FOMC Minutes
Page 1
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Minutes of the Federal Open Market Committee
January 27–28, 2015
A meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee was
held in the offices of the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System in Washington, D.C., on
Tuesday, January 27, 2015, at 10:00 a.m. and continued
on Wednesday, January 28, 2015, at 9:00 a.m.
Michael S. Gibson, Director, Division of Banking
Supervision and Regulation, Board of Governors
PRESENT:
Janet L. Yellen, Chair
William C. Dudley, Vice Chairman
Lael Brainard
Charles L. Evans
Stanley Fischer
Jeffrey M. Lacker
Dennis P. Lockhart
Jerome H. Powell
Daniel K. Tarullo
John C. Williams
James A. Clouse, Deputy Director, Division of
Monetary Affairs, Board of Governors
James Bullard, Esther L. George, Loretta J. Mester, and
Eric Rosengren, Alternate Members of the Federal
Open Market Committee
Richard W. Fisher, Narayana Kocherlakota, and
Charles I. Plosser, Presidents of the Federal
Reserve Banks of Dallas, Minneapolis, and
Philadelphia, respectively
Thomas Laubach, Secretary and Economist
Matthew M. Luecke, Deputy Secretary
Michelle A. Smith, Assistant Secretary
Scott G. Alvarez, General Counsel
Thomas C. Baxter, Deputy General Counsel
Steven B. Kamin, Economist
David W. Wilcox, Economist
David Altig, Thomas A. Connors, Michael P. Leahy,
Jonathan P. McCarthy, William R. Nelson, Glenn
D. Rudebusch, Daniel G. Sullivan, and William
Wascher, Associate Economists
Simon Potter, Manager, System Open Market Account
Lorie K. Logan, Deputy Manager, System Open
Market Account
Robert deV. Frierson,1 Secretary of the Board, Office
of the Secretary, Board of Governors
Nellie Liang, Director, Office of Financial Stability
Policy and Research, Board of Governors
William B. English, Senior Special Adviser to the
Board, Office of Board Members, Board of
Governors
Andrew Figura, David Reifschneider, and Stacey
Tevlin, Special Advisers to the Board, Office of
Board Members, Board of Governors
Trevor A. Reeve, Special Adviser to the Chair, Office
of Board Members, Board of Governors
David E. Lebow, Senior Associate Director, Division
of Research and Statistics, Board of Governors
Michael T. Kiley, Senior Adviser, Division of Research
and Statistics, and Senior Associate Director,
Office of Financial Stability Policy and Research,
Board of Governors
Jeremy B. Rudd, Senior Adviser, Division of Research
and Statistics, Board of Governors; Joyce K.
Zickler, Senior Adviser, Division of Monetary
Affairs, Board of Governors
Fabio M. Natalucci2 and Gretchen C. Weinbach,3
Associate Directors, Division of Monetary Affairs,
Board of Governors
________________
Attended the joint session of the Federal Open Market
Committee and the Board of Governors.
2 Attended the portion of the meeting following the joint
session of the Federal Open Market Committee and the
Board of Governors.
3 Attended through the conclusion of the joint session of the
Federal Open Market Committee and the Board of
Governors.
1
Page 2
Federal Open Market Committee
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Joseph W. Gruber, Deputy Associate Director,
Division of International Finance, Board of
Governors; David López-Salido, Deputy Associate
Director, Division of Monetary Affairs, Board of
Governors
Jennifer Gallagher, Special Assistant to the Board,
Office of Board Members, Board of Governors
Edward Nelson, Assistant Director, Division of
Monetary Affairs, Board of Governors; Shane M.
Sherlund, Assistant Director, Division of Research
and Statistics, Board of Governors
Burcu Duygan-Bump and Robert J. Tetlow,21 Advisers,
Division of Monetary Affairs, Board of Governors;
Eric C. Engstrom, Adviser, Division of Research
and Statistics, Board of Governors
Penelope A. Beattie,12 Assistant to the Secretary, Office
of the Secretary, Board of Governors
Dana L. Burnett and Christopher J. Gust, Section
Chiefs, Division of Monetary Affairs, Board of
Governors
Katie Ross,1 Manager, Office of the Secretary, Board of
Governors
David H. Small, Project Manager, Division of
Monetary Affairs, Board of Governors
Carlos O. Arteta, Senior Economist, Division of
International Finance, Board of Governors;
Kimberly Bayard, Senior Economist, Division of
Research and Statistics, Board of Governors;
Elmar Mertens, Senior Economist, Division of
Monetary Affairs, Board of Governors
Bernd Schlusche and Emre Yoldas, Economists,
Division of Monetary Affairs, Board of Governors
Blake Prichard, First Vice President, Federal Reserve
Bank of Philadelphia
Jeff Fuhrer and Alberto G. Musalem, Executive Vice
Presidents, Federal Reserve Banks of Boston and
New York, respectively
Troy Davig, Michael Dotsey, Joshua L. Frost,4 Evan F.
Koenig, Samuel Schulhofer-Wohl, and Christopher
J. Waller, Senior Vice Presidents, Federal Reserve
Banks of Kansas City, Philadelphia, New York,
Dallas, Minneapolis, and St. Louis, respectively
Todd E. Clark and Douglas Tillett, Vice Presidents,
Federal Reserve Banks of Cleveland and Chicago,
respectively
Robert L. Hetzel, Senior Economist, Federal Reserve
Bank of Richmond
Annual Organizational Matters5
In the agenda for this meeting, it was reported that advices of the election of the following members and alternate members of the Federal Open Market Committee
(the “Committee”) for a term beginning January 27,
2015, had been received and that these individuals had
executed their oaths of office.
The elected members and alternate members were as follows:
William C. Dudley, President of the Federal Reserve
Bank of New York, with Christine Cumming, First Vice
President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, as
alternate
Jeffrey M. Lacker, President of the Federal Reserve Bank
of Richmond, with Eric Rosengren, President of the
Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, as alternate
Peter M. Garavuso, Information Management Analyst,
Division of Monetary Affairs, Board of Governors
Charles L. Evans, President of the Federal Reserve Bank
of Chicago, with Loretta J. Mester, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, as alternate
Attended the joint session of the Federal Open Market
Committee and the Board of Governors.
2
Attended the portion of the meeting following the joint
session of the Federal Open Market Committee and the
Board of Governors.
4
1
Attended through the discussion on liftoff tools and possible liftoff options.
5 Versions of the current Committee documents are available
at www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/rules_authorizations.htm.
Minutes of the Meeting of January 27–28, 2015
Page 3
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Dennis P. Lockhart, President of the Federal Reserve
Bank of Atlanta, with James Bullard, President of the
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, as alternate
SOMA, respectively, on the understanding that their selection was subject to their being satisfactory to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
John C. Williams, President of the Federal Reserve Bank
of San Francisco, with Esther L. George, President of
the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, as alternate
Secretary’s note: Advice subsequently was received that the manager and deputy manager
selections indicated above were satisfactory to
the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
By unanimous vote, the following officers of the Committee were selected to serve until the selection of their
successors at the first regularly scheduled meeting of the
Committee in 2016:
Janet L. Yellen
William C. Dudley
Thomas Laubach
Matthew M. Luecke
David W. Skidmore
Michelle A. Smith
Scott G. Alvarez
Thomas C. Baxter
Richard M. Ashton
Steven B. Kamin
David W. Wilcox
David Altig
Thomas A. Connors
Eric M. Engen
Michael P. Leahy
Jonathan P. McCarthy
William R. Nelson
Glenn D. Rudebusch
Daniel G. Sullivan
John A. Weinberg
William Wascher
Chairman
Vice Chairman
Secretary and Economist
Deputy Secretary
Assistant Secretary6
Assistant Secretary
General Counsel
Deputy General Counsel
Assistant General Counsel
Economist
Economist
AUTHORIZATION FOR DOMESTIC OPEN
MARKET OPERATIONS
(As amended effective January 27, 2015)
Associate Economists
By unanimous vote, the Federal Reserve Bank of New
York was selected to execute transactions for the System
Open Market Account (“SOMA”).
By unanimous vote, the Committee selected Simon Potter and Lorie K. Logan to serve at the pleasure of the
Committee as manager and deputy manager of the
6
7
By unanimous vote, the Authorization for Domestic
Open Market Operations was approved with two sets of
amendments. The first set of amendments aimed at simplifying the language by defining common terms, eliminating duplication of language, and standardizing references to the Committee.7 The second set of amendments clarified or modified existing authority, in particular by introducing the defined term “Selected Bank” as
part of prudent planning to simplify transfer of authority
from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York to another
Federal Reserve Bank selected by the Committee in the
event of a significant contingency, removing the authorization to use agents for agency mortgage-backed securities (“MBS”) transactions, defining the types of collateral accepted in securities lending operations described
in paragraph 3, and updating the language relating to the
Chair’s authority to act in exceptional circumstances.8
The Guidelines for the Conduct of System Open Market
Operations in Federal-Agency Issues remained suspended.
Effective February 2, 2015.
To improve consistency, references to “the FOMC,” “the
Federal Open Market Committee,” and “the Committee”
were standardized, where appropriate, around the convention of “the Committee.” This change was implemented in other affected documents.
1. The Federal Open Market Committee (the “Committee”) authorizes and directs the Federal Reserve Bank
selected by the Committee to execute open market transactions (the “Selected Bank”), to the extent necessary to
carry out the most recent domestic policy directive
adopted by the Committee:
A. To buy or sell in the open market securities that
are direct obligations of, or fully guaranteed as to principal and interest by, the United States, and securities
that are direct obligations of, or fully guaranteed as to
principal and interest by, any agency of the United
8
The change regarding the introduction of the term “Selected
Bank” was implemented in other affected documents, including the Authorization for Foreign Currency Operations, Procedural Instructions with Respect to Foreign
Currency Operations, and Program for Security of
FOMC Information.
