|
|
|
|
| LEADER |
03439nmm a2200769 u 4500 |
| 001 |
EB001825288 |
| 003 |
EBX01000000000000000991734 |
| 005 |
00000000000000.0 |
| 007 |
cr||||||||||||||||||||| |
| 008 |
180614 ||| eng |
| 020 |
|
|
|a 9781475591330
|
| 100 |
1 |
|
|a Quint, Dominic
|
| 245 |
0 |
0 |
|a Should Unconventional Monetary Policies Become Conventional?
|c Dominic Quint, Pau Rabanal
|
| 260 |
|
|
|a Washington, D.C.
|b International Monetary Fund
|c 2017
|
| 300 |
|
|
|a 44 pages
|
| 651 |
|
4 |
|a United States
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Wealth
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Sovereign bonds
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Economics
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Banks
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Dynamic Treatment Effect Models
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Banks and banking
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Deflation
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Mortgages
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a National accounts
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Unconventional monetary policies
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Time-Series Models
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Cycles
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Bonds
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Macroeconomics
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Corporate bonds
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Banking
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a State Space Models
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Depository Institutions
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Inflation
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Institutional Investors
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Pension Funds
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Stocks
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Monetary economics
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Financial institutions
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Saving
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Financial Instruments
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Micro Finance Institutions
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Diffusion Processes
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a General Financial Markets: General (includes Measurement and Data)
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Investments: Bonds
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Non-bank Financial Institutions
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Price Level
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Banks and Banking
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Investments: Stocks
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Consumption
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Prices
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Macroeconomics: Consumption
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Monetary policy
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Business Fluctuations
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Dynamic Quantile Regressions
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Investment & securities
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Monetary Policy
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Money and Monetary Policy
|
| 700 |
1 |
|
|a Rabanal, Pau
|
| 041 |
0 |
7 |
|a eng
|2 ISO 639-2
|
| 989 |
|
|
|b IMF
|a International Monetary Fund
|
| 490 |
0 |
|
|a IMF Working Papers
|
| 028 |
5 |
0 |
|a 10.5089/9781475591330.001
|
| 856 |
4 |
0 |
|u https://elibrary.imf.org/view/journals/001/2017/085/001.2017.issue-085-en.xml?cid=44787-com-dsp-marc
|x Verlag
|3 Volltext
|
| 082 |
0 |
|
|a 330
|
| 520 |
|
|
|a The large recession that followed the Global Financial Crisis of 2008-09 triggered unprecedented monetary policy easing around the world. Most central banks in advanced economies deployed new instruments to affect credit conditions and to provide liquidity at a large scale after shortterm policy rates reached their effective lower bound. In this paper, we study if this new set of tools, commonly labeled as unconventional monetary policies (UMP), should still be used when economic conditions and interest rates normalize. In particular, we study the optimality of asset purchase programs by using an estimated non-linear DSGE model with a banking sector and long-term private and public debt for the United States. We find that the benefits of using such UMP in normal times are substantial, equivalent to 1.45 percent of consumption. However, the benefits from using UMP are shock-dependent and mostly arise when the economy is hit by financial shocks. When more traditional business cycle shocks (such as supply and demand shocks) hit the economy, the benefits of using UMP are negligible or zero
|