Does Foreign Exchange Intervention Signal Future Monetary Policy?
47 Pages Posted: 12 Apr 2004 Last revised: 1 Oct 2022
Date Written: March 1993
Abstract
A frequently cited explanation for why sterilized interventions may affect exchange rates is that these interventions signal central banks' future monetary policy intentions. This explanation presumes that central banks in fact back up interventions with subsequent changes in monetary policy. We empirically examine this hypothesis using data on market observations of U.S. intervention together with monetary policy variables, and exchange rates. We strongly reject the hypothesis that interventions convey no signal. However, we also find that in some episodes, intervention signaled changes in monetary policy in the opposite direction of the conventional signaling story. This finding can explain why in some periods exchange rates moved in the opposite direction of that suggested by intervention.
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?
Recommended Papers
-
Official Intervention in the Foreign Exchange Market: Is it Effective, and, If so, How Does it Work?
By Mark P. Taylor and Lucio Sarno
-
By Gabriele Galati and William R. Melick
-
U.S. Intervention: Assessing the Probability of Success
By Owen Humpage
-
Does Central Bank Intervention Increase the Volatility of Foreign Exchange Rates?
-
Is Foreign Exchange Intervention Effective?: The Japanese Experiences in the 1990s
-
The Practice of Central Bank Intervention: Looking Under the Hood
-
Is Sterilized Foreign Exchange Intervention Effective after All? An Event Study Approach
By Rasmus Fatum and Michael M. Hutchison
-
A Transaction Level Study of the Effects of Central Bank Intervention of Exchange Rates
By Richard Payne and Paolo Vitale