The Fed and its dueling dual mandate

Analysis
Insights

Questions regarding the Federal Reserve’s price stability and maximum employment mandates abound. We look at what investors should know at a time when there is a lack of clarity regarding the central bank’s next moves.

Share

May 8, 2025

Thomas Garretson, CFA
Senior Portfolio Strategist
Fixed Income Strategies
Portfolio Advisory Group–U.S.

In no uncertain terms – which may be welcomed in a world of almost nothing but uncertainty – the Fed’s meeting this week was largely inconsequential.

But there were some minor developments that speak to larger themes that we think are worth exploring.

In newly added language to its official policy statement, the Federal Reserve Board noted that, “The Committee is attentive to the risks to both sides of its dual mandate and judges that the risks of higher unemployment and higher inflation have risen.”

Fed Chair Jerome Powell went further in his prepared remarks to note that, “If the large increases in tariffs that have been announced are sustained, they are likely to generate a rise in inflation, a slowdown in economic growth, and an increase in unemployment.”

This theme, of course, is also increasingly being reflected in a wide swath of analyst forecasts. The first chart shows how far RBC Capital Markets’ economists expect inflation to deviate from the Fed’s 2.0 percent annual target, and how far unemployment is seen rising beyond the Fed’s 4.2 percent estimate of the “full employment” rate of unemployment.

Inflation and unemployment both seen exceeding Fed goals, but inflation to a greater degree

Inflation and unemployment expectations vs. Fed targets

The chart shows how much RBC Capital Markets expects inflation to deviate from the Fed’s 2.0 percent annual target and how much unemployment could exceed the Fed’s estimated 4.2 percent “full employment” rate. Inflation is expected to exceed the Fed target by up to 1.4 percentage points in Q4 2025, and unemployment by up to 0.6 percentage points.

  • Inflation gap
  • Jobless gap

Source – RBC Wealth Management, Bloomberg; RBC Capital Markets forecasts for the Consumer Price Index and unemployment rate as of April 2025

Breaking the tension

As Powell noted multiple times during his press conference, the prospects of both higher inflation and higher unemployment create “tension” with respect to achieving the Fed’s dual mandate of price stability and maximum employment, and how it manages its monetary policy tools in doing so.

So, the question then is which mandate will the Fed prioritize when it next decides to act?

Our current thinking is relatively straightforward: The inflationary impacts of tariffs will hit first, and to a greater degree, which has kept – and will likely keep – the Fed on hold until the September meeting. At which point rising unemployment, if realized, will trigger the first of a series of rate cuts – we think three this year followed by three next year – even in the face of elevated inflation. But inflation begins to fade, and unemployment stabilizes, through 2026.

We would hope it goes without saying that even in the best of times forecasts are just that, forecasts. At the moment, any forecast likely isn’t much better than anyone’s worst guess. But this seems like a simple, and fair, framework to be working with.

Are inflation expectations dragging anchor?

Though the Fed noted that current economic growth remains solid and inflation only slightly elevated, the expectations component of both is the next theme which has been featured at recent meetings. Powell has routinely stated that the Fed’s job is to keep the one-time inflationary impact of tariffs from morphing into a persistent inflation problem.

As the second chart shows, that objective appears at risk. Consumer inflation expectations have been rising sharply since the beginning of the year. Though Powell downplayed this at the March meeting as “too soon to draw conclusion,” four months nearly makes a trend, in our view, with preliminary data for May due next week potentially extending it.

Decades of relative stability in inflation expectations upended

Expected change inh prices during next five to 10 years

Expected change in prices during next five to 10 years

The line chart shows long-run consumer inflation expectations over the past 25 years. Expectations were relatively stable around the 2.8 percent median for most of the period. In recent months, however, expectations for inflation have jumped to 4.4 percent, significantly higher than at any time in the past 25 years.

  • Consumer long-run inflation expectations
  • Median

Source – RBC Wealth Management, Bloomberg, University of Michigan Surveys of Consumers

This dynamic shouldn’t be ignored. In recent decades, the Fed largely achieved its goal of “anchoring” inflation expectations. By and large, expectations, even through the worst of the recent inflation wave, held within a tight range. This break, if sustained, could signal a material shift in consumer psyche as it relates to prices.

