The Federal Reserve faces its most significant internal division in recent years as Chair Jerome Powell navigates a deeply split FOMC ahead of a key policy meeting. While a 25-basis-point rate cut is widely expected, the challenge lies in post-meeting communication. Powell is likely to adopt a "hawkish cut" strategy—lowering rates while avoiding strong signals about future easing, particularly for January. He will emphasize data dependency and may signal that rates are approaching neutral to reassure hawkish members concerned about persistent inflation. The decision is complicated by a government shutdown delaying key economic data and external political pressure. Regardless of the outcome, high uncertainty and market volatility are expected to persist, with future policy moves contingent on labor market conditions and inflation data.

<html><head></head><body>As Federal Reserve policymakers become increasingly divided between hawkish and dovish stances, Chairman Powell faces a daunting coordination task at this week's central bank meeting. Although the market widely expects the Fed to cut interest rates again, the real challenge lies in post-decision policy communication. Powell must carefully balance internal opposing views and leave flexible room for future policy paths.<h3>A Deeply Divided Committee</h3>Currently, the level of divergence within the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) is considered the most severe in Powell's eight-year tenure. This split is directly reflected in the distribution of voting rights: among the 12 voting members, five have expressed opposition or skepticism toward further rate cuts.Since 2019, no FOMC meeting has seen three or more dissenting votes, and since 1990, this has occurred only nine times. Therefore, the market is highly focused on whether this meeting will witness a high number of dissenting votes, which in itself reflects the complexity and uncertainty of policy-making.This profound divergence stems from different interpretations of the contradictory state of the U.S. economy.One side (dovish) is more concerned about the weakening signals in the job market. For example, New York Fed President Williams believes that the downside risks in the labor market have increased, while upward inflationary pressures have eased, thus advocating that "there is still room for further rate cuts in the near term."The other side (hawkish) is worried about the stickiness of inflation. Officials like Boston Fed President Collins emphasize that progress on inflation has stalled, and the current "moderately restrictive" monetary policy level is necessary to ensure inflation returns to the 2% target, thus urging caution on further rate cuts. These differing emphases on the contradictory economic data make it difficult for the committee to form a unified opinion.<h3>Communication Strategy of a "Hawkish Cut"</h3>Faced with such internal divisions, market analysis suggests that Powell is most likely to adopt a communication strategy known as a "hawkish cut." This means the Fed may approve a 25-basis-point rate cut at the December meeting, but Powell will strive to avoid sending strong signals about a future easing cycle in his post-meeting press conference, particularly by setting a high bar for another rate cut in January. Analysts at Bank of America note that Powell may attempt to balance the expected rate cut action with hawkish rhetoric.Specifically, the communication strategy may focus on two aspects:First, emphasizing that future policy decisions will strictly depend on data, especially upcoming employment and inflation reports,暗示ing that this rate cut is not the start of a prolonged easing cycle.Second, signaling that interest rates are approaching the level of the "neutral rate." The neutral rate is the level at which interest rates neither stimulate nor restrain the economy. By暗示ing that the policy stance may soon shift from restrictive to neutral, Powell can attempt to reassure hawkish members that the Fed is not heading toward excessive easing.However, executing this communication strategy poses significant challenges. Powell must placate internal hawkish voices while avoiding being too dovish, lest the market interpret it as a pause in the easing cycle, triggering an inappropriate tightening of financial conditions. He must find a delicate balance between these conflicting objectives.<h3>Decision-Making Amid Data Gaps and Political Pressure</h3>A unique dilemma for the Fed's current decision-making is the absence of key economic data. Due to the ongoing U.S. federal government shutdown, a series of important economic reports, including the October jobs report, have been delayed. This forces policymakers to make judgments in a "data vacuum" with incomplete information, akin to "driving in heavy fog" and having to slow down. The lack of data not only increases the risk of policy misjudgment but also makes it difficult for Powell to rely on clear data support when explaining decisions, forcing him to depend more on overall economic outlook assessments and private-sector alternative data.Meanwhile, political pressure is also a factor that cannot be ignored. President Trump has repeatedly publicly pressured the Fed to cut rates and is considering nominees for the next Fed chair. This external pressure, with its potential impact on the Fed's monetary policy independence, significantly raises the political and economic stakes of this meeting. Powell has previously stated that the Fed's policy decisions are "based on data, not politics," but adhering to this principle in such a complex context requires immense determination and wisdom.<h3>Future Path: Uncertainty as the New Normal</h3>Regardless of the outcome of the December meeting, the Fed's future policy path is fraught with uncertainty. A gap exists between market expectations and the Fed's official guidance: futures market pricing currently indicates expectations for further rate cuts after January, while some Fed officials prefer a wait-and-see approach after this cut. Powell is likely to preserve flexibility for future actions. One possible communication approach is to emphasize that the need for further rate cuts will depend on whether the labor market shows signs of "further significant softening." This means that if subsequent economic data, particularly employment data, deteriorates significantly, the Fed may still act. Conversely, if inflation data unexpectedly rebounds strongly, it could support the hawkish view, leading to rates remaining higher for longer.Furthermore, academic debates about the level of the "neutral rate"预示 long-term complexity in policy-making. FOMC members' estimates of the neutral rate vary significantly, ranging from 2.6% to 3.9%. This fundamental divergence means that even after short-term data-dependent decisions, reaching a consensus on the ultimate level to which rates should be cut remains difficult within the Fed, ensuring that the future policy trajectory will not be smooth.In summary, Chairman Powell's core task at this meeting is to seek a fragile balance within a severely divided committee, using a "hawkish cut" strategy to placate internal and external parties, while striving to maintain the Fed's policy independence and credibility under the dual constraints of data gaps and political pressure. Regardless of the outcome, high uncertainty and market volatility are likely to become the new normal for the foreseeable future.</body></html>

# Neutral Rate Related Articles

The Fed Faces Its Biggest Internal Divergence in Recent Years! Has Powell Stopped Being 'Hawkish' This Time?

Regulatory Policy

Industry News