华尔街 nhận xét biên bản cuộc họp tháng 6 của Fed: Trọng tâm là lạm phát, không có tính cấp bách trong việc tăng lãi suất trong ngắn hạn

Original author: Long Yue, Wall Street News

The Fed's June meeting minutes have been released, and three major Wall Street institutions unanimously read one signal: inflation is the real deciding factor for interest rate hikes.

The Fed's June FOMC meeting minutes were released on July 8. The minutes showed that "all" participants supported keeping the federal funds rate unchanged in the 3.5%-3.75% range. The market initially feared the minutes were hawkish, but after reading them, they were generally interpreted as marginally dovish—for a simple reason: the minutes showed no urgency for a near-term rate hike.

According to sources from Zhui Feng trading desk, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and Citigroup quickly released commentary reports after the minutes were published, with core judgments highly consistent: the Fed's current reaction function remains data-driven, and the policy direction depends entirely on inflation data in the coming months.

Goldman Sachs economist Jan Hatzius' team directly pointed out the core logic: the key dividing line in the minutes is whether inflation will begin to fall "soon." If it does, "almost all" officials discussing this scenario support "maintaining or eventually lowering" rates; if not, similarly, "almost all" officials discussing the high-inflation scenario believe "some degree of policy tightening may be necessary."

Two paths, one key: inflation data.

"A Few" See Reasons to Hike, But No One Really Wants To

One of the most watched phrases in the minutes is that "a few" participants believed there were "reasons to raise rates" at the June meeting.

But Morgan Stanley Chief US Economist Michael Gapen clearly pointed out that this is different from "leaning toward a rate hike." He wrote: "These 'few' participants indicated they are currently satisfied with keeping the policy rate at its current level."

Citigroup economist Andrew Hollenhorst shared the same view. In his report, he quoted the minutes, noting that these participants "expressed support for maintaining the current target range at this meeting." In other words, even if some thought a rate hike was justified, no one at that point actually wanted to pull the trigger.

Notably, the previous SEP dot plot showed 9 officials predicted rate hikes in 2026, with many expecting 2-3 hikes. However, based on the minutes' language, this hawkish leaning has not yet translated into a willingness to act.

Inflation: Not Just How High, But the Direction

The core logic of the minutes can be summarized in one sentence: Where inflation goes, interest rates follow.

The Goldman Sachs team pointed out that "most" participants in the minutes discussed two scenarios:

Scenario 1: Inflationary pressures subside, and inflation "soon" begins returning to the 2% target—"almost all" participants discussing this scenario believed the federal funds rate should be "maintained or eventually lowered" at that point.

Scenario 2: Inflation remains elevated due to AI-related demand, Middle East conflicts, or tariff factors—"almost all" participants discussing this scenario believed "some degree of policy tightening may be necessary."

The team outlined specific official comments: Participants generally noted that both core and headline inflation had risen further, remaining "well above" the 2% target, mainly attributable to tariff impacts, supply chain disruptions from a blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, and strong demand driven by AI-related investments. "Several" officials noted that price pressures had become more broad-based, covering transportation, airfares, petrochemicals, and agricultural inputs; services inflation excluding housing remained "elevated."

However, the reason officials did not act hastily boils down to two points:

First, inflation expectations remain consistent with the path back to the target. Second, "many" officials believed the labor market is "currently not a source of inflationary pressure." Citigroup's Hollenhorst added that the June non-farm payroll data was below expectations, and the previous month's data was revised downward, further weakening concerns that the labor market could reignite inflation. This means that the current high level of inflation is viewed by officials more as a result of supply-side shocks rather than runaway demand.

Morgan Stanley's Gapen offered a specific interpretation of the phrase "some degree of policy tightening," meaning a "recalibration of the policy stance" — a rate hike of 50-75 basis points, rather than the start of a full rate hike cycle.

Gapen used the word "soon" to define the Fed's boundary of patience—he believes this likely means "in the coming months," specifically the next 3 to 4 inflation data points. If inflation dissipates and supply-side pressures appear temporary, staying put is the correct answer.

This Is Not a "Regime Change," It's Still Data-Driven

Some market participants feared that the new Fed Chair Warsh might push for a fundamental shift in the monetary policy framework—moving away from "data dependency" towards proactive tightening to lower inflation faster.

Morgan Stanley's Gapen directly responded to this: "The minutes do not point to an 'institutional shift' in the Fed's reaction function." He believes the passages in the minutes regarding the monetary policy outlook remain entirely within the past framework of "data dependence."

The logic is: if inflation subsides, the Fed stands pat and opens the door for future easing; if inflation persists, the Fed may reverse some or all of the rate cuts previously implemented for risk management purposes. "This shows that data still matters and the Committee remains uncertain about the path of inflation," Gapen wrote.

In terms of communication strategy, the format of the minutes was essentially consistent with previous meetings, retaining forward-looking statements, scenario analysis, and descriptive terms like "a few," "some," and "most." Morgan Stanley noted that while the market had previously feared Chair Warsh might significantly reduce the amount of information in the minutes, "the new minutes look very similar to the old minutes."

Predictions from the Three Institutions: No Rate Hike This Year, Rate Cut to Wait Until 2027

The three institutions have slight differences in their predictions, but the direction is consistent:

Morgan Stanley expects that if inflation subsides as they predict, the Fed will keep rates unchanged this year, with two 25-basis-point rate cuts in 2027 or later. Gapen believes there isn't sufficient data support for a July rate hike, but if inflation exceeds expectations, a September rate hike is "theoretically possible."

Goldman Sachs expects the core PCE year-over-year rate to fall to 3.0% (currently 3.4%) by the end of 2026, and core CPI to fall to 2.6% (currently 2.9%), with month-on-month readings remaining moderate in the coming months. Their base case is keeping rates unchanged throughout 2026, but they acknowledge some risk of a rate hike.

Citigroup holds the most dovish view. Hollenhorst believes the market's pricing for a July rate hike is "too hawkish relative to the Fed's reaction function." He expects that as the unemployment rate rises in the coming months, the balance within the committee will shift from hiking to cutting, with a base case of two 25-basis-point rate cuts in October and December of this year, and another 25-basis-point cut in January 2027.