|
Help | |
You are here: Rediff Home » India » Business » Columnists » Guest Column » Surjit Bhalla |
|
Stimulus 2.0 was announced on January 2, 2009. The joint coordinated action of the Ministry of Finance and the RBI was widely applauded in the media. This bonhomie was not always present. As stated as recently as December 23 in the The Indian Express: "The RBI and the government, it is learnt, are not on the same page on the pace and extent of monetary actions required to stimulate the slowing economy". This story documented a rift between the RBI and all others in the government. Specifically, that the RBI was objecting strenuously to the lowering of interest rates any further, especially after the previously large 250 basis point reduction in the repo rate. Analysis of widely available macro-economic data confirms the suspicion that the RBI has been on a different page (planet?) for some time now. In its policy statement of October 2008, when economic activity in the world, and India, collapsed like never before, the RBI did now lower its policy rate, the repo, and stated this as a major reason: "It is necessary to moderate monetary expansion and plan for a rate of money supply growth in the range of around 17 per cent in 2008-09 in consonance with the outlook on growth and inflation so as to ensure macroeconomic and financial stability in the period ahead". This statement provided a major clue to humble practitioners of the art of deciphering the policy actions of the RBI (or the Fed or the Bank of England etc). Further, most practitioners of monetary policy agree that it has to attempt to be forward-looking and, to be effective, at least occasionally contain an element of surprise. A repo rate entirely determined by money supply growth would not serve any purpose.
All central bankers look at the trend in inflation, and real output before making their decisions. Hence the popular Taylor rule which looks at both before deciding on the policy interest rate. Using quarterly data, I estimated various "models" of repo rate determination. Some are reported in the table. The models were estimated for two time-periods: from inception of the policy rate till end-2007 (the Jalan-Reddy period named after the Governors in charge), and from September 2003 to end-2007 (the Reddy period). Data for the year 2008 were not included in the sample for two reasons: first to obtain out-of-sample predictions and second, because 2008 was a special year for all! Surprisingly, for neither period is the inflation rate significant. All the noise in 2008 was about containing inflation, yet this variable has never mattered. GDP growth does matter for the entire period (but has a wrong sign!), but has zero relevance during the Reddy period. The predictions of the M3 only equation (model 4) are plotted against the actual repo rate for the period since 2003, third quarter. Note the close fit. The error (difference between the predicted and actual rate) for the entire period 2003 to 2008 is minuscule -- -0.064 per cent or minus 6.4 basis points. The model errors during the first two quarters of 2008 are also minuscule -- positive 12 and negative 18 basis points. Which brings us to the fourth quarter of 2008. After much reluctance and obstinacy, the RBI (now under Subbarao, a different master but the same simple model?) reduced the repo rate to 7.5 per cent thus bringing down the quarterly average to 7.33 per cent. The predicted repo rate for the quarter -- 7.34 per cent. It never gets closer than this! So now we know why the RBI thinks one way, and the rest of India, and the world, thinks differently. The author is Chairman, Oxus Investments, a New Delhi-based asset management company. The views expressed are personal. More Guest Columns |
Email | Print | Get latest news on your desktop |
|
|
© 2009 Rediff.com India Limited. All Rights Reserved. Disclaimer | Feedback |