Fed leaves rates unchanged, flags ‘lack of further progress’ on inflation

WASHINGTON, May 1 (Reuters) – The U.S. Federal Reserve held interest rates steady on Wednesday and signaled it is still leaning towards eventual reductions in borrowing costs, but put a red flag on recent disappointing inflation readings that could make those rate cuts a while in coming.

Indeed, Fed Chair Jerome Powell said that after starting 2024 with three months of faster-than-expected price increases, it “will take longer than previously expected” for policymakers to become comfortable that inflation will resume the decline towards 2% that had cheered them through much of last year.

That steady progress has stalled for now, and while Powell said rate increases remained unlikely, he set the stage for a potentially extended hold of the benchmark policy rate in the 5.25%-5.50% range that has been in place since July.

U.S. central bankers still believe the current policy rate is putting enough pressure on economic activity to bring inflation under control, Powell said, and they would be content to wait as long as needed for that to become apparent – even if inflation is simply “moving sideways” in the meantime.

The Fed’s preferred inflation measure – the personal consumption expenditures price index – increased at a 2.7% annual rate in March, an acceleration from the prior month.

“Inflation is still too high,” Powell said in a press conference after the end of the Federal Open Market Committee’s two-day policy meeting. “Further progress in bringing it down is not assured and the path forward is uncertain.”

Powell said his forecast remained for inflation to fall over the course of the year, but that “my confidence in that is lower than it was.”

Whether there are rate cuts this year or not remains in doubt.

“If we did have a path where inflation proves more persistent than expected, and where the labor market remains strong but inflation is moving sideways and we’re not gaining greater confidence, well, that would be a case in which it could be appropriate to hold off on rate cuts,” Powell said. “There are paths to not cutting and there are paths to cutting. It’s really going to depend on the data.”

Despite the uncertainty of the current economic moment, Powell’s characterization of rate hikes as “unlikely” cheered investors concerned about a newly hawkish Fed chief.

U.S. stock and bond prices turned higher as Powell preached patience that may delay rate cuts, but also means a high bar for any more hikes. The Fed raised its benchmark policy rate by 5.25 percentage points in 2022 and 2023 to curb a surge in inflation.

Powell’s remarks on Wednesday were “notably less hawkish than many feared,” said analysts at Evercore ISI. “The basic message was that cuts have been delayed, not derailed.”

Investors in contracts tied to the Fed’s policy rate increased bets that rate cuts could begin in September rather than later in the year as reflected in earlier market pricing.

BALANCE SHEET

The Fed’s latest policy statement kept key elements of its economic assessment and policy guidance intact, noting that “inflation has eased” over the past year, and framing its discussion of interest rates around the conditions under which borrowing costs can be lowered.

“The Committee does not expect it will be appropriate to reduce the target range until it has gained greater confidence that inflation is moving sustainably towards 2%,” the Fed repeated in its unanimously-approved statement.

That continues to leave the timing of any rate cut in doubt, and Fed officials made emphatic their concern that the first months of 2024 have done little to help the cause.

“In recent months, there has been a lack of further progress towards the Committee’s 2% inflation objective,” the Fed said in its statement.

Reuters Graphics
Reuters Graphics

The U.S. central bank also announced it will scale back the pace at which it is shrinking its balance sheet starting on June 1, allowing only $25 billion in Treasury bonds to run off each month versus the current $60 billion. Mortgage-backed securities will continue to run off by up to $35 billion monthly.

The step is meant to ensure the financial system does not run short of reserves, as happened in 2019 during the Fed’s last round of “quantitative tightening.”

While the move could loosen financial conditions at the margin at a time when the U.S. central bank is trying to keep pressure on the economy, policymakers insist their balance sheet and interest rate tools serve different ends.

The Fed maintained its overall assessment of economic growth, saying that the economy “continued to expand at a solid pace. Job gains have remained strong and the unemployment rate has remained low.”

Powell reconciled that with the relatively weak, 1.6% growth of gross domestic product in the first quarter by saying that the 3.1% increase in private domestic demand was a better gauge of where the economy stands, with output buttressed by a recent jump in immigration.

Asked about the risk the U.S. was entering a period of “stagflation” with stagnant growth and rising prices, Powell said current conditions are nothing like those seen in the late 1970s when prices were rising more than 10% annually at one point alongside high unemployment.

“Right now we have … pretty solid growth … We have inflation running under 3%,” Powell said. “I don’t see the ‘stag’ and I don’t see the ‘flation.'”

Originally posted by Reuters https://www.reuters.com/markets/rates-bonds/fed-hold-rates-steady-inflation-dims-hopes-policy-easing-2024-05-01/

Is IRS Abusing its Authority in Micro-Captives Investigations?

A pair of federal Tax Court decisions at the start of 2024 are painting a concerning picture that the IRS is abusing its authority and attempting to become a quasi-federal governing agency over the insurance industry. The IRS secured a pair of victories against a form of self-insurance for small businesses known as micro-captive insurance. The cases – Keating v. Commissioner and Swift v. Commissioner – used biased fact patterns to support the unfounded principle that all micro-captives are tax shelters or tax schemes.

Neither decision provided guidance nor clarification of how honest micro-captive owners should structure their captive arrangements to remain compliant with IRS regulations. Without such guidance, small to mid-size business owners are subject to open scrutiny at the whim of a federal agency attempting to seize regulatory control of an industry already regulated at the state level.

These victories are contrary to why the 831(b) tax code was written. Similar to what we are seeing today, this code was originally written during a time in which Americans were saddled by a hardened insurance market. Originally passed in the 1980s, Section 831(b) was designed to empower small to mid-sized insurance companies by excluding part of their income from taxation, allowing them to better compete with larger insurance providers and provide a vehicle of self-insurance against risks that may not be covered by insurance companies.

The 2015 Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes Act states that companies are eligible for this type of risk mitigation under Section 831(b) of the tax code when the owner of an insured business holds an interest in the insurer no greater than their interest in the business.

In January, IRS Commissioner Danny Werfel disclosed that nearly 1,100 micro-captives are under IRS investigation. Business owners and plan administrators who are caught up in these audits are then sifted through, with the IRS seeking only cases in which wins are virtually guaranteed. Instead of providing a conclusive determination for other taxpayers who can legitimately benefit from using an 831(b), the IRS uses its ambiguous scrutiny as a deterrent from using these plans, which in some cases can provide a lifeline to small to mid-size businesses.

The IRS has made clear its dislike of micro-captives and is working to eliminate them through its overreach of power and intimidation. This gross misuse by a bureaucratic agency directly contradicts congressional support for the existence of micro-captive insurance. To put it bluntly, the IRS is undermining the laws passed by our nation’s elected representatives and wants to put insurance regulation in the hands of the federal government.

In December, multiple members of the U.S. House Committee on Ways and Means Committee wrote to Werfel to express their disdain about the IRS’s treatment of micro-captives. Members of Congress called for the IRS to work with the insurance industry to develop a mutually agreeable path forward for small to mid-size businesses to utilize this section of the tax code without fear of retribution.

The decision in Keating is concerning. In fact, the judge alluded to how the courts believed insurance companies should be regulated.

The McCarran-Ferguson Act of 1945 provides the framework for how the insurance industry is regulated in the U.S. – the federal government can define insurance for federal tax purposes but is prohibited from overreaching into the regulation of insurance, which is left to the individual states.

Without action from Congress, or the IRS backing off its assault on our industry, the overreach of power toward micro-captive owners will likely continue, along with its efforts to eventually obtain federal oversight over other parts of the insurance business.

The question of overreach by the IRS isn’t a question of if it will stop, but rather a question of when and how. The ripple effects will have far greater implications on the insurance industry as a whole than anything else that may come of this IRS case.

Originally posted by Insurance Journal https://www.insurancejournal.com/magazines/mag-features/2024/04/15/769316.htm