The paper builds a parsimonious US business cycle SVARMA model, establishing identification conditions for independent monetary shocks. The SVARMA model, utilizing Divisia M3 and Divisia M4, is compared to the simple sum M2. The monetary rule with Divisia M3 yields theoretically consistent results marked by the absence of the usual price and liquidity puzzles. As the Federal Reserve (Fed) took a more hawkish approach to curb inflation, significant increases in US interest rates and declines in monetary aggregates were largely influenced by the Fed’s reaction function, which incorporates the Divisia M3 monetary rule. Findings emphasize the monetary impact on the business cycle, highlighting the significance of Divisia monetary aggregates. Historical and variance decompositions reveal diverse, dynamic effects of monetary shocks on macroeconomic variables. The SVARMA model with Divisia M3 and M4 demonstrates superior performance over simple sum M2 in capturing the time path of monetary shocks.

A large literature has shown money demand functions constructed from simple-sum aggregates are unstable. We revisit the controversy surrounding the instability of money demand by examining cointegrating income-money relationships with the Divisia monetary aggregates for the U.S., and compare them with their simple-sum counterparts. We innovate by conducting a more granular analysis of various monetary assets and their associated user costs. We find characterizing money demand with simple-sum measures only works well in a period preceding 1980. Divisia aggregates, their components, and their user costs provide a more reliable interpretation of money demand. Subsample analysis across 1980 and 2008 suggests the instability of money demand is a matter of measurement rather than a consequence of a structural change in agents’ preference for monetary assets.

This paper assesses the information content and predictive capabilities of Divisia monetary indicators concerning sector-specific economic activities. Although existing evidence strongly supports the informative nature and predictive potential of various Divisia indicators at an aggregate level, studies focusing on Divisia information content for specific industries are notably sparse. Sector-level data provide a more detailed insight into economic and labor market dynamics. By analyzing comprehensive sector-specific data on real GDP, value added, employment, and unemployment rates across thirteen diverse sectors in the United States, this paper investigates the predictive abilities of narrow and broad Divisia money across three categories (original, credit card-augmented, and credit card-augmented inside money). The results show that narrow Divisia money serve as robust predictors of sector-specific economic and labor market indicators, often surpassing the predictive capacity of the conventional Fed funds rate and slightly outperforming broad Divisia measures in relation to these indicators.

This paper identifies several ways in which “measurement matters” in detecting quantity-theoretic linkages between money growth and inflation in recent data from the Euro Area, United Kingdom, and USA. Elaborating on the “Barnett critique,” it uses Divisia aggregates in place of their simple-sum counterparts to gauge the effects that monetary expansion or contraction is having on inflationary pressures. It also uses one-sided time series filtering techniques to track, in real time, slowly shifting trends in velocity and real economic growth that would otherwise weaken the statistical money growth-inflation relationship. Finally, it documents how measures of inflation based on GDP were distorted severely, especially in the EA and UK, during the 2020 economic closures. Using measures based on consumption instead, estimates from the P-star model confirm that changes in money growth have strong predictive power for subsequent movements in inflation.

We assess the responses of output and inflation to monetary policy shocks in the context of a Bayesian, monetary structural vector autoregressive model. We allow money supply and leverage measures to enter into the interest rate policy rule and use an identification approach that is by construction devoid of any price puzzles. We provide a comprehensive comparison between monetary policy shocks under a policy regime that follows a standard Taylor rule and those that augment the standard reaction function of the central bank with measures of leverage and the money supply. We find that contractionary monetary policy is more pronounced and persistent when the reaction function of the central bank is augmented with measures of money and leverage than when the reaction function follows a typical Taylor rule. Our results support the use and inclusion of monetary aggregates in monetary policy and business cycle analysis.

This paper examines correlation and dependence structures between money and the level of economic activity in the USA in the context of a Markov-switching copula vector error correction model. We use the error correction model to focus on the short-run dynamics between money and output while accounting for their long-run equilibrium relationship. We use the Markov regime-switching model to account for instabilities in the relationship between money and output, and also consider different copula models with different dependence structures to investigate (upper and lower) tail dependence.

In this paper, we are motivated by the fact that little is known about the relative performance of broad and narrow Divisia monetary aggregates, and by recent work that tests and rejects the appropriateness of the aggregation assumptions that underlie the various monetary aggregates published by the Federal Reserve as well as a large number of monetary asset groupings suggested by earlier studies. We present a comprehensive comparison of narrow versus broad Divisia monetary aggregates within three classes of empirical models. We compute correlations between the cyclical components of Divisia monetary aggregates at different levels of aggregation and the cyclical component of industrial production. We test for Granger causality running from the Divisia aggregates to industrial production and various other measures of real economic activity. We also reestimate a structural vector autoregression based on earlier work by Leeper and Roush [(2003) Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking 35, 1217–1256] and Belongia and Ireland [(2015) Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 33, 255–269; (2016) Journal of Money, Credit and Banking 48, 1223–1266], modifying that earlier work using monthly rather than quarterly data and extending it, both using broad as well as narrower Divisia monetary aggregates and by allowing for Generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity (GARCH) behavior in the structural shocks.

We investigate the demand for money and the degree of substitutability among monetary assets in the United States using the generalized Leontief and the Minflex Laurent (ML) models as suggested by Serletis and Shahmoradi (2007). In doing so, we merge the demand systems literature with the recent financial econometrics literature, relaxing the homoskedasticity assumption and instead assuming that the covariance matrix of the errors of flexible demand systems is time-varying. We also pay explicit attention to theoretical regularity, treating the curvature property as a maintained hypothesis. Our findings indicate that only the curvature constrained ML model with a Baba, Engle, Kraft, and Kroner (BEKK) specification for the conditional covariance matrix is able to generate inference consistent with theoretical regularity.

We test the long-run neutrality of money proposition for the United States paying attention to the integration and cointegration properties of the variables. We use quarterly data (over the period from 1967:1 to 2014:1) and the new Center for Financial Stability Divisia monetary aggregates. We make a comparison among the narrower monetary aggregates, M1, M2M, MZM, M2, and ALL, and the broad monetary aggregates, M4+, M4-, and M3, and show that there is no statistically significant evidence against long-run monetary neutrality, consistent with both monetarist and Keynesian macroeconomic theory.

Although a number of economists have tried to revive the idea of nominal GDP targeting since the financial crisis of 2008, very little has been said about how this objective might be achieved in practice. This paper adopts and extends a strategy first outlined by Holbrook Working and later employed in the P-Star model. It presents a series of theoretical and empirical results to argue that Divisia monetary aggregates can be controlled by the Federal Reserve and that the trend velocities of these aggregates exhibit the stability required to make long-run targeting of a nominal objective feasible.