tivo168_的投資理財_Excel_應用教學

Release Date: July 15, 2009
資料來源：http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/monetary/20090715a.htm

For release at 2:00 p.m. EDT

The Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Open Market Committee on Wednesday released the attached minutes of the Committee meeting held on June 23-24, 2009 and of the conference call held on June 3, 2009. A summary of economic projections made by Federal Reserve Board members and Reserve Bank presidents for the June 23-24, 2009 meeting is also included as an addendum to these minutes.

The minutes for each regularly scheduled meeting of the Committee ordinarily are made available three weeks after the day of the policy decision and subsequently are published in the Board's Annual Report. Summaries of economic projections are released on an approximately quarterly schedule. The descriptions of economic and financial conditions contained in these minutes and in the Summary of Economic Projections are based solely on the information that was available to the Committee at the time of the meeting.

The FOMC minutes can be viewed on the Board's website at ：http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/fomccalendars.htm

Minutes of Federal Open Market Committee
June 3 and 23-24, 2009: 347 KB PDF | HTML




Minutes of the Federal Open Market Committee

June 23-24, 2009

資料來源：http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/fomcminutes20090624.htm

FOMC Minutes | Summary of Economic Projections
A joint meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System was held in the offices of the Board of Governors in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday, June 23, 2009, at 1:00 p.m. and continued on Wednesday, June 24, 2009, at 9:00 a.m.
PRESENT:
Mr. Bernanke, Chairman
Mr. Dudley, Vice Chairman
Ms. Duke
Mr. Evans
Mr. Kohn
Mr. Lacker
Mr. Lockhart
Mr. Tarullo
Mr. Warsh
Ms. Yellen

Messrs. Bullard and Hoenig, Ms. Pianalto, and Mr. Rosengren, Alternate Members of the Federal Open Market Committee

Messrs. Fisher, Plosser, and Stern, Presidents of the Federal Reserve Banks of Dallas, Philadelphia, and Minneapolis, respectively

Mr. Madigan, Secretary and Economist
Ms. Danker, Deputy Secretary
Mr. Luecke, Assistant Secretary
Mr. Skidmore, Assistant Secretary
Ms. Smith, Assistant Secretary
Mr. Alvarez,1 General Counsel
Mr. Baxter, Deputy General Counsel
Mr. Sheets, Economist
Mr. Stockton, Economist

Messrs. Altig, Clouse, Connors, Kamin, Slifman, Weinberg, and Wilcox, Associate Economists

Mr. Sack, Manager, System Open Market Account

Ms. Johnson, Secretary of the Board, Office of the Secretary, Board of Governors

Mr. Frierson,1 Deputy Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Board of Governors

Mr. Struckmeyer, Deputy Staff Director, Office of the Staff Director for Management, Board of Governors

Mr. English, Deputy Director, Division of Monetary Affairs, Board of Governors

Mr. Blanchard, Assistant to the Board, Office of Board Members, Board of Governors

Messrs. Greenlee, Nelson, Reifschneider, and Wascher, Associate Directors, Divisions of Banking Supervision and Regulation, Monetary Affairs, Research and Statistics, and Research and Statistics, respectively, Board of Governors

Mr. Gagnon, Visiting Associate Director, Division of Monetary Affairs, Board of Governors

Mr. Oliner, Senior Adviser, Division of Research and Statistics, Board of Governors

Messrs. Carpenter and Perli, Deputy Associate Directors, Division of Monetary Affairs, Board of Governors

Mr. Kiley, Assistant Director, Division of Research and Statistics, Board of Governors

Mr. Small, Project Manager, Division of Monetary Affairs, Board of Governors

Ms. Lindner, Group Manager, Division of Research and Statistics, Board of Governors

Mr. Wood, Senior Economist, Division of International Finance, Board of Governors

Messrs. Driscoll, King,¹ and McCarthy, Economists, Division of Monetary Affairs, Board of Governors

Ms. Beattie, Assistant to the Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Board of Governors

Ms. Low, Open Market Secretariat Specialist, Division of Monetary Affairs, Board of Governors

Messrs. Fuhrer and Rosenblum, Executive Vice Presidents, Federal Reserve Banks of Boston and Dallas, respectively

Mr. Judd, Advisor to the President, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco

Messrs. Feldman, Hilton, Krane, McAndrews, Mses. Mester and Mosser, and Messrs. Schweitzer, Sellon, and Waller, Senior Vice Presidents, Federal Reserve Banks of Minneapolis, New York, Chicago, New York, Philadelphia, New York, Cleveland, Kansas City, and St. Louis, respectively

Ms. Logan, Vice President, Federal Reserve Bank of New York

Developments in Financial Markets and the Federal Reserve's Balance Sheet
The Manager of the System Open Market Account (SOMA) reported on recent developments in domestic and foreign financial markets. The Manager also reported on System open market operations in Treasury securities and in agency debt and agency mortgage-backed securities (MBS) during the period since the Committee's April 28-29 meeting. By unanimous vote, the Committee ratified those transactions. There were no open market operations in foreign currencies for the System's account over the intermeeting period.

The Committee reviewed a staff proposal that would authorize the Desk to lend, as part of the Federal Reserve's regular overnight securities lending operations, securities held in the SOMA portfolio that are direct obligations of federal agencies. Lending agency securities was viewed as a technical modification to the existing overnight securities lending program that would support functioning of agency debt markets. The Committee voted unanimously to amend paragraph 3 of the Authorization for Domestic Open Market Operations with the text underlined below.

"3. In order to ensure the effective conduct of open market operations, the Federal Open Market Committee authorizes the Federal Reserve Bank of New York to lend on an overnight basis U.S. Government securities and securities that are direct obligations of any agency of the United States, held in the System Open Market Account, to dealers at rates that shall be determined by competitive bidding. The Federal Reserve Bank of New York shall set a minimum lending fee consistent with the objectives of the program and apply reasonable limitations on the total amount of a specific issue that may be auctioned and on the amount of securities that each dealer may borrow. The Federal Reserve Bank of New York may reject bids which could facilitate a dealer's ability to control a single issue as determined solely by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York."

The staff reported on projections of the Federal Reserve's balance sheet under various assumptions about economic and financial conditions and the associated path of monetary policy. Staff projections suggested that the size of the Federal Reserve's balance sheet might peak late this year and decline gradually thereafter. The staff also presented information on the possible implications of substantial changes in the size and composition of the Federal Reserve's balance sheet for the System's net income. The analysis indicated that the Federal Reserve was likely to earn substantial net interest income over the next few years under most interest rate scenarios. The staff presented one scenario, however, in which aggressive increases in short-term interest rates significantly reduced System net income relative to a baseline scenario. The analysis also suggested that the market value of the Federal Reserve's securities holdings could decline appreciably under some scenarios. However, while the Federal Reserve would retain the option of selling securities before they mature or are prepaid as a means of tightening policy when appropriate, it was not expected to have to do so. Changes in market valuations were thus seen as unlikely to have significant implications for the System's net income.

In a related discussion, the staff briefed the Committee on a number of possible tools that the Federal Reserve might employ to foster effective control of the federal funds rate in the context of a much expanded balance sheet. Some of those tools were focused primarily on shaping or strengthening the demand for reserves, while others were designed to provide greater control over the supply of reserves. In discussing the staff presentation, meeting participants generally agreed that the Federal Reserve either already had or could develop tools to remove policy accommodation when appropriate. Ensuring that policy accommodation can ultimately be withdrawn smoothly and at the appropriate time would remain a top priority of the Federal Reserve.

The staff also provided the Committee with an analysis of the potential adverse effects of very high reserve balances on bank capital ratios. An important issue was whether the further increase in reserve balances that is likely to result from the Federal Reserve's already-announced program of asset purchases could lead banks to limit their lending and acquisition of securities in order to prevent an excessive decline in their capital ratios. The analysis concluded that, with few exceptions, banks' regulatory leverage ratios (defined as tier 1 capital divided by total average assets) were likely to remain comfortably above regulatory minimums, even with the substantial growth in reserve balances projected to occur in coming months and even if there were some erosion in bank capital. In part, that result reflected the fact that many institutions had raised capital lately; in addition, the leverage ratios for most institutions were well above the regulatory minimums at the end of the first quarter.

The staff also reviewed the experience to date with the Federal Reserve's purchases of Treasury securities, agency debt securities, and agency MBS. A number of potential modifications to those programs were presented for the Committee's consideration, including possible expansions in their size, extensions of the duration of securities purchased, steps to increase the flexibility of those purchases both within each program and across programs in response to short-term market developments, and possible approaches to winding down purchases as the programs near completion. The Federal Reserve was already purchasing a very large fraction of new current-coupon agency MBS and agency debt, and further increasing the scale of those programs could compromise market functioning. Some participants thought that increases in purchases of Treasury securities might have little or no effect on long-term interest rates unless the increases were very sizable, given the large amount of current and projected supply of Treasury securities. Others were concerned that announcements of substantial additional purchases could add to perceptions that the federal debt was being monetized. While most members did not see large-scale purchases of Treasury securities as likely to be a source of inflation pressures given the weak economic outlook, public concern about monetization could have adverse implications for inflation expectations. The asset purchase programs were intended to support economic activity by improving market functioning and reducing interest rates on mortgage loans and other long-term credit to households and businesses relative to what they otherwise would have been. But the Committee had not set specific objectives for longer-term interest rates, and participants did not consider it appropriate to allow the Desk discretion to adjust the size and composition of the Federal Reserve's asset purchases in response to short-run fluctuations in market interest rates. Some participants noted that, in principle, the Committee could formulate a plan for asset purchases that would respond to economic and financial developments in a way that might better promote monetary policy objectives. Most, however, thought that formulating and communicating such a plan would be very difficult, potentially leading to an increase in market uncertainty regarding Federal Reserve actions and intentions. Many participants agreed, however, that it was appropriate for the Desk to make small adjustments to the size and timing of purchases aimed at fostering market liquidity and improving market functioning. Participants discussed the merits of including securities backed by adjustable-rate mortgages in MBS purchases and of tapering off purchases of securities as the asset purchase programs were being completed, but the Committee did not reach a decision on those issues at the meeting.

The staff presented policymakers with proposals for extensions, modifications, and terminations of various liquidity programs. A number of the credit and liquidity facilities that the Federal Reserve had established in the course of the financial crisis were scheduled to expire on October 30. Use of most of the liquidity facilities had declined in recent months as market conditions had improved. Still, meeting participants judged that market conditions remained fragile, and that concerns about counterparty credit risk and access to liquidity, both of which had ebbed notably in recent months, could increase again. Moreover, participants viewed the availability of the liquidity facilities as a factor that had contributed to the reduction in financial strains. If the Federal Reserve's backup liquidity facilities were terminated prematurely, such developments might put renewed pressure on some financial institutions and markets and tighten credit conditions for businesses and households. The period over year-end was seen as posing heightened risks given the usual pressures in financial markets at that time. In these circumstances, participants agreed that most facilities should be extended into early next year. However, participants also judged that improved market conditions and declining use of the facilities warranted scaling back, suspending, or tightening access to several programs, including the Term Auction Facility (TAF), the Term Securities Lending Facility (TSLF), and the Asset-Backed Commercial Paper Money Market Mutual Fund Liquidity Facility (AMLF).

Following the presentation and discussion of the staff proposal, the Board voted unanimously to extend the AMLF, the Commercial Paper Funding Facility (CPFF), the Primary Dealer Credit Facility (PDCF), and the TSLF through February 1, 2010. The Board did not extend the Money Market Investor Funding Facility (MMIFF) beyond October 30. The extension of the TSLF required the approval of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), as that facility was established under the joint authority of the Board and the FOMC. The Board and the FOMC jointly decided to suspend some TSLF auctions and to reduce the size and frequency of others. In addition, the FOMC extended the temporary reciprocal currency arrangements (swap lines) between the Federal Reserve and other central banks to February 1, 2010. The FOMC unanimously passed the following resolution to extend the temporary swap arrangements and the TSLF:

"The Federal Open Market Committee extends until February 1, 2010, its authorizations for the Federal Reserve Bank of New York to engage in temporary reciprocal currency arrangements ("swap arrangements") with foreign central banks under the conditions previously established by the Committee.

The Federal Open Market Committee extends until February 1, 2010, its authorizations for the Federal Reserve Bank of New York to provide a Term Securities Lending Facility, subject to the same collateral, interest rate, and other conditions previously established by the Committee. However, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York is directed to suspend Schedule 1 TSLF auctions, effective immediately. The Federal Reserve Bank of New York is directed to conduct Schedule 2 TSLF auctions initially on a monthly basis in amounts of $75 billion; the Reserve Bank is directed to reduce over time the amounts provided through the TSLF as market conditions warrant. The Federal Reserve Bank of New York is directed to suspend operations of the Term Securities Lending Facility Options Program (TOP), effective immediately. Should market conditions appear to warrant the resumption of Schedule 1 TSLF or TOP auctions, the Account Manager is to consult with the Chairman and, if possible, the Board and the Federal Open Market Committee."

Board members and FOMC participants noted their expectation that a number of these facilities may not need to be extended beyond February 1, 2010, if the recent improvements in market conditions continue. However, if financial stresses do not moderate as expected, the Board and the FOMC were prepared to extend the terms of some or all of the facilities as needed to promote financial stability and economic growth.

Staff Review of the Economic Situation
The information reviewed at the June 23-24 meeting suggested that the economy remained very weak, though declines in activity seemed to be lessening. Employment was still falling, and manufacturers had cut production further in response to excess inventories and soft demand. But the reductions in employment and industrial production had slowed somewhat, consumer spending appeared to be holding reasonably steady after shrinking in the second half of 2008, and sales and construction of single-family homes had apparently flattened out. In addition, the recent declines in capital spending were smaller than those recorded earlier in the year. Consumer price inflation was fairly quiescent in recent months, although the upturn in energy prices appeared likely to boost headline inflation in June.

The demand for labor weakened further in May, albeit less rapidly than in earlier months. Nonfarm payrolls continued to shrink, but the decline was the smallest since September. In addition, average weekly hours of production and nonsupervisory workers on private payrolls, which had dropped substantially from September to March, were essentially unchanged in April and May. Thus aggregate hours worked by this group fell at a slower pace in April and May than on average over the previous seven months. The unemployment rate, however, rose further in May, to 9.4 percent. Despite the high level of joblessness, the labor force participation rate moved up for a second consecutive month to a level close to where it was at the beginning of the recession. The four-week moving average of initial claims for unemployment insurance fell back a little, but the number of individuals receiving unemployment insurance benefits continued to increase.

Industrial production decreased in April and May but at a slower pace than in the first quarter. Manufacturing output also fell in those months, and the factory operating rate dipped further in May. In the high-tech sector, computer output fell at a pace similar to that in the first quarter, but near-term indicators of production turned somewhat less negative and global semiconductor sales climbed in April for the second consecutive month. The production of motor vehicles and parts dropped sharply in May, principally because of extended plant shutdowns at General Motors and Chrysler. The production of commercial aircraft moved up. Outside the transportation and high-tech sectors, most industries continued to cut production in both April and May, though at a slower pace than over the preceding five months.

Real personal consumption expenditures rose somewhat in the first quarter after falling in the second half of 2008, and available data suggested that spending was holding reasonably steady in the second quarter. On the basis of the latest retail sales data, real expenditures on goods other than motor vehicles