『I have two questions. You didn't discuss the reinvestments, but I was wondering whether the Governing Council could at any stage consider a possibility to change the capital key as the guiding principle of the APP, given the APP is one of its tools.』
『Just given to the new capital key, if the GDP of a country grows it has actually more APP so kind of a more easing policy. If the GDP of a country shrinks actually it has - I won't say tightening - but less easing. That's something to think about. I don't know if you're going to.(後半割愛)』
『(前半割愛)Now, on the first point about the capital key, no, we haven't discussed. I'd be surprised if we were to use a different concept other than the capital key. We used that for a long time now with the asset purchases and so I'd be surprised. But as I said, we haven't discussed that, but you correctly say that there is a strange pro-cyclicality here between the revision of the capital key and the economic situation of a country. True, but these adjustments to the capital key happen every five years. In a sense, it's just a country happens to have a lower GDP because of a variety of reasons that may have nothing to do with cyclical stimulus.』
『(前半割愛)For my second question, both the European Central Bank and the Federal Reserve seem to be coming under a lot of political pressure to keep all of your monetary stimulus in place or provide more stimulus, even. What would you say to the lawmakers that are really mounting on both sides of the Atlantic quite a fierce challenge to your operational independence?』
イイシツモンダナー
『On the second question you had, what I would answer, I would answer that central bank independence is a precious thing. It's precious because it's essential for the credibility of the central banks. Credibility is essential for effectiveness, so central bank independence in terms of how to comply and deliver their mandates - which in our case is price stability - and central bank independence in choosing the instruments that are more appropriate or most appropriate to pursue this objective, is crucial for the effectiveness of monetary policy.』
まあその通り。
『If one thinks about that, one would conclude that actually the legislators themselves, often the very same people who are arguing for the central banks to do this and that, should be the first ones to care about monetary policy effectiveness and central banks reaching their goals, pursuing their mandates.』
とはいえ日本いやなんでもないです。
でもってこの質疑が前座だったのかこんなのがECBのサイトにアップされとりますの。
[外部リンク] bank independence First Lamfalussy Lecture by Mario Draghi, President of the ECB, at the Banque Nationale de Belgique, Brussels, 26 October 2018
『(前半割愛)Second question is about Italy, as you can imagine. In the past you said, “Look at the facts and not the words”, but the facts have been coming in and then haven't been that good. There's a budget in breach of EU rules; it's been rejected by the Commission. Now with facts on the table, what is your assessment now?』
『(前半割愛)On Italy, you have to remember that Italy is a fiscal discussion, so there wasn't much discussion about Italy. As a matter of fact, the Vice-President, Dombrovskis, was there and basically, I asked him permission to quote him, to quote what he said. He said, “Of course we have to observe and apply fiscal rules but we're also seeking a dialogue”. I think that's what it is, but then I could answer other questions about the facts.』
『Still again about Italy. I would like to refer to your recent statement that the Italian situation was not posing any risks of contagion. My question is whether you confirm this statement or whether it has changed.』
で、この後の答えが大演説になる。
『No, I didn't say there wasn’t any risk of contagion; I said at that point in time there was no sign of contagion. It's different.』
『Okay, let me also respond to the other part of the question I was asked before about; what are the facts?』
演説開始。
『First let me say, what's the context. The context of our discussion today was, as I said before, the statement by the Vice-President of the Commission, who said of course he has to apply fiscal rules but he's also seeking a dialogue.』
あの予算案はアカンとEU委員会が言ったけどこれからも対話の余地を探るようだよ。
『The second point of context is what I said in the previous press conference in the IMF, during the course of the IMF meetings, is that I'm personally - and that's a personal perception so take it for what it's worth - I am confident that an agreement will be found.』
何らかの合意に至るものだと信じていますよ。
『Now let me come to the facts. Interest rates have come up and are coming up. That means the lending rates are going up still moderately, I should say, for households and for firms. It means that households will have to pay more for borrowing from banks and so do companies. Of course in the case of companies that finance, fund themselves issuing bonds, the pass-through from the capital markets to the bond market - to the corporate bond market - is obviously faster. For them, the increase in borrowing rates has been more marked and quicker. Now, all this likely means that it will have effects on credit and ultimately on growth and, by the way, on the very same space that is needed for fiscal expansion. In a sense, if the interest rates keep on going up, the room that is available to expand the budget gets smaller.』
『As I said, the increases in interest rates have been there now for a while. We've analysed it both from surveys and through direct evidence; these increasing rates. But these increasing rates are not so far - at least banking rates - are not significant, or not material.』
とは言いましても銀行の金利とかそこまで盛大に上昇している訳ではない。
『However we have now the bank lending survey of this quarter. It does say that basically, terms and conditions applied by Italian banks on new loans to enterprises and households for house purchases, tightened.』
この前出た銀行サーベイ見るとイタ銀行の貸し出し条件はタイト化している。
『Terms and conditions - so not standards - terms and conditions tightened in the third quarter of 2018, driven by a higher cost of funds and balance sheet constraints.』