Page 4
Federal Open Market Committee
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
States, that are eligible for purchase or sale under Section 14(b) of the Federal Reserve Act (“Eligible Securities”) for the System Open Market Account
(“SOMA”):
i.
As an outright operation with securities dealers
and foreign and international accounts maintained
at the Selected Bank: on a same-day or deferred delivery basis (including such transactions as are commonly referred to as dollar rolls and coupon swaps)
at market prices; or
ii. As a temporary operation: on a same-day or
deferred delivery basis, to purchase such Eligible Securities subject to an agreement to resell (“repo
transactions”) or to sell such Eligible Securities subject to an agreement to repurchase (“reverse repo
transactions”) for a term of 65 business days or less,
at rates that, unless otherwise authorized by the
Committee, are determined by competitive bidding,
after applying reasonable limitations on the volume
of agreements with individual counterparties;
B. To allow Eligible Securities in the SOMA to mature without replacement;
C. To exchange, at market prices, in connection
with a Treasury auction, maturing Eligible Securities in
the SOMA with the Treasury, in the case of Eligible
Securities that are direct obligations of the United
States or that are fully guaranteed as to principal and
interest by the United States; and
D. To exchange, at market prices, maturing Eligible
Securities in the SOMA with an agency of the United
States, in the case of Eligible Securities that are direct
obligations of that agency or that are fully guaranteed
as to principal and interest by that agency.
2. The Committee authorizes the Selected Bank to
undertake transactions of the type described in paragraph 1 from time to time for the purpose of testing operational readiness, subject to the following limitations:
A. All transactions authorized in this paragraph 2
shall be conducted with prior notice to the Committee;
B. The aggregate par value of the transactions authorized in this paragraph 2 that are of the type described in paragraph 1.A.i shall not exceed $5 billion
per calendar year; and
C. The outstanding amount of the transactions described in paragraph 1.A.ii shall not exceed $5 billion
at any given time.
3. In order to ensure the effective conduct of open
market operations, the Committee authorizes the Selected Bank to operate a program to lend Eligible Securities held in the SOMA to dealers on an overnight basis
(except that the Selected Bank may lend Eligible Securities for longer than an overnight term to accommodate
weekend, holiday, and similar trading conventions).
A. Such securities lending must be:
i.
At rates determined by competitive bidding;
ii. At a minimum lending fee consistent with the
objectives of the program;
iii. Subject to reasonable limitations on the total
amount of a specific issue of Eligible Securities that
may be auctioned; and
iv. Subject to reasonable limitations on the
amount of Eligible Securities that each borrower
may borrow.
B. The Selected Bank may:
i.
Reject bids that, as determined in its sole discretion, could facilitate a bidder’s ability to control a
single issue;
ii. Accept Treasury securities or cash as collateral
for any loan of securities authorized in this paragraph 3; and
iii. Accept agency securities as collateral only for a
loan of agency securities authorized in this paragraph 3.
4. In order to ensure the effective conduct of open
market operations, while assisting in the provision of
short-term investments or other authorized services for
foreign central bank and international accounts maintained at a Federal Reserve Bank (the “Foreign Accounts”) and accounts maintained at a Federal Reserve
Bank as fiscal agent of the United States pursuant to section 15 of the Federal Reserve Act (together with the
Foreign Accounts, the “Customer Accounts”), the Committee authorizes the following when undertaken on
terms comparable to those available in the open market:
A. The Selected Bank, for the SOMA, to undertake
reverse repo transactions in Eligible Securities held in
the SOMA with the Customer Accounts for a term of
65 business days or less; and
B. Any Federal Reserve Bank that maintains Customer Accounts, for any such Customer Account,
when appropriate and subject to all other necessary
authorization and approvals, to:
i.
Undertake repo transactions in Eligible Securities with dealers with a corresponding reverse repo
transaction in such Eligible Securities with the Customer Accounts; and
ii. Undertake intraday reverse repo transactions
in Eligible Securities with Foreign Accounts.
Transactions undertaken with Customer Accounts under the provisions of this paragraph 4 may provide for a
service fee when appropriate. Transactions undertaken
Minutes of the Meeting of January 27–28, 2015
Page 5
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
with Customer Accounts are also subject to the authorization or approval of other entities, including the Board
of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and, when
involving accounts maintained at a Federal Reserve
Bank as fiscal agent of the United States, the United
States Department of the Treasury.
5. The Committee authorizes the Chairman of the
Committee, in fostering the Committee’s objectives during any period between meetings of the Committee, to
instruct the Selected Bank to act on behalf of the Committee to:
A. Adjust somewhat in exceptional circumstances
the stance of monetary policy and to take actions that
may result in material changes in the composition and
size of the assets in the SOMA; or
B. Undertake transactions with respect to Eligible
Securities in order to appropriately address temporary
disruptions of an operational or highly unusual nature
in U.S. dollar funding markets.
Any such adjustment described in subparagraph A of
this paragraph 5 shall be made in the context of the
Committee’s discussion and decision about the stance of
policy at its most recent meeting and the Committee’s
long-run objectives to foster maximum employment and
price stability, and shall be based on economic, financial,
and monetary developments since the most recent meeting of the Committee. The Chairman, whenever feasible, will consult with the Committee before making any
instruction under this paragraph 5.
The Committee voted to amend the Authorization for
Foreign Currency Operations and the Procedural Instructions with Respect to Foreign Currency Operations, and to reaffirm the Foreign Currency Directive in
the form shown below. The approval of these documents included approval of the System’s warehousing
agreement with the U.S. Treasury. A change was made
to the Authorization for Foreign Currency Operations
to increase the duration limit of the foreign currency
portfolio to 24 months from 18 months. This change
was made to provide greater flexibility in the management of the foreign currency portfolio, in an environment in which interest rates are low in many major economies. Mr. Lacker dissented in the votes on the Authorization for Foreign Currency Operations and the Foreign Currency Directive to indicate his opposition to foreign currency intervention by the Federal Reserve. In
his view, such intervention would be ineffective if it did
not also signal a shift in domestic monetary policy; and
if it did signal such a shift, it could potentially compromise the Federal Reserve’s monetary policy independence.
AUTHORIZATION FOR FOREIGN CURRENCY
OPERATIONS
(As amended effective January 27, 2015)
1. The Federal Open Market Committee (the “Committee”) authorizes and directs the Federal Reserve Bank
selected by the Committee to execute open market transactions (the “Selected Bank”), for the System Open Market Account, to the extent necessary to carry out the
Committee’s foreign currency directive and express authorizations by the Committee pursuant thereto, and in
conformity with such procedural instructions as the
Committee may issue from time to time:
A. To purchase and sell the following foreign currencies in the form of cable transfers through spot or
forward transactions on the open market at home and
abroad, including transactions with the U.S. Treasury,
with the U.S. Exchange Stabilization Fund established
by section 10 of the Gold Reserve Act of 1934, with
foreign monetary authorities, with the Bank for International Settlements, and with other international financial institutions:
Australian dollars
Brazilian reais
Canadian dollars
Danish kroner
euro
Japanese yen
Korean won
Mexican pesos
New Zealand dollars
Norwegian kroner
Pounds sterling
Singapore dollars
Swedish kronor
Swiss francs
B. To hold balances of, and to have outstanding forward contracts to receive or to deliver, the foreign currencies listed in paragraph A above.
C. To draw foreign currencies and to permit foreign
banks to draw dollars under the arrangements listed in
paragraph 2 below, in accordance with the Procedural
Instructions with Respect to Foreign Currency Operations.
D. To maintain an overall open position in all foreign currencies not exceeding $25.0 billion. For this
purpose, the overall open position in all foreign currencies is defined as the sum (disregarding signs) of net
positions in individual currencies, excluding changes
Page 6
Federal Open Market Committee
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
in dollar value due to foreign exchange rate movements and interest accruals. The net position in a single foreign currency is defined as holdings of balances
in that currency, plus outstanding contracts for future
receipt, minus outstanding contracts for future delivery of that currency, i.e., as the sum of these elements
with due regard to sign.
2. The Committee directs the Selected Bank to maintain for the System Open Market Account (subject to the
requirements of section 214.5 of Regulation N, Relations with Foreign Banks and Bankers):
A. Reciprocal currency arrangements with the following foreign banks:
Foreign bank
Amount of arrangement
(millions of dollars equivalent)
Bank of Canada
Bank of Mexico
2,000
3,000
B. Standing dollar liquidity swap arrangements with
the following foreign banks:
Bank of Canada
Bank of England
Bank of Japan
European Central Bank
Swiss National Bank
C. Standing foreign currency liquidity swap arrangements with the following foreign banks:
Bank of Canada
Bank of England
Bank of Japan
European Central Bank
Swiss National Bank
Dollar and foreign currency liquidity swap arrangements
have no pre-set size limits. Any new swap arrangements
shall be referred for review and approval to the Committee. All swap arrangements are subject to annual review
and approval by the Committee.
3. All transactions in foreign currencies undertaken
under paragraph 1.A above shall, unless otherwise expressly authorized by the Committee, be at prevailing
market rates. For the purpose of providing an investment return on System holdings of foreign currencies or
for the purpose of adjusting interest rates paid or received in connection with swap drawings, transactions
with foreign central banks may be undertaken at nonmarket exchange rates.
4. It shall be the normal practice to arrange with foreign central banks for the coordination of foreign currency transactions. In making operating arrangements
with foreign central banks on System holdings of foreign
currencies, the Selected Bank shall not commit itself to
maintain any specific balance, unless authorized by the
Committee. Any agreements or understandings concerning the administration of the accounts maintained
by the Selected Bank with the foreign banks designated
by the Board of Governors under section 214.5 of Regulation N shall be referred for review and approval to
the Committee.
5. Foreign currency holdings shall be invested to ensure that adequate liquidity is maintained to meet anticipated needs and so that each currency portfolio shall
generally have an average duration of no more than 24
months (calculated as Macaulay duration). Such investments may include buying or selling outright obligations
of, or fully guaranteed as to principal and interest by, a
foreign government or agency thereof; buying such securities under agreements for repurchase of such securities; selling such securities under agreements for the resale of such securities; and holding various time and
other deposit accounts at foreign institutions. In addition, when appropriate in connection with arrangements
to provide investment facilities for foreign currency
holdings, U.S. government securities may be purchased
from foreign central banks under agreements for repurchase of such securities within 30 calendar days.
6. All operations undertaken pursuant to the preceding paragraphs shall be reported promptly to the Foreign
Currency Subcommittee (the “Subcommittee”) and the
Committee. The Subcommittee consists of the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Committee, the Vice
Chairman of the Board of Governors, and such other
member of the Board as the Chairman may designate (or
in the absence of members of the Board serving on the
Subcommittee, other Board members designated by the
Chairman as alternates, and in the absence of the Vice
Chairman of the Committee, the Vice Chairman’s alternate). Meetings of the Subcommittee shall be called at
the request of any member, or at the request of the manager, System Open Market Account (“manager”), for the
purposes of reviewing recent or contemplated operations and of consulting with the manager on other matters relating to the manager’s responsibilities. At the request of any member of the Subcommittee, questions
arising from such reviews and consultations shall be referred for determination to the Committee.
7. The Chairman is authorized:
A. With the approval of the Committee, to enter
into any needed agreement or understanding with the
Minutes of the Meeting of January 27–28, 2015
Page 7
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Secretary of the Treasury about the division of responsibility for foreign currency operations between the
System and the Treasury;
B. To keep the Secretary of the Treasury fully advised concerning System foreign currency operations,
and to consult with the Secretary on policy matters relating to foreign currency operations;
C. From time to time, to transmit appropriate reports and information to the National Advisory Council on International Monetary and Financial Policies.
8. All Federal Reserve Banks shall participate in the
foreign currency operations for System Account in accordance with paragraph 3G(1) of the Board of Governors’ Statement of Procedure with Respect to Foreign
Relationships of Federal Reserve Banks dated January 1,
1944.
9. The Committee authorizes the Selected Bank to
undertake transactions of the type described in paragraphs 1, 2, and 5, and foreign exchange and investment
transactions that it may be otherwise authorized to
undertake from time to time for the purpose of testing
operational readiness. The aggregate amount of such
transactions shall not exceed $2.5 billion per calendar
year. These transactions shall be conducted with prior
notice to the Committee.
FOREIGN CURRENCY DIRECTIVE
(As reaffirmed effective January 27, 2015)
1. System operations in foreign currencies shall generally be directed at countering disorderly market conditions, provided that market exchange rates for the U.S.
dollar reflect actions and behavior consistent with IMF
Article IV, Section 1.
2. To achieve this end the System shall:
A. Undertake spot and forward purchases and sales
of foreign exchange.
B. Maintain reciprocal currency arrangements with
foreign central banks in accordance with the Authorization for Foreign Currency Operations.
C. Maintain standing dollar liquidity swap arrangements with foreign banks in accordance with the Authorization for Foreign Currency Operations.
D. Maintain standing foreign currency liquidity
swap arrangements with foreign banks in accordance
with the Authorization for Foreign Currency Operations.
E. Cooperate in other respects with central banks of
other countries and with international monetary institutions.
3. Transactions may also be undertaken:
A. To adjust System balances in light of probable
future needs for currencies.
B. To provide means for meeting System and Treasury commitments in particular currencies, and to facilitate operations of the Exchange Stabilization Fund.
C. For such other purposes as may be expressly authorized by the Committee.
4. System foreign currency operations shall be conducted:
A. In close and continuous consultation and cooperation with the United States Treasury;
B. In cooperation, as appropriate, with foreign
monetary authorities; and
C. In a manner consistent with the obligations of
the United States in the International Monetary Fund
regarding exchange arrangements under IMF Article
IV.
PROCEDURAL INSTRUCTIONS WITH RESPECT
TO FOREIGN CURRENCY OPERATIONS
(As amended effective January 27, 2015)
In conducting operations pursuant to the authorization and direction of the Federal Open Market Committee (the “Committee”) as set forth in the Authorization
for Foreign Currency Operations and the Foreign Currency Directive, the Federal Reserve Bank selected by
the Committee to execute open market transactions (the
“Selected Bank”), through the manager, System Open
Market Account (“manager”), shall be guided by the following procedural understandings with respect to consultations and clearances with the Committee, the Foreign Currency Subcommittee (the “Subcommittee”),
and the Chairman of the Committee, unless otherwise
directed by the Committee. All operations undertaken
pursuant to such clearances shall be reported promptly
to the Committee.
1. For the reciprocal currency arrangements authorized in paragraphs 2.A of the Authorization for
Foreign Currency Operations:
A. Drawings must be approved by the Subcommittee (or by the Chairman, if the Chairman believes
that consultation with the Subcommittee is not feasible in the time available) if the swap drawing proposed by a foreign bank does not exceed the larger
of (i) $200 million or (ii) 15 percent of the size of the
swap arrangement.
B. Drawings must be approved by the Committee
(or by the Subcommittee, if the Subcommittee believes that consultation with the full Committee is
Page 8
Federal Open Market Committee
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
not feasible in the time available, or by the Chairman, if the Chairman believes that consultation with
the Subcommittee is not feasible in the time available) if the swap drawing proposed by a foreign bank
exceeds the larger of (i) $200 million or (ii) 15 percent of the size of the swap arrangement.
C. The manager shall also consult with the Subcommittee or the Chairman about proposed swap
drawings by the System.
D. Any changes in the terms of existing swap arrangements shall be referred for review and approval to the Chairman. The Chairman shall keep
the Committee informed of any changes in terms,
and the terms shall be consistent with principles discussed with and guidance provided by the Committee.
2. For the dollar and foreign currency liquidity swap
arrangements authorized in paragraphs 2.B and 2.C of
the Authorization for Foreign Currency Operations:
A. Drawings must be approved by the Chairman
in consultation with the Subcommittee. The Chairman or the Subcommittee will consult with the
Committee prior to the initial drawing on the dollar
or foreign currency liquidity swap lines if possible
under the circumstances then prevailing; authority
to approve subsequent drawings for either the dollar
or foreign currency liquidity swap lines may be delegated to the manager by the Chairman.
B. Any changes in the terms of existing swap arrangements shall be referred for review and approval to the Chairman. The Chairman shall keep
the Committee informed of any changes in terms,
and the terms shall be consistent with principles discussed with and guidance provided by the Committee.
3. Any operation must be approved by:
A. The Subcommittee (or by the Chairman, if the
Chairman believes that consultation with the Subcommittee is not feasible in the time available) if it:
i.
Would result in a change in the System’s
overall open position in foreign currencies exceeding $300 million on any day or $600 million
since the most recent regular meeting of the Committee.
ii. Would result in a change on any day in the
System’s net position in a single foreign currency
exceeding $150 million, or $300 million when the
operation is associated with repayment of swap
drawings.
iii. Might generate a substantial volume of trading in a particular currency by the System, even
though the change in the System’s net position in
that currency (as defined in paragraph 1.D of the
Authorization for Foreign Currency Operations)
might be less than the limits specified in 3.A.ii.
B. The Committee (or by the Subcommittee, if
the Subcommittee believes that consultation with
the full Committee is not feasible in the time available, or by the Chairman, if the Chairman believes
that consultation with the Subcommittee is not feasible in the time available) if it would result in a
change in the System’s overall open position in foreign currencies exceeding $1.5 billion since the most
recent regular meeting of the Committee.
4. The Committee authorizes the Selected Bank to
undertake transactions of the type described in paragraphs 1, 2, and 5 of the Authorization for Foreign
Currency Operations and foreign exchange and investment transactions that it may be otherwise authorized to undertake from time to time for the purpose of testing operational readiness. The aggregate
amount of such transactions shall not exceed
$2.5 billion per calendar year. These transactions
shall be conducted with prior notice to the Committee.
By unanimous vote, the Committee amended its Program for Security of FOMC Information with changes
to how Federal Reserve Banks classify and access Committee information.
In its annual reconsideration of the Statement on
Longer-Run Goals and Monetary Policy Strategy, participants generally agreed that only a minor update was required at this meeting. Several participants observed
that this statement had helped to increase public understanding of the Committee’s goals and policy framework. It was noted, however, that the Committee
should continue to discuss possible enhancements to the
statement over the coming year.
Following the discussion, the Committee voted to reaffirm the statement with an updated reference to participants’ estimates of the longer-run normal unemployment rate. Mr. Tarullo abstained because he did not believe the statement reflects sufficient consensus in the
principles underlying the Committee’s policy actions so
as to significantly advance public understanding of its
monetary policy strategy.
Minutes of the Meeting of January 27–28, 2015
Page 9
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT ON LONGER-RUN GOALS AND
MONETARY POLICY STRATEGY
(As amended effective January 27, 2015)
“The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) is
firmly committed to fulfilling its statutory mandate from
the Congress of promoting maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates. The
Committee seeks to explain its monetary policy decisions to the public as clearly as possible. Such clarity
facilitates well-informed decisionmaking by households
and businesses, reduces economic and financial uncertainty, increases the effectiveness of monetary policy,
and enhances transparency and accountability, which are
essential in a democratic society.
Inflation, employment, and long-term interest rates
fluctuate over time in response to economic and financial disturbances. Moreover, monetary policy actions
tend to influence economic activity and prices with a lag.
Therefore, the Committee’s policy decisions reflect its
longer-run goals, its medium-term outlook, and its assessments of the balance of risks, including risks to the
financial system that could impede the attainment of the
Committee’s goals.
The inflation rate over the longer run is primarily determined by monetary policy, and hence the Committee
has the ability to specify a longer-run goal for inflation.
The Committee reaffirms its judgment that inflation at
the rate of 2 percent, as measured by the annual change
in the price index for personal consumption expenditures, is most consistent over the longer run with the
Federal Reserve’s statutory mandate. Communicating
this inflation goal clearly to the public helps keep longerterm inflation expectations firmly anchored, thereby fostering price stability and moderate long-term interest
rates and enhancing the Committee’s ability to promote
maximum employment in the face of significant economic disturbances. The maximum level of employment
is largely determined by nonmonetary factors that affect
the structure and dynamics of the labor market. These
factors may change over time and may not be directly
measurable. Consequently, it would not be appropriate
to specify a fixed goal for employment; rather, the Committee’s policy decisions must be informed by assessments of the maximum level of employment, recognizing that such assessments are necessarily uncertain and
subject to revision. The Committee considers a wide
range of indicators in making these assessments. Information about Committee participants’ estimates of the
longer-run normal rates of output growth and unemployment is published four times per year in the
FOMC’s Summary of Economic Projections. For example, in the most recent projections, FOMC participants’ estimates of the longer-run normal rate of unemployment had a central tendency of 5.2 percent to 5.5
percent.
In setting monetary policy, the Committee seeks to
mitigate deviations of inflation from its longer-run goal
and deviations of employment from the Committee’s assessments of its maximum level. These objectives are
generally complementary. However, under circumstances in which the Committee judges that the objectives are not complementary, it follows a balanced approach in promoting them, taking into account the magnitude of the deviations and the potentially different
time horizons over which employment and inflation are
projected to return to levels judged consistent with its
mandate.
The Committee intends to reaffirm these principles
and to make adjustments as appropriate at its annual
organizational meeting each January.”
Developments in Financial Markets and the Federal Reserve’s Balance Sheet
In a joint session of the Committee and the Board of
Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the manager
of the System Open Market Account (SOMA) reported
on developments in domestic and foreign financial markets. The deputy manager followed with a review of System open market operations conducted during the period since the Committee met on December 16–17,
2014. The deputy manager also discussed the outcomes
of recent tests of term and overnight reverse repurchase
agreements (term RRPs and ON RRPs, respectively).
These tests suggested that the combination of term RRP
and ON RRP operations had been effective in supporting money market rates leading into and over year-end.
The presentation also outlined some staff recommendations for further testing of Term Deposit Facility operations.
By unanimous vote, the Committee ratified the Open
Market Desk’s domestic transactions over the intermeeting period. There were no intervention operations in
foreign currencies for the System’s account over the intermeeting period.
Liftoff Tools and Possible Liftoff Options
A staff briefing provided some background on possible
options for the use of supplementary tools, in addition
to interest on excess reserves (IOER), that the Committee could choose to use during the early stages of policy
normalization. The purpose of these options was to
Page 10
Federal Open Market Committee
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
help ensure sufficient control over the federal funds rate
and other short-term interest rates during this period
while mitigating potential risks associated with particular
policy tools. The presentation discussed the possibility
of establishing, on a temporary basis, an aggregate cap
for ON RRP operations that was substantially above the
cap the Committee had chosen for the purposes of testing such operations. In addition, the presentation discussed the possible use of term RRP operations, either
before or after the commencement of policy firming, as
a way to reinforce control of short-term interest rates
and to manage the size of the ON RRP program. Other
possible options presented at the briefing included adjusting the values of the IOER and ON RRP rates associated with a given target range for the federal funds rate
and the use of term deposits.
In their discussion of these issues, participants generally
agreed that it was very important for the commencement
of policy firming to proceed successfully. Consequently,
most were prepared to take the steps necessary to ensure
that the federal funds rate traded within the target range
established by the Federal Open Market Committee
(FOMC). However, a few participants noted that dayto-day volatility in the federal funds rate, potentially including temporary movements outside the target range,
would not be surprising, and that historical experience
suggested that such temporary movements had few, if
any, implications for overall financial conditions or the
aggregate economy.
With regard to the appropriate setting of the cap for ON
RRP operations at the beginning of normalization, the
staff reported that testing to date suggested that ON
RRP operations have generally been successful in establishing a floor on the level of the federal funds effective
rate and other short-term interest rates, as long as market
participants judge that the aggregate cap is quite unlikely
to bind. Against this backdrop, most meeting participants indicated that a sizable ON RRP cap would be appropriate to support policy implementation at the time
of liftoff, and a couple of participants suggested that the
aggregate cap might be suspended for a time. A couple
of participants expressed continued concerns about the
potential risks to financial stability associated with a large
ON RRP facility and the possible effect of such a facility
on patterns of financial intermediation. Moreover, some
participants were concerned that a decision to allow a
temporary increase in the maximum size of the ON RRP
facility could be viewed by market participants as a signal
that a large ON RRP facility would be maintained for a
longer period than those participants deemed appropri-
ate. While acknowledging these concerns, many participants believed that a temporarily elevated cap on the ON
RRP operations at a time when the Committee saw conditions as appropriate to begin normalization would
likely pose limited risks; another participant judged that
an ON RRP program was, in any case, unlikely to materially increase the risks to financial stability. Some participants noted that a relatively high cap could be established and then reduced fairly soon after the initial policy
firming if it was determined that it was not needed, and
that such a reduction could help underscore the Committee’s intent to use such a facility only to the extent
necessary. A number of participants emphasized that
the Committee should develop plans to ensure that such
a facility is temporary and that it can be phased out once
it is no longer needed to help control the federal funds
rate.
With regard to the possible use of term RRP operations
as an additional supplementary tool, participants noted
that recent testing showed that term RRP operations
ahead of the year-end were associated with a significant
decline in the level of take-up at ON RRP operations.
The staff presentation suggested that risks to financial
stability associated with term RRPs could be somewhat
lower than those associated with ON RRP operations
because term RRP operations would be conducted only
on selected dates, the Federal Reserve would set the
quantity auctioned, and the rate on term RRPs would be
determined by the auction process. However, a few participants expressed the view that term RRPs were unlikely to lower risks to financial stability significantly. In
addition, some participants noted that the use of term
RRP operations could complicate communications. A
few others observed that the Committee should not design its operations to reduce year-end or quarter-end volatility induced by financial firms’ reporting practices.
Nonetheless, many participants agreed that the use of
term RRP operations during the period of policy tightening could be useful in some situations.
With regard to the potential use of other tools, several
participants noted that the IOER and ON RRP rates
should be set at the top and bottom, respectively, of the
target range for the federal funds rate. To deviate from
such a structure would complicate communications
about the policy framework and therefore should be
avoided if possible. However, some participants judged
that adjustments to the relationship of the IOER rate
and the ON RRP rate to the target range for the federal
funds rate might, in some circumstances, be helpful for
improving control of the federal funds rate. A few par-
Minutes of the Meeting of January 27–28, 2015
Page 11
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
ticipants noted that use of term deposits during the tightening phase could also be appropriate in some circumstances.
The staff presentation also discussed a technical issue related to the calculation of the payment of interest on reserves. Under current arrangements, an increase in the
IOER rate that is implemented in the middle of a reserve
maintenance period is not fully reflected in interest payments to depository institutions until the beginning of a
new maintenance period. Participants generally suggested that it would be useful for the staff to investigate
changes in the method used to determine the interest
payments on reserves that could tighten the link between
the IOER rate in place each day and the level of reserve
balances held by depository institutions each day.
At the conclusion of their discussion, participants generally agreed that it would be useful to discuss further at
coming meetings specific calibrations of policy tools that
could be used during the early stages of policy normalization. In addition, many noted that it would be useful
to communicate additional information to the public on
these issues to provide greater clarity about the Committee’s approach to policy implementation at that time.
A staff briefing outlined two proposals that the Committee could consider for further testing of term RRP operations. In the first of these proposals, the Desk would
conduct a series of preannounced term RRP operations
that would span the end of the first quarter. In the second proposal, the Desk would conduct small term RRP
operations in February and early March, in addition to
the quarter-end option presented in the first proposal. In their discussion of term RRP testing, participants noted that the testing could provide further information about the substitutability between the ON and
term RRP operations, including outside year-end and
quarter-end periods. A number of participants emphasized that, even if the Committee conducted additional
tests, it had not yet decided whether to use term RRP
operations as part of policy normalization.
