Fed Prioritizes Jobs Over Inflation in 2025 Rate Cut Decision
The Federal Reserve's September 2025 policy meeting minutes underscored the central bank's continued prioritization of labor market risks over inflation, with officials signaling no immediate urgency to conclude quantitative tightening. The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) approved a 25-basis-point reduction in the federal funds rate, bringing the target range to 4.00%-4.25%. The decision, supported by 11 of 12 members, marked the first rate cut of the year and was accompanied by projections for two additional reductions by year-end. Governor Stephen Miran, a Trump appointee and advocate for more aggressive easing, was the sole dissenter, favoring a 50-basis-point cut. The FOMC acknowledged elevated inflation-upwardly revised to 3.1% for 2025-but emphasized rising downside risks to employment, including a slowing labor market and revised job growth figures showing nearly a million fewer jobs created than previously reported[1].
The Fed's dual mandate dilemma intensified as conflicting economic signals emerged. While core inflation (excluding food and energy) remained above 3%, the labor market showed signs of fragility. August's unemployment rate reached 4.3%, the highest since October 2021, with job gains stagnating. The FOMC noted "moderated" economic activity and a "marked slowing" in both labor supply and demand. Chair Jerome Powell characterized the cut as a "risk management" move, stating that monetary policy had shifted to a "more neutral" stance from its earlier "moderately restrictive" posture. However, Powell cautioned against viewing the cut as a direct response to a weak economy, emphasizing the need to balance inflation control with employment stability[2].
The dot plot of FOMC members' rate projections revealed significant internal divergence. A median target of 3.6% by year-end implied two more 25-basis-point cuts in October and December. Yet, projections ranged widely, with one policymaker (likely Miran) advocating for a total of 1.25 percentage points in reductions. By 2026, the median rate was projected to fall to 3.4%, with a further decline to 3.1% in 2027. Analysts noted that the wide dispersion of views reflected the complexity of navigating a labor market slowdown amid inflationary pressures from Trump's tariffs and shifting immigration policies. Simon Dangoor of Goldman Sachs observed that "the doves on the committee are now in the driver's seat," though a "significant upside surprise in inflation or labor market rebound" could alter the trajectory[3].
Political dynamics further complicated the Fed's decision-making. Trump's public pressure for rapid rate cuts and his appointment of Miran to the Board of Governors raised concerns about the central bank's independence. Miran's advocacy for lower rates aligned with Trump's calls to stimulate the housing market and reduce government debt costs. Meanwhile, legal battles over Trump's attempt to remove Governor Lisa Cook highlighted tensions between political influence and institutional autonomy. Despite these challenges, the FOMC maintained near-unanimity on the rate cut, with Powell reaffirming the Fed's commitment to independence and "meeting-by-meeting" decision-making[4].
Market reactions to the decision were mixed. The Dow Jones Industrial Average surged by 400 points initially, reflecting optimism about accommodative policy, while Treasury yields rose on longer-term maturities. Analysts debated the efficacy of the cuts, with some arguing that a single 25-basis-point reduction would have limited impact on inflation or consumer borrowing costs. However, the forward guidance of further easing provided a boost to risk assets. Katie Klingensmith of Edelman Financial Engines noted that stabilized inflation allowed the Fed to focus on labor market risks, while Tony Welch of SignatureFD described the economy as "muddling along" with upper-income groups sustaining spending. The Fed's updated GDP forecast of 1.6% growth for 2025, slightly above June's projection, underscored confidence in the resilience of consumer demand despite labor market headwinds[5].



Comentarios
Aún no hay comentarios