Connect with us

The New York Fed DSGE Model Forecast—December 2021

This post presents an update of the economic forecasts generated by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s dynamic stochastic general equilibrium (DSGE) model. We describe very briefly our forecast and its change since September 2021.

Published

on

This post presents an update of the economic forecasts generated by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s dynamic stochastic general equilibrium (DSGE) model. We describe very briefly our forecast and its change since September 2021.

As usual, we wish to remind our readers that the DSGE model forecast is not an official New York Fed forecast, but only an input to the Research staff’s overall forecasting process. For more information about the model and variables discussed here, see our DSGE model Q & A.

The December 2021 model forecast is reported in the table below, alongside the one from September 2021, and depicted in the charts that follow. The forecast uses quarterly macroeconomic data released through 2021:Q3, augmented for 2021:Q4 with the median forecasts for real GDP growth and core PCE inflation from the Philadelphia Fed’s November Survey of Professional Forecasters (SPF) release, as well as the yields on 10-year Treasury securities and Baa corporate bonds based on 2021:Q4 averages up to November 29.

Compared to September, the model projects somewhat weaker GDP growth in 2021 and 2022, together with slightly higher inflation through the forecast horizon. This unfavorable combination of forecast revisions mostly reflects two factors. The first factor is a continuation of the cost-push shock dynamics that have prevailed over the past few quarters, resulting in higher inflation and lower output. The second factor is tighter monetary policy in 2022 and 2023, as a response to the higher realized and forecasted inflation.

Following a 2020 dominated by the extreme swings in economic activity related to COVID-19, the key economic development of 2021 according to the model has been a series of large and persistent cost-push shocks. These shocks have raised inflation by about 2 percentage points so far in 2021 and are expected to fade only gradually over the course of 2022. In addition, the model attributes part of the elevated inflation readings in 2021 to a shock that increases the observed price level on impact, but that subsequently reduces inflation as its temporary level effect on prices fades. This price-level shock captures the effect on overall inflation of the extreme spikes in the prices of some goods, especially durables, which are expected to reverse at least in part. The model reads the data released since September as consistent with this environment, with inflation surprising on the upside and economic activity weaker than expected in the second half of the year, although strengthening in Q4. As a result, the SPF nowcast for 2021 has core PCE inflation at 3.9 percent and GDP growth at 4.8 percent, down from 5.3 percent in September.

In 2022, the model projects inflation to moderate to 2.2 percent, the same as in September, with a further decline to 2 percent in 2023 and 2024, which is marginally stronger than the September expectation. This return of inflation to mandate-consistent levels reflects the fading effect of cost-push shocks, whose contribution to inflation remains positive through 2022, and the disappearance of price-level shocks, as well as the response of monetary policy to these developments. Starting in 2020:Q4, such policy response follows average inflation targeting (AIT), reflecting the changes in the FOMC monetary policy strategy announced in August 2020. 

On balance, the near-term reaction of monetary policy to economic developments described above generates a modest drag on real activity. Coupled with the payback from the positive boost to GDP growth provided by the accommodative policy stance adopted so far, this drag pushes GDP growth below potential in 2023 and 2024. Compared to September, however, GDP growth is higher in 2023 and 2024, at 1.2 and 1.4 percent, respectively. This improvement in part reflects the more gradual tightening of policy in the later years.

Estimates of the real natural rate and its future evolution are broadly similar to those in September, with the natural rate predicted to be -0.4 percent by the end of 2021 and rising slowly to 0.5 percent in 2024.

Forecast Comparison

2021202220232024
DecSepDecSepDecSepDecSep
GDP growth (Q4/Q4)4.8
(4.6, 5.0)
5.3
(4.3, 6.4)
1.6
(-0.5, 3.7)
1.7
(-1.1, 4.5)
1.2
(-0.7, 3.1)
0.8
(-2.1, 3.8)
1.4
(-0.5, 3.3)
0.7
(-2.8, 4.1)
Core PCE inflation (Q4/Q4)3.9
(3.6, 4.2)
3.8
(3.6, 4.0)
2.2
(1.4, 3.0)
2.2
(1.5, 3.0)
2.0
(1.1, 2.9)
1.9
(1.1, 2.7)
2.0
(1.1, 3.0)
1.8
(1.1, 2.6)
Real natural rate of interest (Q4)-0.4
(-1.5, 0.6)
-0.2
(-1.4, 1.0)
0.2
(-1.2, 1.6
0.3
(-1.2, 1.8)
0.4
(-1.1, 2.0)
0.5
(-1.1, 2.1)
0.5
(-1.1, 2.2)
0.6
(-1.0, 2.3)
Source: Authors’ calculations.
Notes: This table lists the forecasts of output growth, core PCE inflation, and the real natural rate of interest from the December 2021 and September 2021 forecasts. The numbers outside parentheses are the mean forecasts, and the numbers in parentheses are the 68 percent bands.

Forecasts of Output Growth

Source: Authors’ calculations.
Notes: These two panels depict output growth. In the top panel, the black line indicates actual data and the red line shows the model forecasts. The shaded areas mark the uncertainty associated with our forecasts at 50, 60, 70, 80, and 90 percent probability intervals. In the bottom panel, the blue line shows the current forecast (quarter-to-quarter, annualized), and the gray line shows the September 2021 forecast.

Forecasts of Inflation

Source: Authors’ calculations.
Notes: These two panels depict core personal consumption expenditures (PCE) inflation. In the top panel, the black line indicates actual data and the red line shows the model forecasts. The shaded areas mark the uncertainty associated with our forecasts at 50, 60, 70, 80, and 90 percent probability intervals. In the bottom panel, the blue line shows the current forecast (quarter-to-quarter, annualized), and the gray line shows the September 2021 forecast.

Real Natural Rate of Interest

Source: Authors’ calculations.
Notes: The black line shows the model’s mean estimate of the real natural rate of interest; the red line shows the model forecast of the real natural rate. The shaded area marks the uncertainty associated with the forecasts at 50, 60, 70, 80, and 90 percent probability intervals.

Marco Del Negro is a vice president in the Bank’s Research and Statistics Group.

Aidan Gleich is a senior research analyst in the Bank’s Research and Statistics Group.

Shlok Goyal is a senior research analyst in the Bank’s Research and Statistics Group.

Alissa Johnson is a senior research analyst in the Bank’s Research and Statistics Group.

Andrea Tambalotti is a vice president in the Bank’s Research and Statistics Group.

Related Reading
The New York Fed DSGE Model Forecast—September 2021
The New York Fed DSGE Model Forecast—June 2021
The New York Fed DSGE Model Forecast—March 2021
The New York Fed DSGE Model
Hey, Economist! Tell Us about the New Applied Macroeconomics and Econometrics Center
Applied Macroeconomics and Econometrics Center (AMEC)


Read More

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

February Employment Situation

By Paul Gomme and Peter Rupert The establishment data from the BLS showed a 275,000 increase in payroll employment for February, outpacing the 230,000…

Published

on

By Paul Gomme and Peter Rupert

The establishment data from the BLS showed a 275,000 increase in payroll employment for February, outpacing the 230,000 average over the previous 12 months. The payroll data for January and December were revised down by a total of 167,000. The private sector added 223,000 new jobs, the largest gain since May of last year.

Temporary help services employment continues a steep decline after a sharp post-pandemic rise.

Average hours of work increased from 34.2 to 34.3. The increase, along with the 223,000 private employment increase led to a hefty increase in total hours of 5.6% at an annualized rate, also the largest increase since May of last year.

The establishment report, once again, beat “expectations;” the WSJ survey of economists was 198,000. Other than the downward revisions, mentioned above, another bit of negative news was a smallish increase in wage growth, from $34.52 to $34.57.

The household survey shows that the labor force increased 150,000, a drop in employment of 184,000 and an increase in the number of unemployed persons of 334,000. The labor force participation rate held steady at 62.5, the employment to population ratio decreased from 60.2 to 60.1 and the unemployment rate increased from 3.66 to 3.86. Remember that the unemployment rate is the number of unemployed relative to the labor force (the number employed plus the number unemployed). Consequently, the unemployment rate can go up if the number of unemployed rises holding fixed the labor force, or if the labor force shrinks holding the number unemployed unchanged. An increase in the unemployment rate is not necessarily a bad thing: it may reflect a strong labor market drawing “marginally attached” individuals from outside the labor force. Indeed, there was a 96,000 decline in those workers.