『Now, what about the spillovers? Since the last time I spoke about this, we have observed some increase in interest rates in some other countries, or non-core countries, let's call them this way. Again it's not material but it's been there. And so again the issue is: what's the cause of them; because these countries themselves had specific idiosyncratic phenomena, facts, events that may justify, and have been estimated to justify, some increase in rates.』
『So far we reached I think the conclusion that it's kind of hard to distinguish. There may be some spillovers but they are limited; that's the current assessment and I will keep you posted as the situation will evolve.』
『As a follow-up to my colleague's question just now about OMT, Italian politicians seem to have an expectation that if the spread rises too much, the ECB will somehow intervene. That's why I wanted to ask the following: in case the ECB in any future crisis surrounding Italy would - or any other country - feel the need to intervene by purchasing sovereign debt of individual member states, would the OMT programme really be the only available tool? Or would there still be a way conceivable to do it outside the OMT programme?』
『Now, we are talking about the specific situation. What is available for the ECB towards a specific country is OMT.』
ということで、
『The OMT, as you remember, is subject to having a programme with ESM and is also subject to the assessment by the Governing Council of the ECB that the undertaking of the OMT doesn't prejudge the monetary policy for the whole of the euro area, but that's what's there. Our mandate, as I said before, is a mandate towards price stability, not towards financing governments' deficits or adhering to a fiscal dominance situation.』
でまあ英文ヘッドラインってどうなっているのかよとみて確認しますと、 [外部リンク] at BOJ See 10-Year Yield Limit Higher Than 0.2% By Toru Fujioka , Masahiro Hidaka , and Yuko Takeo 2018年10月26日 14:05 JST Updated on 2018年10月26日 15:56 JST (何故か日本語環境でブルームバーグの英語ニュース出すとタイムスタンプは日本語表記されるようで)
ということで題名が『Some at BOJ See 10-Year Yield Limit Higher Than 0.2%』ってなっていて、まあ日本語とは同じ書き方なのですが、日本語の題名みた時点で「いつもの”謎の関係者”か」という想像がつくので、その時点で読む方の頭に補正が入るのですが、これ見て中の記事(どうも記事全文読めるのは月に何本かとかそういう感じのようなので記事は引用しないです)を見ますと、日本語よりも印象が強いかなと思う物件に仕立てあがっております。もう毎度過ぎて何とも。
[外部リンク] to Maintain Policy Stance With Focus Growing on 10-Year Yield Range By Toru Fujioka and Masahiro Hidaka 2018年10月29日 5:00 JST
ブルームバーグの行っている日銀政策サーベイの記事なんですけど、「With Focus Growing on 10-Year Yield Range」ってお前が金曜に煽り記事書いとるだけやんと小一時間問い詰めたい訳でして、海外の投資家もいい加減に気が付けばいいのに、と思う今日この頃でございました。
『Based on our regular economic and monetary analyses, we decided to keep the key ECB interest rates unchanged. We continue to expect them to remain at their present levels at least through the summer of 2019, and in any case for as long as necessary to ensure the continued sustained convergence of inflation to levels that are below, but close to, 2% over the medium term.』
『Regarding non-standard monetary policy measures, we will continue to make net purchases under the asset purchase programme (APP) at the new monthly pace of ユーロ15 billion until the end of December 2018. We anticipate that, subject to incoming data confirming our medium-term inflation outlook, we will then end net purchases. We intend to reinvest the principal payments from maturing securities purchased under the APP for an extended period of time after the end of our net asset purchases, and in any case for as long as necessary to maintain favourable liquidity conditions and an ample degree of monetary accommodation.』
『Incoming information, while somewhat weaker than expected, remains overall consistent with an ongoing broad-based expansion of the euro area economy and gradually rising inflation pressures.』
while somewhat weaker than expectedではあるが全体的にはユーロ圏経済は幅広く拡大して徐々に物価に上昇圧力だそうな。
『The underlying strength of the economy continues to support our confidence that the sustained convergence of inflation to our aim will proceed and will be maintained even after a gradual winding-down of our net asset purchases. At the same time, uncertainties relating to protectionism, vulnerabilities in emerging markets and financial market volatility remain prominent. Significant monetary policy stimulus is still needed to support the further build-up of domestic price pressures and headline inflation developments over the medium term.』
『This support will continue to be provided by the net asset purchases until the end of the year, by the sizeable stock of acquired assets and the associated reinvestments, and by our enhanced forward guidance on the key ECB interest rates. In any event, the Governing Council stands ready to adjust all of its instruments as appropriate to ensure that inflation continues to move towards the Governing Council’s inflation aim in a sustained manner.』
『Did you discuss downgrading your risk assessment to tilted to the downside? What were the main arguments for and against in the discussion?(後半割愛)』
後半はイタリア何ですけどね(^^)。
『Let me answer the first question; it will require a little time.』
割と長尺の演説が入ります。
『By and large, the Governing Council discussions you've seen from the introductory statement confirmed the balance of risks and of course didn't take any decision on monetary policy.』
ステートメントで示したように認識はバランスのままです。
『There was acknowledgement of a somewhat weaker momentum, but in the midst of most eurozone countries - which still have positive output gaps, and slightly expansionary and sometimes in some cases pro-cyclical fiscal policies in some countries. We're talking about a weaker momentum, not a downturn. This is clearly certified by most survey indicators that have come out since the last time we met.』
「a weaker momentum, not a downturn」だそうな。
『But these indicators remain above - and in some cases well above - historical averages and certainly is certified by slower growth. Then the issue is: what are the reasons behind this weaker momentum and these weaker survey indicators?』
で?
