The government’s plan for the UK economy is well known. Reduce the public-sector deficit to restore confidence and get the economy going again. The deficit will be reduced mainly by government spending cuts but also by tax increases, including a rise in VAT from 17.5% to 20% on 1 January 2011. Reductions in public-sector demand will be more than offset by a rise in private-sector demand.
But what if private-sector demand does not increase sufficiently? With a fall in government expenditure, reduced public-sector employment and higher taxes, the danger is that demand for private-sector output may actually fall. And this is not helped by a decline in both consumer and business confidence (see, for example, Nationwide Consumer Confidence Index). What is more, consumer borrowing has been falling (see Consumer borrowing falls again) as people seek to reduce their debt, fearing an uncertain future.
So does the government have a ‘Plan B’ to stimulate the economy if it seems to be moving back into recession? Or will it be ‘cuts, come what may’? The Financial Times (see link below) has revealed that senior civil servants have indeed been considering possible stimulus measures if a return to recession seems likely.
Over in Threadneedle Street, there has been a debate in the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee over whether an additional round of quantitative easing may be necessary. So far, the MPC has rejected this approach, but one member, Adam Posen, has strongly advocated stimulating demand (see The UK inflation outlook if this time isn’t different, arguing that the current high inflation is the result of temporary cost-push factors and is not indicative of excessively strong demand.
So should there be a Plan B? And if so, what should it look like?
Articles
Gus O’Donnell’s economic ‘Plan B’ emerges BBC News, Nick Robinson (14/12/10)
Sir Gus O’Donnell asks ministers to consider possible stimulus measures Financial Times, Jim Pickard (14/12/10) (includes link to article by Philip Stephens)
Gus O’Donnell urges Treasury to prepare ‘Plan B’ for economy Guardian, Patrick Wintour and Nicholas Watt (14/12/10)
Unemployment, and that ‘Plan B’ BBC News blogs, Stephanomics, Stephanie Flanders (15/12/10)
Inflation wars (cont’d) BBC News blogs, Stephanomics, Stephanie Flanders (16/12/10)
Don’t overreact to UK inflation – Bank’s Posen Reuters, Patrick Graham (16/12/10)
Bank of England’s Adam Posen calls for more quantitative easing The Telegraph, Philip Aldrick and Emma Rowley (29/9/10)
Don’t overreact to above-target UK inflation rate, cautions Posen Herald Scotland, Ian McConnell (17/12/10)
Posen calls for calm as inflation fears rise Independent, Sean O’Grady (17/12/10)
Data
OECD Economic Outlook OECD (see, in particular, Tables 1, 18, 27, 28 and 32)
Forecasts for the UK economy HM Treasury
UK Economic Outlook PricewaterhouseCoopers
Employment and Unemployment ONS
Inflation Report Bank of England
Questions
- What are likely to be the most important factors in determining the level of aggregate demand in the coming months?
- What are the dangers of (a) not having a Plan B and (b) having and publishing a Plan B?
- Why is inflation currently above target? What is likely to happen to inflation over the coming months?
- What are the arguments for and against having another round of quantitative easing?
- What else could the Bank of England do to stimulate a flagging economy?
It is the Bank of England’s responsibility to ensure that inflation remains on target. They use interest rates and the money supply to keep inflation within a 1% band of the inflation target set by the government = 2%. However, for the past 12 months, we have had an inflation rate above the 3% maximum and this looks set to continue. Official figures show that the CPI inflation rate has risen to 3.3% in November, up from 3.2% in October 2010 – above the inflation target. There was also movement on the RPI from 4.5% to 4.7% during the same months. The ONS suggests that this increase is largely down to record increases in food, clothing and furniture prices: not the best news as Christmas approaches. It is not just consumers that are facing rising prices, as factories are also experiencing increasing costs of production, especially with the rising cost of crude oil (see A crude story). Interest rates have not changed, as policymakers believe prices will be ‘reined in’ before too long.
However, the government expects inflation to remain above target over the next year, especially with the approaching increase in VAT from 17.5% to 20%. As this tax is increased, retail prices will also rise and hence inflation is likely to remain high. There is also concern that retailers will use the increase in VAT to push through further price rises. A report by KPMG suggests that 60% of retailers intend not only to increase prices to cover the rise in VAT, but to increase prices over and above the VAT rise.
Despite the planned VAT rise spelling bad news for inflation, it could be the spending cuts that offset this. As next year brings a year of austerity through a decrease in public spending, this could deflate the economy and hence bring inflation back within target. However, there are suggestions that more quantitative easing may be on the cards in order to stimulate growth, if it appears to be slowing next year. The Bank of England’s Deputy Governor, Charles Bean said:
“It is certainly possible that we may well want to undertake a second round of quantitative easing if there is a clear sign that UK output growth and with it inflation prospects are slowing,” Bean told a business audience in London.”
The following articles consider the rising costs experienced by firms, the factors behind the inflation and some of the likely effects we may see over the coming months.
Articles
UK inflation rises to a surprise six-month high The Telegraph, Emma Rowley (14/12/10)
UK inflation rate rises to 3.3% in November BBC News (14/12/10)
Inflation unexpectedly hits 6-month high in November Reuters, David Milliken and Christina Fincher (14/12/10)
Food and clothing push up inflation Associated Press (14/12/10)
Retailers ‘to increase prices by more than VAT rise’ BBC News (14/12/10)
VAT increase ‘will hide price rises’ Guardian, Phillip Inman (14/12/10)
Slower growth may warrant more QE Reuters, Peter Griffiths and David Milliken (13/12/10)
Factories feel squeeze of inflation The Telegraph, Emma Rowley (13/12/10)
Figures show rise in input prices The Press Association (13/12/10)
November producer input prices up more than expected Reuters (13/12/10)
Data
Inflation ONS
Inflation Report Bank of England
Questions
- What is the difference between the RPI and CPI? How are each calculated?
- Why are interest rates the main tool for keeping inflation on target at 2%? How do they work?
- Is the inflation we are experiencing due to demand-pull or cost-push factors? Illustrate this on diagram. How are expectations relevant here?
- Explain why the rise in VAT next year may make inflation worse – use a diagram to help your explanation.
- Explain the process by which rising prices of crude oil affect manufacturers, retailers and hence the retail prices we see in shops.
- How are the inflation rate, the interest rate and the exchange rate linked? What could explain the pound jumping by ‘as much as 0.2pc against the dollar after the report’ was released?
- Explain why the public spending cuts next year may reduce inflation. Why might more quantitative easing be needed and how could this affect inflation in the coming months?
By measuring the size and growth of the money supply we can begin to assess the appetite for saving, spending, and borrowing by households and firms and the appetite amongst banks and building societies to supply credit. In this blog we use figures released by the Bank of England in Monetary and Financial Statistics (Bankstats) to begin such an assessment. But, of course, the very first problem we face is measuring the money supply: just what should be include in a measure of money?
One measure of money supply is known as M4. It is a broad measure of money reflecting our need to use money to make transactions, but also our desire to hold money as a store of wealth. According to the Bank of England’s figures the amount of M4 money at the end of October was £2.19 trillion. To put this into some context, the GDP figure for 2009 was £1.4 trillion, so the amount of M4 is equivalent to about 1½ times GDP.
What M4 measures is the stock of notes and coins and sterling-denominated deposits held by households, firms (non-financial corporations or NFCs) and other financial corporations (OFCs), such as insurance companies and pension funds. These groups are collectively referred to as the non-bank private sector or sometimes as the M4 private sector. As well as the deposits that most of us are familiar with, such as sight and time deposits, sterling-denominated deposits also include other less well known, but liquid financial products, such as repos (sale and repurchase agreements) and CDs (certificates of deposit). Repos are essentially secured loans, usually fairly short-term, where individuals or organisations can sell some of their financial assets, such as government debt, to banks in return for cash. Certificates of deposit are a form of time deposit where certificates are issued by banks to customers for usually large deposits for a fixed term.