Following the discussion of the testing of term RRP
operations, the Committee approved the following
resolution on term RRP testing over the end of the first
quarter of 2015:
“During the period of March 19, 2015, to
March 30, 2015, the Federal Open Market
Committee (FOMC) authorizes the Federal
Reserve Bank of New York to conduct a series of term reverse repurchase operations in-
volving U.S. government securities. Such operations shall: (i) mature no later than April 9,
2015; (ii) be subject to an overall size limit of
$200 billion outstanding at any one time;
(iii) be subject to a maximum bid rate of five
basis points above the ON RRP offering rate
in effect on the day of the operation; (iv) be
awarded to all submitters: (A) at the highest
submitted rate if the sum of the bids received
is less than or equal to the preannounced size
of the operation, or (B) at the stop-out rate,
determined by evaluating bids in ascending
order by submitted rate up to the point at
which the total quantity of bids equals the preannounced size of the operation, with all bids
below this rate awarded in full at the stop-out
rate and all bids at the stop-out rate awarded
on a pro rata basis, if the sum of the counterparty offers received is greater than the preannounced size of the operation. Such operations may be for forward settlement. The System Open Market Account manager will inform the FOMC in advance of the terms of
the planned operations. The Chair must approve the terms of, timing of the announcement of, and timing of the operations. These
operations shall be conducted in addition to
the authorized overnight reverse repurchase
agreements, which remain subject to a separate overall size limit of $300 billion per day.”
The Committee also approved the following resolution
on testing term RRP operations during February and
March:
“During the period of February 12, 2015, to
March 10, 2015, the Federal Open Market
Committee (FOMC) authorizes the Federal
Reserve Bank of New York to conduct a series of term reverse repurchase operations involving U.S. government securities. Such operations shall: (i) mature no later than
March 12, 2015; (ii) be subject to an overall
size limit of $50 billion outstanding at any one
time; (iii) be subject to a maximum bid rate of
five basis points above the ON RRP offering
rate in effect on the day of the operation;
(iv) be awarded to all submitters: (A) at the
highest submitted rate if the sum of the bids
received is less than or equal to the preannounced size of the operation, or (B) at the
stop-out rate, determined by evaluating bids
Page 12
Federal Open Market Committee
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
in ascending order by submitted rate up to the
point at which the total quantity of bids equals
the preannounced size of the operation, with
all bids below this rate awarded in full at the
stop-out rate and all bids at the stop-out rate
awarded on a pro rata basis, if the sum of the
counterparty offers received is greater than
the preannounced size of the operation. Such
operations may be for forward settlement.
The System Open Market Account manager
will inform the FOMC in advance of the
terms of the planned operations. The Chair
must approve the terms of, timing of the announcement of, and timing of the operations.
These operations shall be conducted in addition to the authorized overnight reverse repurchase agreements, which remain subject to
a separate overall size limit of $300 billion per
day.”
Mr. Lacker dissented in the votes on both resolutions
because he felt that the testing to date had already provided sufficient information about this tool, and that authorizing further testing could encourage the incorrect
impression that the Committee had already decided that
it would be engaging in term RRP operations during the
period of policy normalization.
The Board meeting concluded at the end of the discussion of liftoff tools and possible liftoff options.
Staff Review of the Economic Situation
The information reviewed for the January 27–28 meeting indicated that economic activity expanded at a solid
pace over the second half of 2014, and that labor market
conditions had again improved in recent months. Consumer price inflation moved further below the FOMC’s
longer-run objective of 2 percent, held down by continuing large decreases in energy prices. While longer-term
market-based measures of inflation compensation declined substantially in recent months, survey measures of
longer-run inflation expectations remained stable.
Total nonfarm payroll employment expanded in December and the gains for October and November were revised up, putting the increase for the fourth quarter
above that for the third quarter. The unemployment rate
declined to 5.6 percent in December, the labor force participation rate decreased, and the employment-to-population rate was unchanged. The share of workers employed part time for economic reasons declined. The
rate of private-sector job openings moved up in November, while the rates of hiring and of quits edged down
but remained well above their year-earlier readings.
Industrial production rose at a robust pace in the fourth
quarter, with a strong increase in manufacturing output
and a modest gain in mining output. Automakers’ assembly schedules for the first quarter and broader indicators of manufacturing production, such as the readings
on new orders from national and regional manufacturing
surveys, generally pointed to moderate gains in factory
output early this year. In contrast, some indicators of
mining activity, such as counts of drilling rigs in operation, weakened, presumably reflecting the recent sharp
declines in energy prices.
Real personal consumption expenditures (PCE) appeared to have risen at a robust pace over the second
half of 2014. Data on spending in the third quarter were
revised up, and the components of nominal retail sales
used to construct estimates of PCE rose briskly in the
fourth quarter. Light motor vehicle sales in the fourth
quarter maintained their robust third-quarter pace. Important factors influencing household spending remained supportive of further solid gains in real PCE
early this year. Real disposable personal income increased in November; since then, continued declines in
energy prices likely raised the purchasing power of
households’ incomes. Households’ net worth likely increased as home values and equity prices advanced, and
consumer sentiment, as measured by the Thomson Reuters/University of Michigan Surveys of Consumers,
moved up in early January to its highest level in more
than a decade.
The pace of housing market activity improved somewhat but remained slow. Starts of new single-family
homes increased in December to their highest level since
2008, and permits for new construction also moved
higher. Starts of multifamily units were unchanged in
December and within the range they have been in for
the past year. Sales of new homes increased, on net, in
November and December, while sales of existing homes
declined, on average, over those two months.
Real private expenditures for business equipment and intellectual property appeared to decelerate in the fourth
quarter. Nominal orders and shipments of nondefense
capital goods, excluding aircraft, declined in November
and December. Moreover, the level of new orders for
these capital goods was only a little above that for shipments, which pointed to modest near-term gains in business equipment spending despite relatively positive readings on business conditions from national and regional
Minutes of the Meeting of January 27–28, 2015
Page 13
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
surveys. Firms’ nominal spending for nonresidential
structures edged down in November but remained
higher than in the third quarter.
Real federal government purchases appeared likely to
have decreased sharply in the fourth quarter, reversing
much of the surprisingly strong increase in the third
quarter. Real state and local government purchases were
rising modestly in the fourth quarter, as nominal construction expenditures for October and November were
little changed, on net, and the payrolls of these governments increased somewhat.
The U.S. international trade deficit narrowed substantially in November, with imports declining more than
exports. The decrease in the value of imports stemmed
in large part from a reduction in the value of petroleum
imports, reflecting both lower prices and volumes.
However, many other categories of goods imports were
also weaker. Export declines were concentrated in capital goods, particularly aircraft. Despite the narrowing of
the nominal trade deficit in November, real net exports
appeared to be on track to decline in the fourth quarter
after adding considerably to real gross domestic product
(GDP) growth in the third quarter.
Total U.S. consumer prices, as measured by the PCE
price index, increased 1¼ percent over the 12 months
ending in November, while core prices, as measured by
PCE prices excluding food and energy, rose about
1½ percent; consumer energy prices declined, and consumer food prices increased faster than overall prices.
Over the 12 months ending in December, total inflation
as measured by the consumer price index (CPI) was
¾ percent, while core CPI inflation was 1½ percent.
Over the 3 months ending in December, the total CPI
decreased at an annual rate of 2½ percent, reflecting recent declines in consumer energy prices, and the core
CPI increased at a 1 percent pace. Measures of expected
long-run inflation from a variety of surveys, including
the Michigan survey and the Desk’s Survey of Primary
Dealers, remained stable. In contrast, market-based
measures of inflation compensation 5 to 10 years ahead
declined further. Over the 12 months ending in December, nominal average hourly earnings for all employees
increased only slightly faster than core consumer price
inflation.
Foreign real GDP growth appeared to increase slightly
in the fourth quarter. In the euro area, retail sales, car
registrations, and industrial production through November were above their third-quarter averages, and in Japan, strengthening consumption and exports suggested
a recovery of output after two quarters of contraction.
However, growth slowed in China, partly reflecting further moderation in residential investment, and declining
construction activity also contributed to slowing GDP
growth in Korea and the United Kingdom. Inflation in
the advanced foreign economies declined sharply at the
end of last year, amid rapidly falling energy prices. By
contrast, inflation in the emerging market economies fell
only modestly, as several of these economies have
government-administered energy prices and some have
been experiencing upward price pressures from currency
depreciations.
Staff Review of the Financial Situation
Over the intermeeting period, amid trading that was volatile at times, longer-term sovereign yields in the United
States and other advanced economies declined. These
moves were attributed in part to a deterioration in market sentiment associated with downward pressure on inflation, increased concern about the global economic
outlook, and announced and anticipated foreign central
bank policies. Moreover, continued sharp declines in oil
prices and U.S. economic data releases that were viewed
by investors as a bit weaker than anticipated, on balance,
reportedly weighed on sentiment.
Federal Reserve communications over the intermeeting
period were apparently seen as about in line with expectations on balance. However, reflecting in part the deterioration in market sentiment, the expected path for the
federal funds rate implied by market quotes shifted
down. Results from the Desk’s January Survey of Primary Dealers indicated that dealers continued to put the
highest probability on scenarios in which the FOMC
chooses to commence policy firming around the middle
of the year, although the average probability assigned to
a commencement after June increased somewhat.
Yields on nominal Treasury securities continued to
move lower over the intermeeting period, with market
expectations of the policy rate path being revised downward, and with term premiums declining, in part reflecting actual and expected policy easing abroad. On balance, the Treasury yield curve flattened over the intermeeting period, while interest rate volatility increased
somewhat. Although the measure of inflation compensation over the next 5 years based on Treasury InflationProtected Securities (TIPS) increased, inflation compensation 5 to 10 years ahead declined further to its lowest
level in a decade. Yields on 5- and 10-year TIPS moved
lower over the period.
Over the intermeeting period, U.S. equity markets were
volatile. Option-implied volatility for the S&P 500 index
declined, on balance, but remained in the upper half of
Page 14
Federal Open Market Committee
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
the range seen over the past year. Broad U.S. equity
price indexes moved higher, while stock prices for large
domestic banking organizations moved lower on net.
Corporate bond spreads were also volatile over the intermeeting period but were little changed, on net, for investment-grade issuers and ended the period lower for
speculative-grade issuers, particularly energy companies.
Credit flows to nonfinancial firms generally remained
strong through the last quarter of 2014, though they
slowed somewhat for riskier firms. Gross corporate
bond issuance continued to be solid, although speculative-grade bond issuance declined late in the year and remained subdued into January. Commercial and industrial loans on banks’ books continued to expand at a robust rate in the fourth quarter of 2014, consistent with
the stronger loan demand from large and middle-market
firms reported in the January Senior Loan Officer Opinion Survey on Bank Lending Practices (SLOOS). Issuance of syndicated leveraged loans in the fourth quarter
was at its slowest pace in two years, as spreads on newly
issued loans increased and refinancing activity declined
significantly. Issuance of collateralized loan obligations
declined but remained elevated; 2014 was the strongest
year on record for the issuance of such securities.
Financing conditions in the commercial real estate
(CRE) sector stayed accommodative. In the January
SLOOS, banks reported that standards continued to
ease, on net, for CRE lending and noted stronger demand for all CRE loan types. Issuance of commercial
mortgage-backed securities continued at a solid pace in
November and December.
Residential mortgage credit conditions, while remaining
tight, showed some further signs of gradual easing. According to the January SLOOS, lending standards eased
for a number of categories of residential mortgage loans
in the fourth quarter. The price of mortgage credit for
qualified borrowers declined again over the intermeeting
period, with interest rates on 30-year fixed-rate mortgages reaching levels close to their all-time lows. Refinance applications rose near the end of the intermeeting period.
Conditions in consumer credit markets stayed largely accommodative over the intermeeting period. Auto and
student loan balances continued to post significant gains
through November, while the expansion of credit card
loans on banks’ books remained moderate during the
fourth quarter as a whole. Respondents to the January
SLOOS indicated that demand for auto and credit card
loans had strengthened further in the fourth quarter.
Consumer credit quality has remained strong on balance.
The credit performance of auto loans, however, reportedly deteriorated a bit further for some lenders, and several banks indicated in the January SLOOS that they expect the performance of subprime auto loans to worsen
this year.
The U.S. dollar strengthened against the currencies of
most other advanced economies amid investor concerns
about growth in those economies as well as increased
monetary accommodation in some of them; the dollar
was largely unchanged, on average, against the currencies
of emerging market economies. Sovereign yields abroad
moved lower, with euro-area yields reflecting the expected and actual easing of the stance of monetary policy
by the European Central Bank (ECB) and U.K. yields
responding to a shift in expectations toward a later start
of Bank of England policy firming. Global equity markets were broadly higher, rebounding from declines in
mid-December.
Several central banks announced monetary policy actions during the period. The ECB announced that it
would expand its asset purchase program to include the
purchase of sovereign bonds; the euro depreciated significantly against the dollar both in anticipation of and
following this announcement. The Swiss National Bank
(SNB) ended its policy of defending the exchange rate
floor of 1.20 Swiss francs per euro, resulting in a significant appreciation of the franc. At the same time, the
SNB reduced policy rates, moving the rate it pays on deposits and its target range for Swiss franc LIBOR, or
London interbank offered rate, further into negative territory. The Bank of Canada, National Bank of Denmark,
Reserve Bank of India, and Central Bank of Turkey also
cut policy rates in January to support their economies
and, in some cases, to foster higher inflation, while the
Central Bank of Brazil raised rates in response to concerns about elevated inflation.
The staff provided its latest report on potential risks to
financial stability. Relatively high levels of capital and
liquidity in the banking sector, moderate levels of maturity transformation in the financial sector, and a relatively subdued pace of borrowing by the nonfinancial
sector continued to be seen as important factors limiting
the vulnerability of the financial system to adverse
shocks. However, the staff report noted valuation pressures in some asset markets. Such pressures were most
notable in corporate debt markets, despite some easing
in recent months. In addition, valuation pressures appear to be building in the CRE sector, as indicated by
rising prices and the easing in lending standards on CRE
Minutes of the Meeting of January 27–28, 2015
Page 15
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
loans. Finally, the increased role of bond and loan mutual funds, in conjunction with other factors, may have
increased the risk that liquidity pressures could emerge
in related markets if investor appetite for such assets
wanes. The effects on the largest banking firms of the
sharp decline in oil prices and developments in foreign
exchange markets appeared limited, although other institutions with more concentrated exposures could face
strains if oil prices remain at current levels for a prolonged period.
In addition, the incoming data on consumer prices apart
from those for energy showed a somewhat smaller rise
than anticipated. The staff’s forecast for inflation in
2016 and 2017 was essentially unchanged, with inflation
projected to remain below the Committee’s 2 percent
objective. Nevertheless, inflation was projected to reach
2 percent over time, with inflation expectations in the
longer run assumed to be consistent with the Committee’s objective and slack in labor and product markets
anticipated to fade.
Staff Economic Outlook
The staff estimated that real GDP growth in the second
half of 2014 was faster than in the projection prepared
for the December meeting, primarily reflecting strongerthan-expected consumer spending. Even so, real GDP
was still estimated to have risen more slowly in the
fourth quarter than in the third quarter, as changes in
both net exports and federal government purchases appeared likely to have subtracted from real GDP growth
in the fourth quarter following large positive contributions in the previous quarter.
The staff viewed the uncertainty around its projections
for real GDP growth, the unemployment rate, and inflation as similar to the average over the past 20 years. The
risks to the forecast for real GDP growth were viewed
as tilted a little to the downside, reflecting the staff’s assessment that neither monetary policy nor fiscal policy
was well positioned to help the economy withstand adverse shocks. At the same time, the staff viewed the risks
around its outlook for the unemployment rate as roughly
balanced. The downside risks to the forecast for inflation were seen as having increased somewhat, partly reflecting the recent soft monthly readings on core inflation.
The staff’s outlook for economic activity over the first
half of 2015 was revised up since December, in part reflecting an anticipated boost to consumer spending from
declines in energy prices. However, the forecast for real
GDP growth over the medium term was little revised, as
the greater momentum implied by recent spending gains
and the support to household spending from lower energy prices was about offset by the restraint implied by
the recent appreciation of the dollar. The staff continued to forecast that real GDP would expand at a modestly faster pace in 2015 and 2016 than it did in 2014 and
that it would rise more quickly than potential output,
supported by increases in consumer and business confidence and a pickup in foreign economic growth, as well
as by a U.S. monetary policy stance that was assumed to
remain highly accommodative for some time. In 2017,
real GDP growth was projected to begin slowing toward, but to remain slightly above, the rate of growth of
potential output. The expansion in economic activity
over the medium term was anticipated to lead to a slow
reduction in resource slack, and the unemployment rate
was expected to decline gradually and to move slightly
below the staff’s estimate of its longer-run natural rate
for a time.
The staff’s forecast for inflation in the near term was revised down, as further sharp declines in crude oil prices
since the December FOMC meeting pointed toward a
somewhat larger transitory decrease in the total PCE
price index early this year than was previously projected.
Participants’ Views on Current Conditions and the
Economic Outlook
In their discussion of the economic situation and the
outlook, meeting participants regarded the information
received over the intermeeting period as indicating that
economic activity had been expanding at a solid pace.
Although growth likely slowed from the rapid rate recorded for the third quarter of 2014, a variety of indicators suggested that real GDP continued to grow faster
than potential GDP late in the year and during January.
Labor market conditions improved further, with strong
job gains and a lower unemployment rate; participants
judged that the underutilization of labor resources was
continuing to diminish. Participants expected that, over
the medium term, real economic activity would increase
at a moderate pace sufficient to lead to further improvements in labor market conditions toward levels consistent with the Committee’s objective of maximum employment. Inflation had declined further below the
Committee’s longer-run objective, largely reflecting declines in energy prices, and was anticipated to decline
further in the near term. Market-based measures of inflation compensation 5 to 10 years ahead had registered
a further decline, while survey-based measures of longerterm inflation expectations remained stable. Participants
generally anticipated that inflation would rise gradually
toward the Committee’s 2 percent objective as the labor
market improved further and the transitory effects of
Page 16
Federal Open Market Committee
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
lower energy prices and other factors dissipated. The
risks to the outlook for economic activity and the labor
market were seen as nearly balanced. Participants generally regarded the net effect of the recent decline in energy prices as likely to be positive for economic activity
and employment. Many participants continued to judge
that a deterioration in the foreign economic situation
could pose downside risks to the outlook for U.S. economic growth. Several saw those risks as having diminished over the intermeeting period, with lower oil prices
and actions of foreign central banks both being supportive of growth abroad, but others pointed to heightened
geopolitical and other risks.
With respect to the U.S. economy, participants noted
that household spending was rising moderately. Recent
declines in oil prices, which had boosted household purchasing power, were among the factors likely to underpin consumer spending in coming months; other factors
cited as supporting household spending included low interest rates, easing credit standards, and continued gains
in employment and income. However, it was noted that
the recovery in the housing sector remained slow and
that tepid nominal wage growth, if continued, could become a significant restraining factor for household
spending.
Industry contacts pointed to generally solid business
conditions, with businesses in many parts of the country
continuing to express optimism about prospects for further improvement in 2015. Although manufacturing activity appeared to have slowed somewhat over the intermeeting period in some regions, business contacts suggested that this slowing was likely to prove temporary,
and information from some parts of the country suggested that capital investment was poised to pick up.
