WEBVTT - Former Fed President Eric Rosengren Talks Tariffs, Inflation

0:00:02.759 --> 0:00:07.240
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.

0:00:08.000 --> 0:00:10.080
<v Speaker 2>So here's the LCENUS this morning, try to increase an

0:00:10.080 --> 0:00:12.560
<v Speaker 2>expectation for FED rate cuts. The view from the former

0:00:12.600 --> 0:00:15.720
<v Speaker 2>Boston FED president Eric Rosenngrant looks like this. He writes,

0:00:15.760 --> 0:00:18.479
<v Speaker 2>the FED maybe slow to react give an uncertainty around

0:00:18.520 --> 0:00:21.479
<v Speaker 2>the trade policy and the likely significant impact on reported

0:00:21.520 --> 0:00:25.239
<v Speaker 2>inflation over the next six months. Eric, Welcome to the program, sir,

0:00:25.680 --> 0:00:28.800
<v Speaker 2>lucky for us to lean on your experience. How misplaced

0:00:28.880 --> 0:00:31.840
<v Speaker 2>or well placed is that bet on that FED cutting rates.

0:00:33.600 --> 0:00:36.120
<v Speaker 1>I think it's a very challenging environment for the FED.

0:00:36.960 --> 0:00:39.400
<v Speaker 1>First of all, while the tariffs have come on and

0:00:39.440 --> 0:00:43.000
<v Speaker 1>are quite significant, the retaliation is just being announced now.

0:00:43.600 --> 0:00:46.879
<v Speaker 1>We had China today, but Europe is certainly going to

0:00:46.880 --> 0:00:51.400
<v Speaker 1>be retaliating as well. The question is how long are

0:00:51.400 --> 0:00:54.840
<v Speaker 1>these tariffs going to be in place. The administration has

0:00:55.000 --> 0:00:58.560
<v Speaker 1>been pretty unclear as to the purpose of the tariffs.

0:00:59.040 --> 0:01:02.800
<v Speaker 1>If the purpose is to raise taxes and bring manufacturing here,

0:01:03.040 --> 0:01:06.520
<v Speaker 1>the tariffs need to be permanent. If the purpose is

0:01:06.760 --> 0:01:11.319
<v Speaker 1>a negotiating tool, then it's going to be temporary. So

0:01:11.560 --> 0:01:14.600
<v Speaker 1>the FED, first of all, has to be concerned that

0:01:15.520 --> 0:01:18.680
<v Speaker 1>the shock that's occurred could be offset pretty quickly by

0:01:18.800 --> 0:01:22.680
<v Speaker 1>If tariffs are a serious policy mistake, the most efficient

0:01:22.720 --> 0:01:25.160
<v Speaker 1>way to address that problem is for the tariffs to

0:01:25.200 --> 0:01:28.640
<v Speaker 1>be taken off. In the event that the tariffs are

0:01:28.680 --> 0:01:33.560
<v Speaker 1>kept on and look more permanent, then you have an

0:01:33.680 --> 0:01:36.440
<v Speaker 1>environment where both the unemployment rate is going to go

0:01:36.560 --> 0:01:39.880
<v Speaker 1>up and the inflation rate's going to go up. The

0:01:39.920 --> 0:01:43.480
<v Speaker 1>inflation rate is probably going to start showing in the

0:01:43.520 --> 0:01:48.360
<v Speaker 1>next couple of months the effect of tariffs. It's a tax,

0:01:48.440 --> 0:01:52.080
<v Speaker 1>it's going to go through relatively quickly. There's some goods

0:01:52.080 --> 0:01:56.040
<v Speaker 1>that are probably already being repriced in reflection of the

0:01:56.080 --> 0:01:59.760
<v Speaker 1>tariff changes. The unemployment rate effect is likely to be

0:01:59.800 --> 0:02:03.680
<v Speaker 1>a little bit more slow moving. So, given the uncertainty

0:02:04.000 --> 0:02:08.720
<v Speaker 1>around what the policy actually is, and given the fact

0:02:08.720 --> 0:02:11.080
<v Speaker 1>that the first impulse is likely to be on the

0:02:11.120 --> 0:02:13.880
<v Speaker 1>inflation side, I think the FED is going to be