The Bank of England’s figures also allow us to analyse the actual holdings of M4 by households, private non-financial corporations and other financial corporations. Consequently, we can analyse the source of these particular liabilities. Of the £2.19 trillion of M4 money at the end of October, 42% was attributable to OFCs, 11% to PNFCs and 47% to households. Interestingly, the average shares over the past 10 years have been 28% OFCs, 14% NFCs and 58% households. Therefore, there has been a shift in the share of banks’ M4 liabilities away from households and towards other financial corporations (OFCs).
So why the change in the composition of Sterling M4 liabilities held by the banking system? Part of the answer may well be attributable to Quantitative Easing (QE): the Bank of England’s £200 billion purchase of financial assets. It appears that a large part of this asset-purchase strategy has resulted in other financial corporations (OFCs) – our insurance companies and pension funds – exchanging assets like government bonds for cheques from the Bank of England. Of course, these cheques are deposited with commercial banks and the banks are then credited with funds from the Bank of England. A crucial question is whether these deposits have facilitated additional lending to households and firms and so created credit.
A major ‘counterpart’ to the private sector sterling liabilities that comprise M4 is sterling lending by banks to the non-bank private sector. Of particular interest, is lending to that bit of the private sector comprised by households and private non-financial corporations. The latest Bank of England figures show that in October net lending to households (including unincorporated businesses and non-profit making institutions) was £1.5 billion. This compares with a 10-year monthly average of close to £3.9 billion. Meanwhile, net lending to private non-financial corporations in October, which over the past 10 years has averaged just over £2.1 billion per month, was -£2.2 billion. The negative figure for PNFCs indicates that more debt was being repaid by firms to banks than was being borrowed.
The net lending figures indicate that lending by banks to households and firms remains incredibly subdued. This is not to say that QE has in any way failed since one cannot directly compare the current situation with that which would have resulted in the absence of QE. Rather, we note that the additional deposits created by QE do not appear to have fuelled large amounts of additional credit and, in turn, further deposits fuelling further credit. The limited amount of credit creation for households and private non-financial corporations helps to explain the relatively slow growth in the stock of M4 held by households and PNFCs. While the stock of M4 increased by 6% in the year to October from £2.06 trillion last year, the stock held by households and PNFCs grew by around 2½%.
It is of course difficult to fully appreciate the extent to which the subdued lending numbers reflect restricted bank lending despite QE, or the desire for households and firms to improve their respective financial positions. One could argue that both are a symptom of the same thing: the desire for banks, households and firms alike to be less susceptible to debt. Clearly, these balance sheet effects will continue to have a large impact on the economy’s activity levels.
Articles
Business loans and mortgage approvals falls Financial Times, Norma Cohen (29/11/10)
UK mortgage approvals fall, M4 at record low on yr – BOE MarketNews.Com (29/11/10
Drop in mortgage approval levels The Herald, Mark Williamson (29/11/10)
Mortgage approvals dip to eight-month low Independent, Sean O’Grady (30/11/10)
Mortgage approvals fall to six month low BBC News (29/11/10)
Gross lending up £1 billion in October Mortgage Introducer, Sarah Davidson (29/11/10)
Data
M4 statistics are available from the Bank of England’s statistics publication, Monetary and Financial Statistics (Bankstats) (See Tables in Section A.)
Questions
- What do you understand by a narrow and a broad measure of the money supply? Which of these describes the M4 measure? Explain your answer.
- What other liabilities do you think might be included on the balance sheet of the UK’s banking system which are not included in M4?
- What do you understand by credit creation? Explain how the exchange by OFCs (e.g. insurance companies and pension funds) of government debt for cheques from the Bank of England could facilitate credit creation?
- What factors can affect the extent of credit creation by banks? How might these have affected the ability of QE to get banks lending again.
- What is meant by net lending? And, what does a negative net lending figure show?
- What do you understand by ‘balance sheet effects’? Illustrate with respect to households, firms and banks.
In the wake of the credit crunch, the Federal Reserve Bank (the Fed) reduced interest rates to virtually zero in December 2008 and embarked on a huge round of quantitative easing over the following 15 months, ending in March 2010. This involved the purchase of some $1.7 trillion of assets, mainly government bonds and mortgage-backed securities. There was also a large planned fiscal stimulus, with President Obama announcing a package of government expenditure increases and tax cuts worth $787 billion in January 2009.
By late 2009, the US economy was recovering and real GDP growth in the final quarter of 2009 was 5.0% (at an annual rate). However, the fiscal stimulus turned out not to be as much as was planned (see and also) and the increased money supply from quantitative easing was not having sufficient effect on aggregate demand. By the second quarter of 2010 annual growth had slowed to 1.7% and there were growing fears of a double-dip recession. What was to be done?
The solution adopted by the Fed was to embark on a second round of quantitative easing – or “QE2”, as it has been dubbed. This will involve purchasing an additional $600 billion of US government bonds by the end of quarter 2 2011, at a rate of around $75 billion per month.
But will it work to stimulate the US economy? What will be the knock-on effects on exchange rates and on other countries? And what will be the effects on prices: commodity prices, stock market prices and prices generally? The following articles look at the issues. They also look at reactions around the world. So far it looks as if other countries will not follow with their own quantitative easing. For example, the Bank of England announced on 4 November that it would not engage in any further quantitative easing. It seems, then, that the USA is the only one on board the QE2.
Articles
QE2 – What is the Fed Doing? Will it Work? Kansas City Star, William B. Greiner (5/11/10)
The ‘Wall Of Money’: A guide to QE2 BBC News blogs: Idle Scrawl, Paul Mason (2/11/10)
Federal Reserve to pump $600bn into US economy BBC News (4/11/10)
Beggar my neighbour – or merely browbeat him? BBC News blogs: Stephanomics, Stephanie Flanders (4/11/10)
Too much cash, bubbles and hot potatoes Financial Times (5/11/10)
Bernanke Invokes Friedman’s Inflation-Fighting Legacy to Defend Stimulus Bloomberg, Scott Lanman and Steve Matthews (7/11/10)
The QE backlash The Economist (5/11/10)
Former Fed Chairman Volcker says bond buying plan won’t do much to boost US economy Chicago Tribune, Kelly Olsen (5/11/10)
Ben Bernanke’s QE2 is misguided Guardian, Chris Payne (6/11/10)
Effects on commodity prices and stock markets
Gold hits record high, oil rallies on Fed stimulus Taipei Times (7/11/10)
Analysis: Fed’s QE2 raises alarm of commodity bubble Reuters, Barbara Lewis and Nick Trevethan (5/11/10)
Fed’s Bernanke defends new economic recovery plan BBC News (7/11/10)
Sit back and enjoy the ride that QE2 has set in motion Financial Times, Neil Hume (5/11/10)
US accused of forcing up world food prices Guardian, Phillip Inman (5/11/10)
Effects on other countries
The rest of the world goes West when America prints more money Telegraph, Liam Halligan (6/11/10)
Backlash against Fed’s $600bn easing Financial Times, Alan Beattie, Kevin Brown and Jennifer Hughes (4/11/10)
China, Germany and South Africa criticise US stimulus BBC News (5/11/10)
G20 beset with fresh crisis over currency International Business Times, Nagesh Narayana (5/11/10)
European Central Bank Keeps Rates at Record Lows New York Times, Julia Werdigier and Jack Ewing (4/11/10)
Official statements by central banks
FOMC press release Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (3/11/10)
News release: Bank of England Maintains Bank Rate at 0.5% and the Size of the Asset Purchase Programme at £200 Billion Bank of England (4/11/10)
ECB Press Conference ECB, Jean-Claude Trichet, President of the ECB, Vítor Constâncio, Vice-President of the ECB (4/11/10)
Questions
- How has the Fed justified the additional $600 billion of quantitative easing?
- What will determine the size of the effect of this quantitative easing on US aggregate demand?
- How will QE2 influence the exchange rate of the dollar?
- Why have other countries been critical of the effects of the US policy?
- What will be the effect of the policy on commodity prices?
The growth in money supply is slowing. This is not surprising, given that the programme of quantitative easing, whereby the Bank of England injected an extra £200bn of (narrow) money into the banking system between March 2009 and February 2010, has come to an end.
Should we be worried about this? Has sufficient money been injected into the economy to sustain the recovery, especially as fiscal policy is about to be radically tightened (see the BBC’s Spending Review section of its website)? One person who thinks that the Bank of England should do more is Adam Posen, an external member of the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee. In a speech on 28 September 2010, he argued that the UK was in danger of slipping into Japanese-style sluggish growth that could last many years. The reason is that capacity would be lost unless aggregate demand is increased sufficiently to bring the UK back up towards the potential level of output. Firms are unlikely to want to retain unused plant and equipment and underutilised skilled labour for very long. If they do start ‘disinvesting’ in this way, potential output will fall.
What, according to Adam Posen is the answer? With fiscal policy being tightened and with Bank rate as low as it can go, the only option is to increase money supply. But with CPI inflation at 3.1%, considerably above the target 2%, is there a danger that increasing the money supply will cause inflation to rise further? Not according to Posen, who sees inflation falling over the medium term.
Not surprisingly other economists and commentators disagree – including some of his colleagues on the MPC. The following articles look at the arguments on both sides. You will also find below a link to the speech and to money supply data. There is also a link to the latest Bank of England inflation and GDP forecasts.
Articles
Posen calls for QE to be resumed Financial Times, Chris Giles (28/9/10)
Weak lending data fuel debate on QE Financial Times, Norma Cohen (29/9/10)
Bank of England’s Adam Posen calls for more quantitative easing Telegraph, Philip Aldrick and Emma Rowley (29/9/10)
Posen pleads for new stimulus to save economy and democracy Independent, Sean O’Grady (29/9/10)
Bring back the usury laws Independent, Hamish McRae (29/9/10)
Rocking the boat on the MPC BBC News blogs, Stephanomics, Stephanie Flanders (28/9/10)
A Response to Adam Posen The Source, Alen Mattich (28/9/10)
Adam Posen is posing the Bank of England a tricky question Guardian, Nils Pratley (28/9/10)
UK economy: optimists vs. pessimists FT blogs, Chris Giles (29/9/10)
What should the Bank of England do next? BBC Today Programme, Stephanie Flanders and John Redwood (1/10/10)
Interest rates will rise, predicts former Bank of England deputy governor Guardian, Dan Milmo (4/10/10)
UK interest rates on hold at record low of 0.5% BBC News (7/10/10)
Speech
The Case for Doing More Speech to the Hull and Humber Chamber of Commerce, Industry and Shipping, Adam Posen (28/9/10)
Data
Money supply data
Money and Lending (Statistical Interactive Database) Bank of England
Bank of England Inflation and GDP forecasts
Inflation and GDP forecasts (Inflation Report) Bank of England
Questions
- Summarise Adam Posen’s arguments for a further round of quantitative easing.
- How may changes in aggregate demand affect a country’s potential (as well as actual) output?
- What are the similarities and differences between the UK now and Japan over the past two decades?
- Describe what has been happening to the various components of money supply over the past few months.
- What might suggest that the Bank of England was wrong in believing that the trend rate of growth was about 2.75%?
- What are the moral arguments about personal and state borrowing? Should we begin the ‘long retreat from the never-never society’?
- Analyse the arguments against a further round of quantitative easing.