NEAM Insights

September Overview At its September meeting, the Fed lowered its benchmark rate range by 25 basis points to 4.00-4.25%. It marked the first move since December 2024. With the employment outlook weakening, Powell stated “the balance of risks has shifted.” Although inflation remains a concern and leaves their dual mandate “in tension,” the Fed, which has no “risk-free path,” believes that “downside risks to employment have risen,” lending support to the committee’s ultimate decision to reduce their benchmark rate range. The move was accompanied by the release of the most recent Summary of Economic Projections, which showed real GDP growing slightly from previous estimates, while unemployment projections remained level to slightly lower and core inflation estimates also tracked a slower course on the way to the Fed’s ultimate target of 2.0%. While policy is not on a “pre-set path,” and remains data dependent, median estimates from the SEP highlight further action, with estimates for the Fed’s benchmark rate showing another 50 basis points of easing by year end, followed by an additional 25 basis points in 2026 and again in 2027. Read More

August Overview With downside risks to employment and upside risks to inflation continuing to present themselves, the minutes from the July FOMC meeting showed that more participants saw tariff induced risks to inflation as a more pressing issue than those impacting the labor market at that time, stating, “a majority of participants judged the upside risk to inflation as the greater of these two risks.” Read More

July Overview At the end of the month, the Fed held its benchmark rate range steady at 4.25% - 4.50%. Nine Fed Governors voted in favor of staying put, while two dissented in favor of a quarter point cut. Despite touting a low unemployment rate and “solid labor market conditions,” the Committee altered its view of the economy from “solid” to “moderating,” and reiterated that “uncertainty remains elevated.” Read More

June Overview The Fed stayed the course in June, keeping the benchmark policy rate range at 4.25 - 4.50% while advocating a cautious approach as recent trade policy measures have yet to show their impact on economic activity and inflation. Per its statement, the Fed believes that uncertainty has “diminished but remains elevated,” the labor market is in “solid” shape, while Read More

May Overview With “heightened uncertainty” still dominating consumer and business sentiment, the Fed unanimously voted to maintain its benchmark rate range at 4.25-4.50%. Arguing that the economy is “still in a solid position,” with unemployment at 4.2%, and inflation lower but still above its target, the Fed remains tethered to the position that upholding the status quo is the best position at this time until hard data encourages them to act otherwise. Read More

April Overview Fed minutes highlighted that the US labor market remains stable and that inflation, although lower, remains above the desired level. New policies, particularly regarding trade, are presenting a challenge, however, and the Fed remains tethered to its data dependency position, waiting for hard data to confirm weakening survey responses on the consumer and business fronts. The Fed sees pressure on inflation favoring the upside, and concurrently growth pressuring to the downside. With “uncertainty higher,” the Fed prefers a more cautious approach, allowing them to remain restrictive enough in the face of potential one-time or more persistent inflation, as well as being ready to let the line out should labor market and/or growth pressures intensify. In a speech at the Economic Club of Chicago mid-month, Powell once again mentioned the “significantly higher than anticipated” tariffs and the corresponding impact on uncertainty, with potential implications for higher transient or persistent inflation, and slower growth on the horizon. With survey data for inflation expectations rising, and domestic and global growth estimates being revised downward, the Fed sits at a crossroads, advocating its intent to act once the data warrants so. Read More

March Overview Against the backdrop of “unusually elevated” uncertainty, the Fed held its benchmark rate steady at its most recent meeting, stating that the economy remains “strong overall” while they continue to work towards achieving their dual goals. Aware that offsetting upward pressures on inflation, and downward pressures on growth are increasing, the committee opted to hold steady. Read More

February Overview The minutes from the most recent January FOMC meeting, in which rates were left on hold after having been reduced by 100 bps from their recent peak, confirmed that the Fed believes rates are “still restrictive,” just less so than before. Although still focusing on both objectives, the focus has shifted to bringing inflation further down as the labor market holds up. Indeed, the minutes shared that participants believe the labor market to be “roughly in balance” and “unlikely to be a source of inflationary pressure in the near future.” Read More

January Overview With three consecutive rate reductions in the rearview mirror, the Fed held its benchmark rate steady at its most recent meeting. Believing that the economy is holding up, it sees no need to “be in a hurry to adjust” its current stance, biding its time instead to watch developments on the labor and inflation front. Indeed, minutes from the December FOMC meeting showed that participants believed that the risks of achieving their dual mandate were “roughly in balance,” albeit with more upside risks to inflation. Read More

December Overview The Fed cut its benchmark rate by 25 basis points as expected, bringing its benchmark range to 4.25%-4.50%. The decision was not unanimous, with the Cleveland Fed’s president voting to stay put at the previous level, and Powell commenting that it was a “closer call.” Commenting again that “labor market conditions have generally eased,” and despite being closer to their goal, inflation remains “somewhat elevated,” the committee will, as has been the case, remain “cautious,” and rely on incoming data to determine the degree and timing of future “adjustments” to its range. Read More