Fed: A tighter labor market will cause 3 interest rate hikes in 2022, economist says

In This Article:

JPMorgan Chief U.S. Economist Mike Feroli joins Yahoo Finance Live to discuss what the Fed's outlook on 2022 should be when taking inflation, interest rate hikes, and overall economic recovery into consideration for their final meeting of the year.

Video Transcript

BRIAN SOZZI: The 2022 outlooks from Wall Street continue to roll in. JPMorgan chief US economist Michael Feroli is looking for interest-rate liftoff from the Fed to begin in September and for the unemployment rate to trek lower. Michael joins us now. Michael, good to see you, as always. Thanks for taking the time here. Within your outlook for next year, how many rate hikes are you looking for and why?

MIKE FEROLI: So we actually are now looking for three rate hikes, June, September, and December. We do think the pivot here by not only the chair of the Fed, Powell, but the rest of the committee toward an early tapering or a faster tapering, I should say, is for a reason, and the reason is to get that done with by March so that they can proceed hopefully in a gradual manner to normalize interest rates.

But we do think that's the direction they're going in, and I really think the major reason for expecting that and what's really changed over the last three to six months has been the labor market and just how tight it's become. So we could easily see an unemployment rate below 4% by early next year, and in that kind of environment, having rates near zero just really doesn't make much sense.

JULIE HYMAN: Hey, Mike, it's Julie here. It's really interesting that you focus on the labor-market side of the equation and not the inflation side of the equation, which has been so much more hotly debated, I think. And also hotly debated is the question of whether the Fed has made a mistake here, right, whether it should have started moving already in some way. How are you thinking about that question? Do you think the Fed is behind the ball here?

MIKE FEROLI: So I think they are behind the ball, but that is almost by design, right? So the Fed, I think they provided the economy with a lot of insurance last year in terms of being very accommodative. It turns out a lot of that insurance wasn't necessary so that ex post it appears as though it were a policy mistake, but I think ex ante, given the amount of risks that we were facing around this time last year, it didn't make sense to probably err toward the side of providing more accommodation.

Now, I do think you're right that we are focused more on the labor market, in part because the price-inflation developments we've seen this year, we do-- I mean, I hate to use this word, but we do think they're going to be mostly transitory in that we shouldn't see the really big price increases that we saw in the second and third quarter going into next year. But when you think in terms of really persistent inflation developments of the type we saw in the '60s and '70s, that has to occur-- or that always occurs with a sort of a wage-price spiral. And so without wages following suit of higher prices, we don't think this would actually have any legs. But because we do think wage inflation is picking up, that's a reason that this inflation that we've seen this year has the risk of becoming more persistent if the Fed were not to act.