stability.

 

 



Copyright ©2025. Franklin Templeton. All rights reserved.

This document is intended to be of general interest only. This document should not be construed as individual investment advice or offer or solicitation to buy, sell or hold any shares of fund. The information provided for any individual security mentioned is not a sufficient basis upon which to make an investment decision. Investments involves risks. Value of investments may go up as well as down and past performance is not an indicator or a guarantee of future performance. The investment returns are calculated on NAV to NAV basis, taking into account of reinvestments and capital gain or loss. The investment returns are denominated in stated currency, which may be a foreign currency other than USD and HKD (“other foreign currency”). US/HK dollar-based investors are therefore exposed to fluctuations in the US/HK dollar / other foreign currency exchange rate. Please refer to the offering documents for further details, including the risk factors.

The data, comments, opinions, estimates and other information contained herein may be subject to change without notice. There is no guarantee that an investment product will meet its objective and any forecasts expressed will be realized. Performance may also be affected by currency fluctuations. Reduced liquidity may have a negative impact on the price of the assets. Currency fluctuations may affect the value of overseas investments. Where an investment product invests in emerging markets, the risks can be greater than in developed markets. Where an investment product invests in derivative instruments, this entails specific risks that may increase the risk profile of the investment product. Where an investment product invests in a specific sector or geographical area, the returns may be more volatile than a more diversified investment product. Franklin Templeton accepts no liability whatsoever for any direct or indirect consequential loss arising from use of this document or any comment, opinion or estimate herein. This document may not be reproduced, distributed or published without prior written permission from Franklin Templeton.

Any share class with “(Hedged)” in its name will attempt to hedge the currency risk between the base currency of the Fund and the currency of the share class, although there can be no guarantee that it will be successful in doing so. In some cases, investors may be subject to additional risks.

Please contact your financial advisor if you are in doubt of any information contained herein.

For UCITS funds only: In addition, a summary of investor rights is available from here. The fund(s)/ sub-fund(s) are notified for marketing in various regions under the UCITS Directive. The fund(s)/ sub-fund(s) can terminate such notifications for any share class and/or sub-fund at any time by using the process contained in Article 93a of the UCITS Directive.

For AIFMD funds only: In addition, a summary of investor rights is available from here. The fund(s)/ sub-fund(s) are notified for marketing in various regions under the AIFMD Directive. The fund(s)/ sub-fund(s) can terminate such notifications for any share class and/or sub-fund at any time by using the process contained in Article 32a of the AIFMD Directive.

For the avoidance of doubt, if you make a decision to invest, you will be buying units/shares in the fund(s)/ sub-fund(s) and will not be investing directly in the underlying assets of the fund(s)/ sub-fund(s).

This document is issued by Franklin Templeton Investments (Asia) Limited and has not been reviewed by the Securities and Futures Commission of Hong Kong.

Unless stated otherwise, all information is as of the date stated above. Source: Franklin Templeton.

CFA® and Chartered Financial Analyst® are trademarks owned by CFA Institute.