0:02:14.000 --> 0:02:17.880
<v Speaker 1>very reluctant to move very quickly if it looks like

0:02:18.000 --> 0:02:20.760
<v Speaker 1>we are actually going to go into a global recession

0:02:20.800 --> 0:02:24.240
<v Speaker 1>where the unemployment rate in the United States goes up

0:02:24.320 --> 0:02:28.000
<v Speaker 1>quite significantly. And that's a situation that the FED obviously

0:02:28.080 --> 0:02:31.560
<v Speaker 1>has to react to. But hopefully there are other off ramps,

0:02:31.560 --> 0:02:37.959
<v Speaker 1>including changes in fiscal policy regarding tariffs that will avoid that.

0:02:38.440 --> 0:02:40.320
<v Speaker 1>I think the last thing that FED wants to do

0:02:40.760 --> 0:02:43.960
<v Speaker 1>is perpetuate a view that inflation is going to be

0:02:44.040 --> 0:02:48.040
<v Speaker 1>tolerated over three percent. I think it's quite likely that

0:02:48.040 --> 0:02:50.440
<v Speaker 1>we're going to see a half percent increase in core

0:02:50.520 --> 0:02:53.560
<v Speaker 1>PCE over the course of this year, and that puts

0:02:53.600 --> 0:02:56.560
<v Speaker 1>US over three percent, puts US at three point three percent.

0:02:57.360 --> 0:03:00.920
<v Speaker 1>That's not inflation rate consistent with the Fed's time, and

0:03:01.080 --> 0:03:03.640
<v Speaker 1>I think it's going to make the FED very reluctant

0:03:03.680 --> 0:03:06.600
<v Speaker 1>to move quickly to address some of the concerns that

0:03:06.639 --> 0:03:10.320
<v Speaker 1>are occurring in financial markets and are likely to be

0:03:10.360 --> 0:03:14.160
<v Speaker 1>occurring in unemployment rate over time. Just quickly. Here, I'm

0:03:14.240 --> 0:03:16.440
<v Speaker 1>wondering if you think then the FED is destined to

0:03:16.480 --> 0:03:19.280
<v Speaker 1>be late and if they cut much more on the

0:03:19.320 --> 0:03:24.359
<v Speaker 1>back end, if the unemployment rate starts going up dramatically,

0:03:24.360 --> 0:03:27.760
<v Speaker 1>it'll cut a lot in the end. That's a really

0:03:27.760 --> 0:03:30.760
<v Speaker 1>bad outcome if it gets to that point. But I

0:03:30.800 --> 0:03:35.520
<v Speaker 1>think they're going to move slowly, gradually and reluctantly. And

0:03:35.840 --> 0:03:39.000
<v Speaker 1>when they move, if it's because the global economy is

0:03:39.040 --> 0:03:42.760
<v Speaker 1>going into a deep recession, I think it will have

0:03:42.920 --> 0:03:47.800
<v Speaker 1>to then start moving quickly to bring interest rates down. Unfortunately,

0:03:47.880 --> 0:03:51.320
<v Speaker 1>it's unlikely to immediately be able to offset the nature

0:03:51.360 --> 0:03:55.240
<v Speaker 1>of the problem, which is bad tariffs. And one thing

0:03:55.320 --> 0:03:58.920
<v Speaker 1>people are not talking about is developing countries are likely

0:03:58.960 --> 0:04:03.920
<v Speaker 1>to be experience and seeing a financial crisis. Many of

0:04:03.960 --> 0:04:07.200
<v Speaker 1>the poorest countries in the world are getting the highest

0:04:07.240 --> 0:04:11.480
<v Speaker 1>earths from the United States, and that could exacerbate the

0:04:11.520 --> 0:04:13.760
<v Speaker 1>international composition of what's going on.

0:04:14.080 --> 0:04:15.720
<v Speaker 2>That's the last thing we want to say this morning,

0:04:15.840 --> 0:04:18.159
<v Speaker 2>that's for sure. Eric, appreciate you jumping on this morning.

0:04:18.160 --> 0:04:20.720
<v Speaker 2>Thank you, sir. The Boston Fed president, the former Boston

0:04:20.720 --> 0:04:22.680
<v Speaker 2>Fed president there, Eric Rosengrant