Several participants noted that there were signs of layoffs
in the oil and gas industries, and that persistently low energy prices might prompt a larger retrenchment of employment in these industries. In addition, it was observed that if capital investment in energy-producing industries slowed significantly, it could damp the overall
expansion of economic activity for a period, especially if
the slowing took place after most of the positive effects
of lower energy prices on growth in household spending
had occurred. A few participants observed that government spending was unlikely to be a major contributor to
the expansion of demand in the period ahead, with real
federal purchases projected to be fairly flat over the medium term.
In their discussion of the foreign economic outlook, participants noted that a number of developments over the
intermeeting period had likely reduced the risks to U.S.
growth. Accommodative policy actions announced by a
number of foreign central banks had likely strengthened
the outlook abroad. The decline in energy prices was
also seen as potentially exerting a stronger-than-anticipated positive effect on growth in the domestic economy and abroad. However, the increase in the foreign
exchange value of the dollar was expected to be a persistent source of restraint on U.S. net exports, and a few
participants pointed to the risk that the dollar could appreciate further. In addition, the slowdown of growth in
China was noted as a factor restraining economic expansion in a number of countries, and several continuing
risks to the international economic outlook were cited,
including global disinflationary pressure, tensions in the
Middle East and Ukraine, and financial uncertainty in
Greece. Overall, the risks to the outlook for U.S. economic activity and the labor market were seen as nearly
balanced.
Participants noted that inflation had moved further below the Committee’s longer-run objective, largely reflecting declines in energy prices and other transitory
factors. A number of participants observed that, with
anchored inflation expectations, the fall in energy prices
should not leave an enduring imprint on aggregate inflation. It was pointed out that the recent intensification
of downward pressure on inflation reflected price movements that were concentrated in a narrow range of items
in households’ consumption basket, a pattern borne out
by trimmed mean measures of inflation. Several participants remarked that inflation measures that excluded energy items had also moved down in recent months, but
these declines partly reflected transitory factors, including downward pressure on import prices and the passthrough of lower energy costs to the prices of nonenergy items. Nonetheless, several participants saw the
continuing weakness of core inflation measures as a concern. In addition, a few participants suggested that the
weakness of nominal wage growth indicated that core
and headline inflation could take longer to return to
2 percent than the Committee anticipated. In contrast,
a couple of participants suggested that nominal wage
growth provides little information about the future behavior of price inflation. Participants also discussed the
possibility that, because of the infrequent occurrence of
reductions in nominal wages, wages may not have fully
adjusted downward in the period of high unemployment, and therefore pent-up wage deflation might have
weighed on wage gains for a time during the expansion.
If this was the case, nominal wage growth could be expected to pick up in coming periods and to resume a
Minutes of the Meeting of January 27–28, 2015
Page 17
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
more normal relationship with labor market slack. Most
participants expected that continuing reductions in resource slack would be helpful in returning inflation over
the medium term to the Committee’s 2 percent longerrun objective, but a few participants voiced concern that
nominal wage growth might rise rapidly and inflation
might exceed 2 percent for a time.
Participants discussed the sizable decline in marketbased measures of inflation compensation that had been
observed over the past year and continued over the intermeeting period. A number of them judged that the
decline mostly reflected a reduction in the risk premiums
embedded in nominal interest rates rather than a decline
in inflation expectations; this interpretation was supported by results of some analytical models used to decompose movements in market-based measures of inflation compensation and also by the continuing stability
of survey-based measures of inflation expectations.
However, other participants put some weight on the
possibility that the decline in inflation compensation reflected a reduction in expected inflation. These participants further argued that the stability of survey-based
measures of inflation expectations should not be taken
as providing much reassurance; in particular, it was
noted that in Japan in the late 1990s and early 2000s,
survey-based measures of longer-term inflation expectations had not recorded major declines even as a disinflationary process had become entrenched. In addition, a
few participants argued that even if the shift down in inflation compensation reflected lower inflation risk premiums rather than reductions in expected inflation, policymakers might still want to take that decline into account because it could reflect increased concern on the
part of investors about adverse outcomes in which low
inflation was accompanied by weak economic activity.
Participants generally agreed that the behavior of
market-based measures of inflation compensation
needed to be monitored closely.
Participants also discussed other aspects of the substantial decline in nominal longer-term interest rates and its
implications. The fall had occurred despite the strengthening U.S. economic outlook and market expectations
that policy normalization could begin later this year.
Some participants suggested that shifts of funds from
abroad into U.S. Treasury securities may have put downward pressure on term premiums; the shifts, in turn, may
have reflected in part a reaction to declines in foreign
sovereign yields in response to actual and anticipated
monetary policy actions abroad. A couple of participants noted that the reduction in longer-term real interest rates tended to make U.S. financial conditions more
accommodative, potentially calling for a somewhat
higher path for the federal funds rate going forward.
Others observed that insofar as the shifts reflected concerns about growth prospects abroad or were accompanied by a stronger dollar, the implications for U.S. monetary policy were less clear. It was further noted that
investment flows from abroad could also be contributing to the decline in TIPS-based measures of inflation
compensation, as such flows tend to be concentrated in
nominal Treasury securities rather than inflationprotected securities.
Participants saw broad-based improvement in labor
market conditions over the intermeeting period, including strong gains in payroll employment and a further reduction in the unemployment rate. Some participants
believed that considerable labor market slack remained,
especially when indicators other than the unemployment
rate were taken into account, including the unusually
large fraction of the labor force working part time for
economic reasons. A few observed that the combination of recent labor market improvements and continued softness in inflation had led them to lower their estimates of the longer-run normal rate of unemployment.
However, a few others saw only a limited degree of remaining labor underutilization or anticipated that underutilization would be eliminated relatively soon.
Participants’ Discussion of Policy Planning
Participants discussed considerations related to the
choice of the appropriate timing of the initial firming in
monetary policy and pace of subsequent rate increases.
Ahead of this discussion, the staff gave a presentation
that outlined some of the key issues likely to be involved,
including the extent to which similar economic outcomes could be generated by different combinations of
the date of the initial firming of policy and the pace of
rate increases thereafter, how these combinations could
affect the risks to economic outcomes, a review of past
episodes in the United States and abroad in which monetary policy transitioned to a tightening phase after a
lengthy period of low policy rates, and issues related to
communications regarding the likely timing and pace of
normalization.
Participants discussed the tradeoffs between the risks
that would be associated with departing from the effective lower bound later and those that would be associated with departing earlier. Several participants noted
that a late departure could result in the stance of monetary policy becoming excessively accommodative, leading to undesirably high inflation. It was also suggested
that maintaining the federal funds rate at its effective
Page 18
Federal Open Market Committee
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
lower bound for an extended period or raising it rapidly,
if that proved necessary, could adversely affect financial
stability. Some participants were concerned that a decision to delay the commencement of tightening could be
perceived as indicating that an overly accommodative
policy is likely to prevail during the firming phase. In
connection with the risks associated with an early start
to policy normalization, many participants observed that
a premature increase in rates might damp the apparent
solid recovery in real activity and labor market conditions, undermining progress toward the Committee’s
objectives of maximum employment and 2 percent inflation. In addition, an earlier tightening would increase
the likelihood that the Committee might be forced by
adverse economic outcomes to return the federal funds
rate to its effective lower bound. Some participants
noted the communications challenges associated with
the prospect of commencing policy tightening at a time
when inflation could be running well below 2 percent,
and a few expressed concern that in some circumstances
the public could come to question the credibility of the
Committee’s 2 percent goal. Indeed, one participant recommended that, in light of the outlook for inflation, the
Committee consider ways to use its tools to provide
more, not less, accommodation.
Many participants indicated that their assessment of the
balance of risks associated with the timing of the beginning of policy normalization had inclined them toward
keeping the federal funds rate at its effective lower
bound for a longer time. Some observed that, even with
these risks taken into consideration, the federal funds
rate may have already been kept at its lower bound for a
sufficient length of time, and that it might be appropriate
to begin policy firming in the near term. Regardless of
the particular strategy undertaken, it was noted that, provided that the data-dependent nature of the path for the
federal funds rate after its initial increase could be communicated to financial markets and the general public in
an effective manner, the precise date at which firming
commenced would have a less important bearing on economic outcomes.
Participants discussed the economic conditions that they
anticipate will prevail at the time they expect it will be
appropriate to begin normalizing policy. There was wide
agreement that it would be difficult to specify in advance
an exhaustive list of economic indicators and the values
that these indicators would need to take. Nonetheless, a
number of participants suggested that they would need
to see further improvement in labor market conditions
and data pointing to continued growth in real activity at
a pace sufficient to support additional labor market gains
before beginning policy normalization. Many participants indicated that such economic conditions would
help bolster their confidence in the likelihood of inflation moving toward the Committee’s 2 percent objective
after the transitory effects of lower energy prices and
other factors dissipate. Some participants noted that
their confidence in inflation returning to 2 percent
would also be bolstered by stable or rising levels of core
PCE inflation, or of alternative series, such as trimmed
mean or median measures of inflation. A number of
participants emphasized that they would need to see either an increase in market-based measures of inflation
compensation or evidence that continued low readings
on these measures did not constitute grounds for concern. Several participants indicated that signs of improvements in labor compensation would be an important signal, while a few others deemphasized the
value of labor compensation data for judging incipient
inflation pressures in light of the loose short-run empirical connection between wage and price inflation.