Earlier in the week, the BLS announced JOLTS (Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey) data for January. There isn’t much to report here as the job openings changed little at 8.9 million, the number of hires and total separations were little changed at 5.7 million and 5.3 million, respectively.

As has been the case for the last couple of years, the number of job openings remains higher than the number of unemployed persons.

Also earlier in the week the BLS announced that productivity increased 3.2% in the 4th quarter with output rising 3.5% and hours of work rising 0.3%.

The bottom line is that the labor market continues its surprisingly (to some) strong performance, once again proving stronger than many had expected. This strength makes it difficult to justify any interest rate cuts soon, particularly given the recent inflation spike.

Read More

Continue Reading

Spread & Containment

Another beloved brewery files Chapter 11 bankruptcy

The beer industry has been devastated by covid, changing tastes, and maybe fallout from the Bud Light scandal.

Published

on

Before the covid pandemic, craft beer was having a moment. Most cities had multiple breweries and taprooms with some having so many that people put together the brewery version of a pub crawl.

It was a period where beer snobbery ruled the day and it was not uncommon to hear bar patrons discuss the makeup of the beer the beer they were drinking. This boom period always seemed destined for failure, or at least a retraction as many markets seemed to have more craft breweries than they could support.

Related: Fast-food chain closes more stores after Chapter 11 bankruptcy

The pandemic, however, hastened that downfall. Many of these local and regional craft breweries counted on in-person sales to drive their business. 

And while many had local and regional distribution, selling through a third party comes with much lower margins. Direct sales drove their business and the pandemic forced many breweries to shut down their taprooms during the period where social distancing rules were in effect.

During those months the breweries still had rent and employees to pay while little money was coming in. That led to a number of popular beermakers including San Francisco's nationally-known Anchor Brewing as well as many regional favorites including Chicago’s Metropolitan Brewing, New Jersey’s Flying Fish, Denver’s Joyride Brewing, Tampa’s Zydeco Brew Werks, and Cleveland’s Terrestrial Brewing filing bankruptcy.

Some of these brands hope to survive, but others, including Anchor Brewing, fell into Chapter 7 liquidation. Now, another domino has fallen as a popular regional brewery has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

Overall beer sales have fallen.

Image source: Shutterstock

Covid is not the only reason for brewery bankruptcies

While covid deserves some of the blame for brewery failures, it's not the only reason why so many have filed for bankruptcy protection. Overall beer sales have fallen driven by younger people embracing non-alcoholic cocktails, and the rise in popularity of non-beer alcoholic offerings,

Beer sales have fallen to their lowest levels since 1999 and some industry analysts

"Sales declined by more than 5% in the first nine months of the year, dragged down not only by the backlash and boycotts against Anheuser-Busch-owned Bud Light but the changing habits of younger drinkers," according to data from Beer Marketer’s Insights published by the New York Post.

Bud Light parent Anheuser Busch InBev (BUD) faced massive boycotts after it partnered with transgender social media influencer Dylan Mulvaney. It was a very small partnership but it led to a right-wing backlash spurred on by Kid Rock, who posted a video on social media where he chastised the company before shooting up cases of Bud Light with an automatic weapon.

Another brewery files Chapter 11 bankruptcy

Gizmo Brew Works, which does business under the name Roth Brewing Company LLC, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on March 8. In its filing, the company checked the box that indicates that its debts are less than $7.5 million and it chooses to proceed under Subchapter V of Chapter 11. 

"Both small business and subchapter V cases are treated differently than a traditional chapter 11 case primarily due to accelerated deadlines and the speed with which the plan is confirmed," USCourts.gov explained. 

Roth Brewing/Gizmo Brew Works shared that it has 50-99 creditors and assets $100,000 and $500,000. The filing noted that the company does expect to have funds available for unsecured creditors. 

The popular brewery operates three taprooms and sells its beer to go at those locations.