『Here we go into a variety of explanations, one of which certainly is country-specific factors; so-called idiosyncratic phenomena. Think about the car sector in Germany. This is having quite a powerful effect for this quarter but not next quarter.』
『The second is the export performance. Last time we discussed the export performance saying that last year, 2017, had an extraordinary export performance. Now we're coming back to normal and so we had a decline in exports that seems now is reflected in the current weaker momentum, but seems now to have come to a halt.』
昨年の輸出が強すぎたのでその分で逆下駄履いていてモメンタムが下がったように見える、だそうな。
『Then of course we have trade uncertainties. We have the stalemate between US and China, with Brexit, with Italy, with financial market volatility, so a bunch of uncertainties. Then we have perhaps the one important part of the explanation; it's simply that we're having growth returning to potential after 2017, where it was clearly above potential.』
『It's not simple here to distinguish what is transitory from what is going to be permanent, what is country specific from what is extended to the whole of the euro area. What is actually having an impact on consumption and investment and what is not having an impact. For one thing, we still observe consumption; pretty strong, buoyed by an expanding employment, an expanding labour market, rising wages and so business investment. Also the emerging market economy situation seems to have stabilised somehow.』
『All in all, the assessment of the Governing Council was, yes, there is a weaker momentum. Yes, there are weaker survey data coming out and maybe some more expected in the future. But is this enough of a change to make us change the baseline scenario? The answer is no. These risks are not being considered at this point in time enough to change the balance of risks. Now, of course we'll have to see the projections in December and that was also one other consideration. I will elaborate on inflation and monetary policy later.(後半割愛)』
『(前半割愛)My second question is on inflation. What is justifying your confidence on inflation pressures given that core inflation rates have actually disappointed several times this year and, as you've said, there are certain geopolitical risks that seem to be increasing? At what point do you worry that the wage and inflation pressures that we see are going to be short lived?』
『Let me answer first the second question. The discussion in the Governing Council showed that there isn't much of a change in inflation, really.』
特にインフレに関する議論に変化はありませんが何か?
『When we look at surrounding developments, we see that negotiated wages keep on going up. This is a very comforting sign because it means that wage increases - which by the way in some core countries have been quite significant - wage increases are going to stay. They are not temporary, they are not drift determined but they are negotiated wages so they're going to stay. They've been quite, in some countries, significant but in general nominal wage growth is picking up.』
お賃金が上昇していることに関して結構な勢いで自信ニキ。
『The other thing is that the labour market keeps on expanding but it's progressively, gradually tighter and tighter. The third thing is that capacity utilisation rates in most countries are pretty high.』
労働需要が一段とタイトになっていることと、設備稼働率が極めて高くなっているのも自信ニキの根拠。
『Frankly, after all this assessment we have no sense that we should doubt our confidence that inflation is gradually converging to our aim. But having said that, we reaffirm the fact that our monetary policy needs to remain accommodative and a considerable degree of monetary accommodation is still needed. I see that there are lots of concerns - well, not lots; some concerns about APP maybe ending at the end of this year.』
APP終了に関する世の中の懸念について最初「lots of concerns」と言ってから「well, not lots; some concerns」と言い直しているのがワロタ。
『Let me tell you one thing that I've said on and on and on: even if it were to end, monetary policy will remain very accommodative by the reinvestment, especially the reinvestment of the considerable stock of assets that we have in our balance sheet and our forward guidance about interest rates.』
『Let me read this about the introductory statement to the sentence. It says, “This support will continue to be provided by the net asset purchases until the end of the year, by the sizeable stock of acquired assets and the associated reinvestments, and by our enhanced forward guidance on the key ECB interest rates. In any event the Governing Council stands ready to adjust all of its instruments as appropriate to ensure that inflation continues to move towards the Governing Council's inflation aim in a sustained manner”. That's what I can say about inflation.(後半割愛)』
「That's what I can say about inflation」ってナンジャソラという感じはしますが、APP拡大を止めても政策は緩和的なんだからそう懸念するもんじゃありませんですよ皆さん、ということで、自信ニキではあっても結局のところ緩和政策そのものをもっと縮小できるかというと、緩和政策があるから見通しがサポートされるみたいな説明なので、威勢は良いのですが出口政策を堂々行う程の自信はない、という事になるでしょうかね。
・キャピタルキーの変更に伴う資産買入の変化はアリやナシや
『Two questions, if I may. If I'm right, next year there will be a new calculation of the capital key, with probably an increasing weight of Germany and a decreasing weight of Italy. What consequences does it have for the reinvestment programme next year?(後半割愛)』
キャピタルキーに関しても結局イタリア絡みですが一応先にネタにしておきます。
『(前半割愛)The first question is about the capital key. We haven't discussed that in the meeting, but just keep in mind - and you are right -there's a capital key readjustment at the beginning of the year. There's also another capital key adjustment with Brexit, so that's also to be kept in mind. But we haven't, basically, discussed any of them.』
ご紹介ページと要旨 [外部リンク] at Risk」という最新の分析手法を用いて、金融脆弱性が実体経済に及ぼし得るリスクの「見える化」を進めた。第二に、最近の金融機関のリスクテイク行動やリスク管理の実態を踏まえて、リスクプロファイル(リスク量、金融機関間のばらつき)の計測の精緻化を行っている。特に、(1)信用リスク面では、金融機関が近年積極化させているミドルリスク企業向け貸出や海外貸出の実態について、(2)市場リスク面では、益出しの増加と株式投信等へのエクスポージャー拡大に伴う影響について、焦点を当てている。第三に、金融機関による近年のリスクテイク行動の影響を金融マクロ計量モデルに織り込み、テールリスクに対する金融機関のストレス耐性に関して、より精緻な分析を行っている。財務が健全な企業に比べると、ミドルリスク企業のデフォルト率が実体経済の悪化によって非線形的に上昇することを考慮し、信用コストを計測した。』
ということで、「GDP at Risk」とは不勉強にして存じませんでしたが、そんなマクプルシミュレーションがあるんですねと思いましたです。あと、市場リスクの所なんですが「(2)市場リスク面では、益出しの増加と株式投信等へのエクスポージャー拡大に伴う影響について、焦点を当てている。」とあるのですが、要旨や本文の記述をざっとみた感じだと、この辺のリスクに関しては投信の中身とかに関してまで突っ込んだレベルで見て分析しているのかどうかがイマイチ分からん(株式投信と言っても単純なインデックスがあるかと思えば配当取りのベータヘッジ型みたいなのもあるのでリスクエクスポージャーは一様ではない)な、とかまあそんなのを思いました。
[外部リンク] of Chairman Powell’s Press Conference September 26, 2018
議事要旨も出てしまったので証文の出し遅れにも程がありますすいませんすいません。
・失業率がこんなに低いのに何でインフレにならんのかという質問
『HOWARD SCHNEIDER. Thanks. Howard Schneider with Reuters. Chair Powell, I think-is this too good to be true? Because you’ve got four years here of unemployment below 4 percent-very low, substantially below NAIRU, what appears to be NAIRU-but no reaction of inflation there. And so I don’t think that’s ever happened since the 1960s. Why do you think it’s going to happen now? Or in the alternative, is this forecast for unemployment just being driven by your confidence intervals to the extent that, well, we don’t know what else to do, so just extend the lie out-line out until something happens? 』
に対してのお答えですが、
『CHAIRMAN POWELL. No, you’re right. The Committee forecasts what they-what they show, in general, is an economy where unemployment remains in the high and middle 3s throughout the entire forecast period and inflation remains very close to 2 percent. That is what the forecast shows.』
それはSEPでそう出ているわな。
『And that is based on our understanding of the way the inflation process works now and on the fact that the inflation seems to be fairly nonreactive to changes in slack-that is to say, a flat Phillips curve.』
スラックの変化に対して反応が少ない=フィリップスカーブがフラット化しているという現状認識だそうな。
『And it’s just-it’s a-it’s a world of strongly anchored inflation expectations.』
『And that’s not just our forecast, that’s many forecasts. So that is-that is -that is the forecast. So you may ask-I mean, the sense is, what does the longer-run natural rate of unemployment mean?』
貴方の質問は「じゃあロンガーランの自然失業率とは何ぞや」という話になりますわな。
『And so that really is a longer-run concept that we think the economy will return to over the longer run. But, obviously, that longer run, you know, isn’t-it’s not creating problems in the short run for that forecast. 』
なんちゅう禅問答。
『Now let’s just admit that the inflation process has changed dramatically from where it was in the 1960s to where it is now. It’s in a good place now. We can’t take for granted that it will remain the way it is, and, you know, we will be, of course, watching carefully. If inflation reacts more strongly or more weakly to the strong economy, then we’ll adjust policy appropriately.』
『HOWARD SCHNEIDER. If I could follow up on that, what are you buying with interest rates?』
『CHAIRMAN POWELL. Well, interest rates, of course, have effects on growth, have effects-I mean if-I guess the-your question was, what are you buying with by raising interest rates? The question is, what would the economy look like if you didn’t raise rates? It would look very different, I think, if we didn’t raise rates.』
相手の質問を確認していますな。
『We’re always trying to, you know, work our way between the-sort of the two-the two problems we face.』
ほう。
『One is that if we move too quickly, we can, you know, snuff out a recovery unnecessarily, and inflation falls short of its 2 percent target. Or if we move too slowly, we have an economy that can overheat.』
利上げが速すぎるリスクと遅すぎるリスクを考えないといけません、だそうで結局利上げはするわけですが。
『So we’re-that-that’s happened through history. We don’t see any signs of that now, but we’re always trying to navigate between those two shoals. And we think that gradually, you know, raising interest rates is the way that we kind of take both of those risks seriously.』
[外部リンク] Views on Current Conditions and the Economic Outlook』を読むのですが、今回はここのケツからではなくて頑張って(というほどのものではないけど)頭から読んでみたら景気認識の所が結構強いんジャマイカという風に思った(個人の感想です)のでその辺から参ります。
『Based on recent readings on spending, employment, and inflation, almost all participants saw little change in their assessment of the economic outlook, although a few of them judged that recent data pointed to a pace of economic activity that was stronger than they had expected earlier this year.』
基本は見方は同じと来てますが、数名(a few)の参加者は見通しよりも上振れて推移だそうな。
『Participants noted a number of favorable economic factors that were supporting above-trend GDP growth; these included strong labor market conditions, stimulative federal tax and spending policies, accommodative financial conditions, solid household balance sheets, and continued high levels of household and business confidence. A number of participants observed that the stimulative effects of the changes in fiscal policy would likely diminish over the next several years.』
強いファクターの話はまあこんなもんとしましてこの次には、
『A couple of participants commented that recent strong growth in GDP may also be due in part to increases in the growth rate of the economy's productive capacity.』
2名の見解ですが、「increases in the growth rate of the economy's productive capacity.」とか来ているのがこれまた強い見解じゃなあと思うとこの先も威勢の良い見解が割とホイホイ出てくるのだ。
・家計に関しては貯蓄率の所の話がオモロイ
5パラ目になります。
『In their discussion of the household sector, participants generally characterized consumption growth as strong, and they judged that robust increases in disposable income, high levels of consumer confidence, and solid household balance sheets had contributed to the strength in spending.』
この辺はいつも通りの話だがこの次に家計の貯蓄率が上がっているという話が出て来まして・・・・・・・・
『Several participants noted that the household saving rate had been revised up significantly in the most recent estimates published by the Bureau of Economic Activity.』
ほうほう。
『A few of those participants remarked that the upward revision in the saving rate could be viewed as evidence of the strength of the financial position of the household sector and could be a factor that would further support solid expansion of consumption spending.』
貯蓄率が高いのは家計が防衛的になっている、というネタでよく言われていた筈なのに、ここに来て貯蓄率の上昇を「evidence of the strength of the financial position of the household sector」とか言い出して将来の消費支出が一層強まるファクターかもしれないとか物凄い勢いでポジティブに解釈する数名(A few)の委員がいるというこの部分はちとビックラしました。
『However, a couple of participants noted that the higher saving rate may not be a precursor to higher future consumption growth. For example, the higher saving rate may indicate some greater caution on the part of consumers, greater inequality of income and wealth--which would imply a lower aggregate propensity to spend--or changing consumer behavior in a low interest rate environment.』
『With regard to residential investment, a few participants noted weak residential construction activity at the national or District level, which was attributed in part to higher interest rates or supply constraints.』
住宅供給にも供給制約来てるとな。
・企業の投資の所はまあこんなもんでしょと思うがここにも供給制約の話が
6パラ目になります。
『Participants noted that business fixed investment had grown strongly so far this year. A few commented that recent changes in federal tax policy had likely bolstered investment spending. Contacts in most sectors remained optimistic about their business prospects, and surveys of manufacturing activity were broadly favorable.』
『Despite this optimism, a number of contacts cited factors that were causing them to forego production or investment opportunities in some cases, including labor shortages and uncertainty regarding trade policy.』
『In particular, tariffs on aluminum and steel were cited as reducing new investment in the energy sector. Contacts also suggested that firms were attempting to diversify the set of countries with which they trade--both imports and exports--as a result of uncertainty over tariff policy. Contacts in the agricultural industry reported that tariffs imposed by China had resulted in lower crop prices, further depressing incomes in that sector, although a new federal program was expected to offset some income losses.』
『In their discussion of labor markets, participants generally agreed that conditions continued to strengthen. Contacts in many Districts reported tight labor markets, with difficulty finding qualified workers.』
『In some cases, firms were coping with labor shortages by increasing salaries, benefits, or workplace amenities in order to attract and retain workers.』
「workplace amenities」にちょっとニヤッとしました(^^)。
『Other business contacts facing labor shortages were responding by increasing training for less-qualified workers.』
(;∀;)イイハナシタ゛ナー
『For the economy overall, participants generally agreed that, on balance, recent data suggested some acceleration in labor costs, but that wage growth remained moderate by historical standards, which was due in part to tepid productivity growth.』
賃金にさほど反映されていないけどそれ以上に労働コストは上がっているとの結論キタコレ。
・物価に関しては上昇圧力の高まりみたいな認識が示されているんですがががががが
8パラ目。
『Regarding inflation, participants noted that on a 12-month basis, both overall inflation and inflation for items other than food and energy remained near 2 percent. Indicators of longer-term inflation expectations were little changed on balance. In general, participants viewed recent consumer price developments as consistent with their expectation that inflation was on a trajectory to achieve the Committee's symmetric 2 percent objective on a sustained basis.』
この辺の認識は順当。2%達成でっせグヘヘヘヘという感じではありますが。
『Several participants commented that inflation may modestly exceed 2 percent for a period of time. Reports from business contacts and surveys in a number of Districts also indicated some firming in inflationary pressures. In particular, some contacts indicated that input prices had been bolstered by strong demand or import tariffs. Moreover, several participants reported that firms in their Districts that were facing higher input prices because of tariffs perceived that they had an increased ability to raise the prices of their products.』
『A couple of participants emphasized that because inflation had run below the Committee's 2 percent objective for the past several years, some measures of trend inflation or longer-term inflation expectations were below levels consistent with the 2 percent objective; these participants judged that a modest increase in inflation expectations would be important for achieving the inflation objective on a sustained basis.』
『In their discussion of developments in financial markets, a number of participants noted that financial conditions remained accommodative: The rise in interest rates and appreciation of the dollar over the intermeeting period had been offset by increases in equity prices, and broader measures continued to point to accommodative financial conditions.』
『Some participants commented about the continued growth in leveraged loans, the loosening of terms and standards on these loans, or the growth of this activity in the nonbank sector as reasons to remain mindful of vulnerabilities and possible risks to financial stability.』
『Participants commented on a number of risks and uncertainties associated with their outlook for economic activity, the labor market, and inflation over the medium term.』
ということで、
『Participants generally agreed that risks to the outlook appeared roughly balanced.』
だそうな。
『Some participants commented that trade policy developments remained a source of uncertainty for the outlook for domestic growth and inflation.』
貿易戦争の動向はリスクだわな。
『The divergence between domestic and foreign economic growth prospects and monetary policies was cited as presenting a downside risk because of the potential for further strengthening of the U.S. dollar; some participants noted that financial stresses in a few EMEs could pose additional risks if they were to spread more broadly through the global economy and financial markets.』
『With regard to upside risks, participants variously noted that high consumer confidence, accommodative financial conditions, or greater-than- expected effects of fiscal stimulus could lead to stronger-than-expected economic outcomes.』
アップサイドリスクキタコレ。
『Tightening resource utilization and an increasing ability of firms to raise output prices were cited as factors that could lead to higher-than-expected inflation, while lower-than-expected growth, a strengthening of the U.S. dollar, or inflation expectations persistently running below 2 percent were mentioned as risks that could lead to lower inflation.』
『A few participants offered perspectives on the term structure of interest rates and what a potential inversion of the yield curve might signal about economic prospects in light of the historical regularity that an inverted yield curve has often preceded the onset of recessions in the United States.』
ということでイールドカーブ形状のお話。
『On the one hand, an inverted yield curve could indicate an increased risk of recession; on the other hand, the low level of term premiums in recent years--reflecting, in part, central bank asset purchases--could temper the reliability of the slope of the yield curve as an indicator of future economic activity. In addition, the recent rise and possible further increases in longer-term interest rates might diminish the likelihood that the yield curve would invert in the near term.』
『In their consideration of monetary policy at this meeting, participants generally judged that the economy was evolving about as anticipated, with real economic activity rising at a strong rate, labor market conditions continuing to strengthen, and inflation near the Committee's objective.』
ということで今回の政策決定(つまり利上げ)に関して。
『Based on their current assessments, all participants expressed the view that it would be appropriate for the Committee to continue its gradual approach to policy firming by raising the target range for the federal funds rate 25 basis points at this meeting.』
『Almost all considered that it was also appropriate to revise the Committee's postmeeting statement in order to remove the language stating that "the stance of monetary policy remains accommodative."』
文言削除の件ですな。
『Participants discussed a number of reasons for removing the language at this time, noting that the Committee would not be signaling a change in the expected path for policy, particularly as the target range for the federal funds rate announced after the Committee's meeting would still be below all of the estimates of its longer-run level submitted in the September SEP. In addition, waiting until the target range for the federal funds rate had been increased further to remove the characterization of the policy stance as "accommodative" could convey a false sense of precision in light of the considerable uncertainty surrounding all estimates of the neutral federal funds rate.』
「discussed a number of reasons」って書いている割にはここに出ている話が何となくフワッとした話だけのように見えるのは気のせいでしょうか。
・今後も徐々に利上げしますという辺りは普通の話ですが
13パラグラフ目になります。
『With regard to the outlook for monetary policy beyond this meeting, participants generally anticipated that further gradual increases in the target range for the federal funds rate would most likely be consistent with a sustained economic expansion, strong labor market conditions, and inflation near 2 percent over the medium term.』
『This gradual approach would balance the risk of tightening monetary policy too quickly, which could lead to an abrupt slowing in the economy and inflation moving below the Committee's objective, against the risk of moving too slowly, which could engender inflation persistently above the objective and possibly contribute to a buildup of financial imbalances.』
まあ普通の話。強いて言えば「a buildup of financial imbalances」を避けるという観点が書かれているのがほほうという感じです。
・どの程度まで利上げをするのかという話は(SEPの通りに)割と高めの球が放られている感じですな
14パラグラフ目がキタコレである。
『Participants offered their views about how much additional policy firming would likely be required for the Committee to sustainably achieve its objectives of maximum employment and 2 percent inflation.』
「how much additional policy firming」の議論キタコレ!!!!
『A few participants expected that policy would need to become modestly restrictive for a time and a number judged that it would be necessary to temporarily raise the federal funds rate above their assessments of its longer-run level in order to reduce the risk of a sustained overshooting of the Committee's 2 percent inflation objective or the risk posed by significant financial imbalances.』
数名(A few)は「modestly restrictive」が適切と来まして、
『A couple of participants indicated that they would not favor adopting a restrictive policy stance in the absence of clear signs of an overheating economy and rising inflation.』
2名の方は抑制的になるのはイクナイ、との主張でございますな。
・中立金利に関しては「政策判断に用いる多くのファクターのうちの1つに過ぎない」キタコレ
15パラグラフ目になります。
『Participants reaffirmed that adjustments to the path for the policy rate would depend on their assessments of the evolution of the economic outlook and risks to the outlook relative to the Committee's statutory objectives.』
ほうほう。
『Many of them noted that future adjustments to the target range for the federal funds rate will depend on the evaluation of incoming information and its implications for the economic outlook.』
『In this context, estimates of the level of the neutral federal funds rate would be only one among many factors that the Committee would consider in making its policy decisions.』
[外部リンク] World Economic Outlook の中で示されているように5、新興国におけるインフレ予想のアンカー度合いは、この 20 年間で顕著に改善しています。また、アンカー度合いがさらに改善すれば、インフレ率の変動の持続性や為替レートの国内物価へのパススルーを弱めることなどを通じて、海外からのショックに対する経済の耐性を強められることも示されています。』
『NICK TIMIRAOS. Thank you. Nick Timiraos, the Wall Street Journal. Chair Powell, given the lags of monetary policy, I want to know how you think about ending the tightening cycle? How will you know when to stop? And do you need to keep going until something in the economy breaks? 』
婉曲に中立金利水準の質問をしたとも読めますがその答えは、
『CHAIRMAN POWELL. So the tightening cycle, as you know, is a reflection of the strength of the economy. And it’s almost three years now that we’ve been gradually raising rates. And I think the fact that we have moved quite gradually, in a way, allows us to carefully watch incoming data in the real economy and in the financial markets to see how the economy is processing higher interest rates. And the fact that we’re moving so gradually-I think it-I think it limits the long and variable lags problem because, you know, we’re being able to raise rates and then wait and see how the economy absorbs these rate increases. And so far, the economy has performed very well and very much in keeping with our expectations. 』
『JIM PUZZANGHERA. Hi, Jim Puzzanghera from the L.A. Times. President Trump has stated publicly he’s not thrilled with the interest rate hikes. His comments didn’t appear to have any impact on you or your colleagues. Were his comments discussed at your meeting? And do you have any concerns about the effect of these types of comments on the perception of the Fed’s independence and your monetary policy?』
もし今日あたりに会見が設定されていたらもっとバシバシ質問されていたかもしれませんね。
『CHAIRMAN POWELL. So we’ve been given a really important job to do on behalf of the American people by Congress, and we’ve been given the tools to do it, and my colleagues and I are focused exclusively on carrying out that mission.』
こういう所は当たり前だがナマコ返答はしない。
『We consider the best thinking, the best theory, and the best evidence. We have disparate points of view, which we debate extensively and come to a perspective and try to set monetary policy to achieve maximum employment in a context of price stability. That’s what we do. We don’t consider political factors or things like that. And so that’s who we are, that’s what we do, and that’s just the way it’s always going to be for us. 』
当然ちゃあ当然の答えですけれども、こちらの職分でベストを尽くしています、という答え。まあこの会見と関係はありませんが、置物一派の皆様におかれましては「We consider the best thinking, the best theory, and the best evidence.」というのを額に飾って10万回くらい復唱して頂きまして、胸に手を当ててよく考えて頂きたいものだと思います。
・金融環境、社債スプレッドや株価に関して&利上げの最終レートに関して
その次の質問です。
『STEVE LIESMAN. Steve Liesman, CNBC. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Can you explain how-the stock market being at a near all-time high, corporate spreads being very tight-how does the level of the market factor into your decisions to raise interest rates? 』
『Is there a concern on your part? And then, as sort of a second and related part, can you tell us whathappens in 2020 and 2021 that-I know you can’t tell us when you’re shaking your head [laughter]-that prompts-that prompts you-the Fed to think that the rates need to still be above neutral in that time period? Thank you. 』
後半がSEPのドットに関してですな。
『CHAIRMAN POWELL. Sure. So in terms of financial markets and monetary policy, we-as we say in our statement every cycle, we do take financial conditions into consideration because financial-broader financial conditions do affect the broader economy, and they’re one of the many things that we take into account. The part of it that we control, though, is what we do with the federal funds rate and that has-that has effects out through, you know, out through the full interest rate curve and into financial asset prices generally. So the answer is, we take everything into account, but, you know, broader financial conditions are just one of the things that we take into account. 』
『In terms of ’20 and ’21, why-your question was why the funds rate needs to be above neutral? So you’re right.』
こんな感じで相手の質問を確認するのが前の人たちよりもかなり目立つのがパウエル流。
『Some of-some of the participants have mostly very modest overshoots of their personal estimates of neutral a couple-three years out. You know, it’s far out into the future. I think it’s hard to be confident that that’s-that that’s the way things are going to be. What we’re going to be doing as we-as we go through time is asking at every meeting whether monetary policy is set to achieve our goals. And I think that that’s an assessment of where policy will need to be some years down the road, and I’ll leave it at that.』
[外部リンク] of Chairman Powell’s Press Conference September 26, 2018 (FINALバージョンです)
こやつの14ページ目からになります。
『MICHAEL MCKEE. Mr. Chairman, Michael McKee, Bloomberg Radio and Television. Financial conditions are still extremely loose by all the measures that track that. The flow of funds shows the decline in short-term borrowing other than in Treasuries. So I’m wondering if that suggests a change in the way that tightening affects the economy. And along those lines, you mentioned that you dropped the word “accommodative” doesn’t suggest a change in policy. But if you’re dropping forward guidance in terms of “accommodative,” does the dot plot really serve any purpose anymore if, as you say, you can’t be confident out to 2021 what’s going to happen with the economy? 』
『So the dot plot-I mean, I-it’s not new. I don’t think it’s a new point that forecasts two and three out-two or three years out are fairly uncertain.』
そらそうなんだが。
『The dot plot is individual FOMC participants who are writing down their individual views on the evolution of the economy and of appropriate monetary policy. We don’t vote on that. These are individual forecasts.』
投票していませんそのまま出してますと。
『I think market participants generally find that interesting information, and so it seems to me to be serving a purpose. I think the point with “accommodative” was that its useful life was over. You know, we put that in the statement in 2015, just when we lifted off, and the idea was to provide assurance that we weren’t trying to slow down the economy, but, in fact, we were still-interest rates were still going to be pushing to support economic activity. Well, that-you know, that purpose has been well served, and the language now doesn’t really say anything that’s important to the way the Committee is thinking about policy going forward. That’s why that came out. Did I get-did I get all of your ques-?』
でもってですね、この話最初がドットチャートなのですがその後“accommodative”の文言になるので、ドットチャートの意味付けについての説明をしているのかしていないのか曖昧(直接はしていない、と解釈するのが普通だと思うけど)なのですが、「I think the point with “accommodative” was that its useful life was over.」って言ってて、その意味合いとして「the idea was to provide assurance that we weren’t trying to slow down the economy,」などと言っている訳で、要するにこの辺りのコミュニケーションというのは出口政策というか金融正常化に向けた動きの中で、インフレが加速しないという環境にあった上に、フィリップスカーブの動向ってか雇用動向が物価に与える反応度合いとかが読みにくかった中でしたので、正常化路線を急ぐように見せた時にオーバーキルするリスクを懸念してあのようなコミュニケーションポリシーを組んだ、という説明をしている、という風に読めた訳ですなアタクシは。