Participants discussed the communications challenges
associated with signaling, when it becomes appropriate
to do so, that policy normalization is likely to begin relatively soon while remaining clear that the Committee’s
actions would depend on incoming data. Many participants regarded dropping the “patient” language in the
statement, whenever that might occur, as risking a shift
in market expectations for the beginning of policy firming toward an unduly narrow range of dates. As a result,
some expressed the concern that financial markets might
overreact, resulting in undesirably tight financial conditions. Participants discussed some possible communications by which they might further underscore the data
dependency of their decision regarding when to tighten
the stance of monetary policy. A number of participants
noted that while forward guidance had been a very useful
tool under the extraordinary conditions of recent years,
as the start of normalization approaches, there would be
limits to the specificity that the Committee could provide about its timing. Looking ahead, some participants
highlighted the potential benefits of streamlining the
Committee’s postmeeting statement once normalization
has begun. More broadly, it was suggested that the
Committee should communicate clearly that policy decisions will be data dependent, and that unanticipated economic developments could therefore warrant a path of
the federal funds rate different from that currently expected by investors or policymakers.
Committee Policy Action
In their discussion of monetary policy for the period
ahead, members judged that information received since
Minutes of the Meeting of January 27–28, 2015
Page 19
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
the FOMC met in December indicated that economic
activity had been expanding at a solid pace. Labor market conditions had improved further, with strong job
gains and a lower unemployment rate; numerous labor
market indicators suggested that the underutilization of
labor resources was continuing to diminish. Household
spending was rising moderately; recent declines in energy prices had boosted household purchasing power.
Business fixed investment was advancing, while the recovery in the housing sector remained slow. Inflation
had declined further below the Committee’s longer-run
objective, largely reflecting declines in energy prices, and
was expected to decline further in the near term.
Market-based measures of five-year, five-year-forward
inflation compensation had declined substantially in recent months, but survey-based measures of longer-term
inflation expectations had remained stable. The Committee expected that, with appropriate monetary policy
accommodation, economic activity would continue to
expand at a moderate pace, with labor market indicators
moving toward levels the Committee judges consistent
with its dual mandate. The Committee also expected
that inflation would rise gradually toward 2 percent as
the labor market improves further and the transitory effects of lower energy prices and other factors dissipate.
In view of the uncertainties about the inflation outlook,
the Committee agreed that it should continue to monitor
inflation developments closely.
In their discussion of language for the postmeeting statement, members generally agreed that they should
acknowledge the solid growth over the second half of
2014 as well as the further improvement in labor market
conditions over the intermeeting period. Job gains had
been strong, and the Committee judged that labor market slack continued to diminish. In addition, members
decided that the statement should note the further decline of inflation seen of late and the additional decline
that was in prospect in the near term, while also registering their judgment that these short-term movements of
inflation largely reflected the recent decline in energy
prices and other transitory factors, and that inflation was
likely to rise gradually toward 2 percent over the medium
term. Members also agreed that it was appropriate to
observe that lower energy prices had boosted household
purchasing power. The Committee further decided that
the postmeeting statement should explicitly
acknowledge the role of international developments as
one of the factors influencing the Committee’s assessment of progress toward its objectives of maximum employment and 2 percent inflation.
The Committee agreed to maintain the target range for
the federal funds rate at 0 to ¼ percent and to reaffirm
the indication in the statement that the Committee’s decision about how long to maintain the current target
range for the federal funds rate would depend on its assessment of actual and expected progress toward its objectives of maximum employment and 2 percent inflation. Members agreed to continue to include, in the forward guidance, language indicating that the Committee
judges that it can be patient in beginning to normalize
the stance of monetary policy. Members agreed that
their policy decisions would remain data dependent, and
they continued to include wording in the statement
noting that if incoming information indicates faster progress toward the Committee’s employment and inflation
objectives than the Committee now expects, then increases in the target range for the federal funds rate
would likely occur sooner than currently anticipated,
and, conversely, that if progress proves slower than expected, then increases in the target range would likely
occur later than currently anticipated. The Committee
decided to maintain its policy of reinvesting principal
payments from its holdings of agency debt and agency
mortgage-backed securities in agency mortgage-backed
securities and of rolling over maturing Treasury securities at auction. This policy, by keeping the Committee’s
holdings of longer-term securities at sizable levels,
should help maintain accommodative financial conditions. Finally, the Committee also decided to reiterate
its expectation that, even after employment and inflation
are near mandate-consistent levels, economic conditions
may, for some time, warrant keeping the target federal
funds rate below levels the Committee views as normal
in the longer run.
At the conclusion of the discussion, the Committee
voted to authorize and direct the Federal Reserve Bank
of New York, until it was instructed otherwise, to
execute transactions in the SOMA in accordance with
the following domestic policy directive:
“Consistent with its statutory mandate, the
Federal Open Market Committee seeks
monetary and financial conditions that will
foster maximum employment and price
stability. In particular, the Committee seeks
conditions in reserve markets consistent with
federal funds trading in a range from 0 to
¼ percent. The Committee directs the Desk
to undertake open market operations as
necessary to maintain such conditions. The
Committee directs the Desk to maintain its
policy of rolling over maturing Treasury
Page 20
Federal Open Market Committee
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
securities into new issues and its policy of
reinvesting principal payments on all agency
debt and agency mortgage-backed securities
in agency mortgage-backed securities. The
Committee also directs the Desk to engage in
dollar roll and coupon swap transactions as
necessary to facilitate settlement of the
Federal Reserve’s agency mortgage-backed
securities transactions. The System Open
Market Account manager and the secretary
will keep the Committee informed of ongoing
developments regarding the System’s balance
sheet that could affect the attainment over
time of the Committee’s objectives of
maximum employment and price stability.”
The vote encompassed approval of the statement below
to be released at 2:00 p.m.:
“Information received since the Federal Open
Market Committee met in December suggests
that economic activity has been expanding at
a solid pace. Labor market conditions have
improved further, with strong job gains and a
lower unemployment rate. On balance, a
range of labor market indicators suggests that
underutilization of labor resources continues
to diminish. Household spending is rising
moderately; recent declines in energy prices
have boosted household purchasing power.
Business fixed investment is advancing, while
the recovery in the housing sector remains
slow. Inflation has declined further below the
Committee’s longer-run objective, largely reflecting declines in energy prices. Marketbased measures of inflation compensation
have declined substantially in recent months;
survey-based measures of longer-term inflation expectations have remained stable.
Consistent with its statutory mandate, the
Committee seeks to foster maximum employment and price stability. The Committee expects that, with appropriate policy accommodation, economic activity will expand at a
moderate pace, with labor market indicators
continuing to move toward levels the Committee judges consistent with its dual mandate. The Committee continues to see the
risks to the outlook for economic activity and
the labor market as nearly balanced. Inflation
is anticipated to decline further in the near
term, but the Committee expects inflation to
rise gradually toward 2 percent over the medium term as the labor market improves further and the transitory effects of lower energy
prices and other factors dissipate. The Committee continues to monitor inflation developments closely.
To support continued progress toward maximum employment and price stability, the
Committee today reaffirmed its view that the
current 0 to ¼ percent target range for the
federal funds rate remains appropriate. In determining how long to maintain this target
range, the Committee will assess progress—
both realized and expected—toward its objectives of maximum employment and 2 percent
inflation. This assessment will take into account a wide range of information, including
measures of labor market conditions, indicators of inflation pressures and inflation expectations, and readings on financial and international developments. Based on its current assessment, the Committee judges that it can be
patient in beginning to normalize the stance
of monetary policy. However, if incoming information indicates faster progress toward the
Committee’s employment and inflation objectives than the Committee now expects, then
increases in the target range for the federal
funds rate are likely to occur sooner than currently anticipated. Conversely, if progress
proves slower than expected, then increases in
the target range are likely to occur later than
currently anticipated.
The Committee is maintaining its existing policy of reinvesting principal payments from its
holdings of agency debt and agency mortgagebacked securities in agency mortgage-backed
securities and of rolling over maturing Treasury securities at auction. This policy, by keeping the Committee’s holdings of longer-term
securities at sizable levels, should help maintain accommodative financial conditions.
When the Committee decides to begin to remove policy accommodation, it will take a balanced approach consistent with its longer-run
goals of maximum employment and inflation
Minutes of the Meeting of January 27–28, 2015
Page 21
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
of 2 percent. The Committee currently anticipates that, even after employment and inflation are near mandate-consistent levels, economic conditions may, for some time, warrant
keeping the target federal funds rate below
levels the Committee views as normal in the
longer run.”
Voting for this action: Janet L. Yellen, William C.
Dudley, Lael Brainard, Charles L. Evans, Stanley
Fischer, Jeffrey M. Lacker, Dennis P. Lockhart,
Jerome H. Powell, Daniel K. Tarullo, and John C. Williams.
Voting against this action: None.
It was agreed that the next meeting of the Committee
would be held on Tuesday–Wednesday, March 17–18,
2015. The meeting adjourned at 12:55 p.m. on
January 28, 2015.
Notation Vote
By notation vote completed on January 6, 2015, the
Committee unanimously approved the minutes of the
Committee meeting held on December 16–17, 2014.
_____________________________
Thomas Laubach
Secretary
Cite this document
Federal Reserve (2015, January 27). FOMC Minutes. Fomc Minutes, Federal Reserve. https://whenthefedspeaks.com/doc/fomc_minutes_20150128
@misc{wtfs_fomc_minutes_20150128,
author = {Federal Reserve},
title = {FOMC Minutes},
year = {2015},
month = {Jan},
howpublished = {Fomc Minutes, Federal Reserve},
url = {https://whenthefedspeaks.com/doc/fomc_minutes_20150128},
note = {Retrieved via When the Fed Speaks corpus}
}