SpringerLink
Log in

Quantitative Easing Policy and Income Inequality in the U.S. Economy: Evidence from a FAVAR Model

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Quantitative Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to analyze the impact of monetary base shocks on different measures of inequality in the U.S. economy for the periods before and after the implementation of the quantitative easing (QE) policy. In order to take additional information into account, the Factor-Augmented Vector Autoregressive (FAVAR) model is built and used in estimation. To extract the component factors, the Principal Component Analysis (PCA) method is applied on data of 115 series of monthly data in the U.S. economy for the period of January 1997 to September 2018. The Impulse Response Function (IRFs) results of FAVAR models show that the expansionary monetary policy does not affect different measures of inequality for the periods before and after QE policy implementation in the short run, but there is a long-run relationship between them for the two periods. The results also show that there are no signs of a “price puzzle” nor “liquidity puzzle” or “exchange rate puzzle” for the period after QE policy implementation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (France)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Amaral, P. 2017. Monetary Policy and Inequality. Economic Commentary, Number 2017-01, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.

  • Bernanke, B. 2015. Monetary Policy and Inequality. Brookings Blog, June 1.

  • Bernanke, B.S., J. Boivin, and P. Eliasz. 2005. Measuring the Effects of Monetary Policy: A Factor-Augmented Vector Autoregressive (FAVAR) Approach. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 120 (1): 387–422.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernanke, B.S., V.R. Reinhart, and B.P. Sack. 2004. Monetary Policy Alternatives at the Zero Bound: An Empirical Assessment. Brookings Chapters on Economic Activity 35 (2): 1–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernanke, B.S., and A.S. Blinder. 1992. The Federal Funds Rate and the Channels of Monetary Transmission. American Economic Review, American Economic Association 82 (4): 901–921.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breitung, J., and S. Eickmeier. 2006. Dynamic Factor Models. Allgemeines Statistisches Arch 90: 27–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cairo, I., and J. Sim. 2017. Income Inequality, Financial Crises and Monetary Policy. 2017 Meeting Papers 1433, Society for Economic Dynamics.

  • Cohan, W. 2014. How Quantitative Easing Contributed to the Nation’s Inequality Problem. Dealbook, New York Times, October 22.

  • Coibion, O., Y. Gorodnichenko, L. Kueng, and J. Silvia. 2017. Innocent Bystanders? Monetary Policy and Inequality in the U.S.? Journal of Monetary Economics 88: 70–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colciago, A., A. Samarina, and J.D. Haan. 2018. Central Bank Policies and Income and Wealth Inequality: A Survey.” DNB Working Papers 594, Netherlands Central Bank, Research Department.

  • Davtyan, K. 2017. The Distributive Effect of Monetary Policy: The Top One Percent Makes the Difference. Economic Modelling 65: 106–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Domanski, D., M. Scatigna, and A. Zabai. 2016. “Wealth Inequality and Monetary Policy.” BIS Quarterly Review (March).

  • Feldkircher, M., and K. Kakamu. 2018. How Does Monetary Policy Affect Income Inequality in Japan? Evidence from Grouped Data. Working Papers in Regional Science, 2018/03. WU Vienna University of Economics and Business, Vienna.

  • Geweke, J. 1977. The Dynamic Factor Analysis of Economic Time Series Models. Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grilli, V., and N. Roubini. 1995. Liquidity and Exchange Rates: Puzzling Evidence from the G-7 Countries. Working Papers 95–17, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.

  • Inui, M., N. Sudo, and T. Yamada 2017. Effects of Monetary Policy Shocks on Inequality in Japan. Bank of Japan Working Paper Series 17-E-3, Bank of Japan.

  • Leeper, E.M., and D.B. Gordon. 1992. In Search of the Liquidity Effect. Journal of Monetary Economics 29 (3): 341–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCracken, M.W., and S. Ng. 2016. FRED-MD: A Monthly Database for Macroeconomic Research. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics 34 (4): 574–589.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montecino, J.A., and G. Epstein. 2015. Did Quantitative Easing Increase Income Inequality? Working Paper No. 28, Institute for New Economic Thinking.

  • Mumtaz, H., and A. Theophilopoulou. 2017. The Impact of Monetary Policy on Inequality in the UK. An Empirical Analysis. European Economic Review 98: 410–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Farrell, R., and L. Rawdanowicz. 2017. Monetary Policy and Inequality: Financial Channels. International Finance 20 (2): 174–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olson, E., and A.T. Young. 2015. Discretionary Monetary Policy, Quantitative Easing, and the Decline in US Labor Share. Economics and Business Letters, Oviedo University Press 4 (2): 63–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roúoiu, A. 2015. Monetary Policy and Factor -Augmented VAR Model. Elsevier, Procedia Economics and Finance 32: 400–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saiki, A., and J. Frost. 2014. How Does Unconventional Monetary Policy Affect Inequality? Evidence from Japan. DNB Working Paper 423. Netherlands Central Bank: Research Department.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sargent, T., and C. Sims. 1977. Business Cycle Modeling Without Pretending to Have Too Much A Priori Economic Theory. Working Papers No. 55. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siami-Namini, S. 2018. The Effect of Monetary Policy Shocks on the Real Economy: A FAVAR Approach. Research Journal of Economics 2 (1): 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sims, C.A. 1980. Comparison of Interwar and Postwar Business Cycles: Monetarism Reconsidered. American Economic Review 70 (2): 250–257.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sims, C.A. 1992. Interpreting the Macroeconomic Time Series Facts: The Effects of Monetary Policy. European Economic Review 36 (5): 975–1000.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stock, J., and M. Watson. 1999. Forecasting Inflation. Journal of Monetary Economics 44 (2): 293–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stock, J., and M. Watson. 2002. Forecasting Using Principal Components from a Large Number of Predictors. Journal of the American Statistical Association 97 (460): 1167–1179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, J.B. 2009. The Financial Crisis and the Policy Responses: An Empirical Analysis of What Went Wrong. NBER Working Paper Series 14631. Cambridge, Mass. National Bureau of Economic Research.

  • Villarreal, F.G. 2014. Monetary Policy and Inequality in Mexico. MPRA Paper 57074, Munich Personal RePEc Archive, University Library of Munich, Germany.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA

    Sima Siami Namini

Authors
  1. Sima Siami Namini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sima Siami Namini.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Siami Namini, S. Quantitative Easing Policy and Income Inequality in the U.S. Economy: Evidence from a FAVAR Model. J. Quant. Econ. 20, 759–779 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40953-022-00316-9

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40953-022-00316-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation