5 things to watch from the Federal Reserve’s next meeting

WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal Reserve policymakers are likely to keep their key interest rate unchanged Wednesday when they finish what may seem like an uneventful meeting. But investors and economists will be looking between the lines of the central bank’s statement Wednesday for clues about its next moves and where it thinks inflation is headed.

The Fed’s Oct. 27-28 meeting will be the fourth of Chairman Kevin Warsh’s tenure, which has been marked by questions regarding his independence from President Donald Trump, who appointed him earlier this year. It also comes just six days before midterm elections that have been shaped by affordability concerns as gas prices have soared and grocery prices remain elevated.

High mortgage rates have become another elevated cost for consumers, with the average 30-year mortgage reaching a three-year high of 7.4% earlier this month before slipping last week to 7.32%. A year ago, the rate was just under 6.2%. Oxford Economics estimates that the sharp increases this year has put home buying out of reach for another 5 million households. Further rate hikes by the Fed could push mortgage rates even higher.

With all those moving parts, here’s what to watch for from the Fed’s meeting:

Slim chance of a rate hike

After inflation came in hotter than expected last month, Wall Street investors and some economists expected the Fed to lift rates at Wednesday’s meeting by a quarter-point, to about 4.1%. The Fed is charged with combatting inflation, and typically seeks to cool spending and bring down inflation by boosting borrowing costs.

Yet several top officials on the Fed’s rate-setting committee in speeches downplayed the likelihood of a rate hike in October. Investors now see almost no chance of an increase in the Fed’s rate, currently at about 3.9%, according to futures prices.

Philip Jefferson, vice chair of the Fed’s board of governors, noted that longer-term interest rates had shot higher in financial markets and added that, “my colleagues and I will need to come to our own judgment, which may take more time.”

Joseph LaVorgna, chief economist at SMBC Americas and a former top Trump administration official, said that the central bank will hold back just before the election.

“The Fed doesn’t want to poke the White House in the eye six days before an election,” LaVorgna said.

Forward guidance — or not

The comments from Jefferson and others raise questions about one of Warsh’s signature initiatives: His disdain for so-called “forward guidance,” a term for the clear signals about the central bank’s next moves provided by previous chairs. Warsh has said that such direction commits the Fed to a specific path and limits its ability to respond to economic data.

Yet the speeches this month by top officials appeared to some economists to be very much like forward guidance — just not from the chairman.

“Either he blessed this message from them and he was on board, in which case, one would have to question the credibility of this idea that that he doesn’t like forward guidance,” said Aditya Bhave, head of U.S. economics research at Bank of America. “But the other possibility is that he wasn’t on board.”

In that case, Warsh could implement a surprise rate hike, which would “end forward guidance by showing markets that they can’t listen to the guidance anymore.”

Still, most economists see the odds of a hike as quite low.

Sizing up Warsh’s independence

At the Fed’s last meeting in September, Warsh defied Trump’s preferences and raised rates, a step that defied concerns that the new Fed chair would turn out to be, in the words of Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, “a sock puppet” for the president.

Trump had said before choosing Warsh in January of this year that he would only pick a Fed chair who would cut rates.

James Knightley, chief international economist for Netherlands-based bank ING, said that September’s rate hike, in defiance of the White House, largely assuaged those concerns.

“So far I think the markets have been encouraged by what they’ve seen,” Knightley said.

Yet since the September meeting, Trump has renewed his efforts to fire Fed governor Lisa Cook. If he is successful, it would open up another slot on the Fed’s board for Trump to fill. The Supreme Court in June blocked an earlier attempt to remove her.

Trump also said after last month’s Fed meeting that he had called Warsh beforehand and told him he “might as well” vote to raise rates because other officials on the rate-setting committee had publicly called for a hike. Trump said the committee is “hostile” and “political.”

Warsh declined at last month’s news conference to comment on any communications with Trump, despite news reports that he has spoken often with the president. With the scope of Warsh’s communications with Trump unclear, Derek Tang, an economist at Monetary Policy Analytics, said, “I think there is still a question mark there” regarding the chairman’s independence.

Warsh’s characterization of inflation

Inflation has come in hotter than most economists expected for two months in a row, heightening concerns that gas price spikes could raise costs across the economy. Diesel fuel reached an all-time high of $6.53 in late September, and has only fallen to $6.35 since then.

High diesel costs raise the price of shipping all sorts of goods, including groceries, cars, and nearly everything else. Businesses could then pass on the costs to consumers, spreading inflation to more parts of the economy.

Bhave notes that inflation hasn’t been at the Fed’s target of a 2% annual rate for a single calendar quarter since the final three months of 2020 — nearly six years ago.

If Warsh reiterates some of what he’s said before — that inflation is too high, and the Fed intends to return it to 2% in a “timelier” fashion — economists and investors will see such comments as a sign the Fed will likely hike rates at its next meeting in December.

Signs of dissent

The Fed’s September decision to lift rates was unanimous. Many Fed watchers, however, expect there could be two or even three dissents among the 12 officials who vote on rates. Beth Hammack, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, and Lorie Logan, president of the Dallas Fed, are considered the most likely to vote in favor of a rate hike this week.

Both have expressed concerns that the Fed’s key rate isn’t high enough to slow the economy and cool inflation.

Ironically, dissents could help Warsh and the Fed, some economists say, by illustrating that there is still support for higher rates on the committee.