"Join us at Gizmo Brew Works Craft Brewery and Taprooms located in Raleigh, Durham, and Chapel Hill, North Carolina. Find us for entertainment, live music, food trucks, beer specials, and most importantly, great-tasting craft beer by Gizmo Brew Works," the company shared on its website.

The company estimates that it has between $1 and $10 million in liabilities (a broad range as the bankruptcy form does not provide a space to be more specific).

Gizmo Brew Works/Roth Brewing did not share a reorganization or funding plan in its bankruptcy filing. An email request for comment sent through the company's contact page was not immediately returned.

 

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Walmart joins Costco in sharing key pricing news

The massive retailers have both shared information that some retailers keep very close to the vest.

Published

on

As we head toward a presidential election, the presumed candidates for both parties will look for issues that rally undecided voters. 

The economy will be a key issue, with Democrats pointing to job creation and lowering prices while Republicans will cite the layoffs at Big Tech companies, high housing prices, and of course, sticky inflation.

The covid pandemic created a perfect storm for inflation and higher prices. It became harder to get many items because people getting sick slowed down, or even stopped, production at some factories.

Related: Popular mall retailer shuts down abruptly after bankruptcy filing

It was also a period where demand increased while shipping, trucking and delivery systems were all strained or thrown out of whack. The combination led to product shortages and higher prices.

You might have gone to the grocery store and not been able to buy your favorite paper towel brand or find toilet paper at all. That happened partly because of the supply chain and partly due to increased demand, but at the end of the day, it led to higher prices, which some consumers blamed on President Joe Biden's administration.

Biden, of course, was blamed for the price increases, but as inflation has dropped and grocery prices have fallen, few companies have been up front about it. That's probably not a political choice in most cases. Instead, some companies have chosen to lower prices more slowly than they raised them.

However, two major retailers, Walmart (WMT) and Costco, have been very honest about inflation. Walmart Chief Executive Doug McMillon's most recent comments validate what Biden's administration has been saying about the state of the economy. And they contrast with the economic picture being painted by Republicans who support their presumptive nominee, Donald Trump.

Walmart has seen inflation drop in many key areas.

Image source: Joe Raedle/Getty Images

Walmart sees lower prices

McMillon does not talk about lower prices to make a political statement. He's communicating with customers and potential customers through the analysts who cover the company's quarterly-earnings calls.

During Walmart's fiscal-fourth-quarter-earnings call, McMillon was clear that prices are going down.

"I'm excited about the omnichannel net promoter score trends the team is driving. Across countries, we continue to see a customer that's resilient but looking for value. As always, we're working hard to deliver that for them, including through our rollbacks on food pricing in Walmart U.S. Those were up significantly in Q4 versus last year, following a big increase in Q3," he said.

He was specific about where the chain has seen prices go down.

"Our general merchandise prices are lower than a year ago and even two years ago in some categories, which means our customers are finding value in areas like apparel and hard lines," he said. "In food, prices are lower than a year ago in places like eggs, apples, and deli snacks, but higher in other places like asparagus and blackberries."

McMillon said that in other areas prices were still up but have been falling.

"Dry grocery and consumables categories like paper goods and cleaning supplies are up mid-single digits versus last year and high teens versus two years ago. Private-brand penetration is up in many of the countries where we operate, including the United States," he said.

Costco sees almost no inflation impact

McMillon avoided the word inflation in his comments. Costco  (COST)  Chief Financial Officer Richard Galanti, who steps down on March 15, has been very transparent on the topic.

The CFO commented on inflation during his company's fiscal-first-quarter-earnings call.

"Most recently, in the last fourth-quarter discussion, we had estimated that year-over-year inflation was in the 1% to 2% range. Our estimate for the quarter just ended, that inflation was in the 0% to 1% range," he said.

Galanti made clear that inflation (and even deflation) varied by category.

"A bigger deflation in some big and bulky items like furniture sets due to lower freight costs year over year, as well as on things like domestics, bulky lower-priced items, again, where the freight cost is significant. Some deflationary items were as much as 20% to 30% and, again, mostly freight-related," he added.

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending