Survey forecasts PCE to stay high, Fed dilemma lingers

Survey forecasts PCE to stay high, Fed dilemma lingers

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

The Those of the Federal Reserve preferred measure of underlying price pressures, The Personal Consumables price index, should have remained higher according to a survey in February.

According to Bloomberg Opinion poll, the PCE price index is estimated to have risen 0.4% mom in February, which would be the biggest increase since June. The PCE Price Index reflects changes in the prices of goods and services purchased by consumers in the United States.

Also read: How to invest in startups

Compared to February 2022, the core inflation gauge is expected to increase by 4.7%, while the headline indicator is expected to increase by 5.1%. Both estimates are more than double the Fed’s target, the report said. The data is to be released on Thursday.

The dilemma: If true, the central bank would be in a dilemma as it tries to contain inflation even though the banking crisis has still not subsided. Despite expectations from certain corners of Wall Street, the central bank refrained from hitting the pause button March policy and raised interest rates by 25 basis points.

It is noteworthy that in a summary of economic forecasts released last week, federal reserve Officials revised the PCE inflation forecast for the year to 3.3% from 3.1% estimated in December. Core PCE inflation forecast is now 3.6% versus 3.5% previously forecast.

Fed Comments: Market participants will also be listening for comments from Fed officials including the Fed Governor this week Philip Jefferson, Boston Fed president SuzanneCollins, Richmond Fed president Tom Barkinand governors Christopher Waller And Lisa Koch.

Fed Vice Chairman for Oversight Michael Barr is set to testify at separate hearings of Senate Banking Committee and the House Financial Services Committee on recent bank failures, the report said.

Continue reading: Minneapolis Fed’s Kashkari says impact of bank stress on economy is unclear – “needs to do less work with federal funds rate…”

[ad_2]

Source story

More to explorer