Considerations in Reducing Inflation From Low to Lower LevelsWP/98/109-EAWP/98/109 Considerations in Reducing Inflation From Low to Lower Levels Michael Leidy and Stephen Tokarick In recent years, the rate of inflation in all of the major industrial countries has moved to low levels, averaging just 2 percent in 1997. Despite a degree of estimation bias in calculating inflation rates, these low rates are not generally viewed as consistent with price stability. In the low-inflation environment that now characterizes many industrial countries, should a policy of further disinflation be pursued? This paper reviews the central considerations in making that decision. The evidence on possible growth effects of disinflation and the mitigation of tax-based distortions is reviewed. Three channels are identified through which a further reduction in inflation could impose economic costs. These are (i) the employment/output effects resulting from downward nominal wage rigidities; (ii) the impossibility of engineering negative real interest rates through monetary policy under price stability; and (iii) the effect of further disinflation on the real cost of servicing government debt. At very low rates of inflation, it also becomes important to ask whether the objective of price stability and the associated benefits can best be realized through targeting the rate of inflation or the price level itself. The paper thus reviews the advantages and disadvantages of price-level versus inflation targeting in a low-inflation environment. How the potential benefits might stack up against the costs of further inflation reduction appear to depend principally on the extent and duration of nominal wage rigidities in the economy. The superiority of a policy of inflation versus price-level targeting hinges largely on whether a price-level target will tend to induce greater macroeconomic instability. This issue remains unsettled, but a price-level targeting regime, contrary to the dominant view in the literature, need not produce increased output and employment variability. |