We wonder whether, if this round of tariff-induced inflation fears wasn’t coming off the back of an actual inflation wave which has only recently appeared to trough, it might prove to be a one-off episode. But coming so soon after an inflationary cycle could only fuel another where we could see the cycle of businesses raising prices, workers seeking wage gains to offset higher prices, and so on and so forth.

Rising inflation expectations also pose economic risks – if consumers fear higher prices ahead, they may spend now, and that could be what is currently holding up economic activity. But amid rising questions about the consumers’ capacity to spend and growing fears about their willingness, higher consumption now could mean lower consumption later.

Wait and see what may be

While the Fed meeting largely failed to move markets in any direction, the announcement of a framework trade deal with the UK today has done so. The S&P 500 has pushed higher toward 5,700, while the benchmark 10-year U.S. Treasury yield has risen to 4.33 percent.

We have maintained our Market Weight recommendation for both U.S. equities and U.S. fixed income, but recent volatility and market uncertainty present a precarious setup. As of April, RBC Capital Markets projected a year-end S&P 500 closing level of 5,550 – nearly 3.0 percent downside from current trading levels. At the same time, RBC Capital Markets forecasts the 10-year Treasury yield to end the year at 3.75 percent. Bond price appreciation should the yield decline to that level, on top of coupons earned, would imply a total return of just over 7.0 percent.

Should tariff and trade fears continue to ease, there is perhaps some modest upside to both of those forecasts. But in an environment such as this, perhaps it’s best just to follow the Fed’s lead and simply wait and see.


The material herein is for informational purposes only and is not directed at, nor intended for distribution to or use by, any person or entity in any country where such distribution or use would be contrary to law or regulation or which would subject Royal Bank of Canada or its subsidiaries or constituent business units (including RBC Wealth Management) to any licensing or registration requirement within such country.

This is not intended to be either a specific offer by any Royal Bank of Canada entity to sell or provide, or a specific invitation to apply for, any particular financial account, product or service. Royal Bank of Canada does not offer accounts, products or services in jurisdictions where it is not permitted to do so, and therefore the RBC Wealth Management business is not available in all countries or markets.

The information contained herein is general in nature and is not intended, and should not be construed, as professional advice or opinion provided to the user, nor as a recommendation of any particular approach. Nothing in this material constitutes legal, accounting or tax advice and you are advised to seek independent legal, tax and accounting advice prior to acting upon anything contained in this material. Interest rates, market conditions, tax and legal rules and other important factors which will be pertinent to your circumstances are subject to change. This material does not purport to be a complete statement of the approaches or steps that may be appropriate for the user, does not take into account the user’s specific investment objectives or risk tolerance and is not intended to be an invitation to effect a securities transaction or to otherwise participate in any investment service.

To the full extent permitted by law neither RBC Wealth Management nor any of its affiliates, nor any other person, accepts any liability whatsoever for any direct or consequential loss arising from any use of this document or the information contained herein. No matter contained in this material may be reproduced or copied by any means without the prior consent of RBC Wealth Management. RBC Wealth Management is the global brand name to describe the wealth management business of the Royal Bank of Canada and its affiliates and branches, including, RBC Investment Services (Asia) Limited, Royal Bank of Canada, Hong Kong Branch, and the Royal Bank of Canada, Singapore Branch. Additional information available upon request.

Royal Bank of Canada is duly established under the Bank Act (Canada), which provides limited liability for shareholders.

® Registered trademark of Royal Bank of Canada. Used under license. RBC Wealth Management is a registered trademark of Royal Bank of Canada. Used under license. Copyright © Royal Bank of Canada 2025. All rights reserved.


Thomas Garretson, CFA

Senior Portfolio Strategist
Fixed Income Strategies
Portfolio Advisory Group–U.S.

Let’s connect


We want to talk about your financial future.

Related articles

Will investors see a pause in rate cuts, or the end?

Analysis 5 minute read
- Will investors see a pause in rate cuts, or the end?

Fed rate cuts for what?

Analysis 6 minute read
- Fed rate cuts for what?

The price of Fed rate cut success is steep, but not too steep

Analysis 12 minute read
- The price of Fed rate cut success is steep, but not too steep