Pre-registration
The 2022-2024 US disinflation episode is partially but not predominantly attributable to the Fed's 525bp rate-hike cycle 2022-03 to 2023-07; supply-chain normalisation, energy-price reversion, and fiscal-impulse fade explain at least as much of CPI's decline from 9.1% (2022-06) to ~3% (2024-12). Decomposition is roughly one-third Fed, two-thirds non-Fed, with monetary effect concentrated in goods and shelter (lagged) rather than headline.
Falsification criterion — what would disprove this
This hypothesis is considered falsified if:
Decomposition of US headline CPI YoY decline 2022-06 (peak 9.06%) to 2024-12 (~2.9%) — total ~6.1pp disinflation — into (a) Fed-driven component via shadow-rate/proxy-FFR shock with Romer-Romer narrative benchmark, (b) supply-shock component via NY Fed Global Supply Chain Pressure Index reversion, (c) energy-price component via Brent contribution to headline CPI, (d) fiscal-impulse component via CBO fiscal-impulse measure. SUPPORTED if Fed-attributable share is in [25%, 50%] of the 6.1pp disinflation. REFUTED if Fed share <15% (no monetary contribution) or >75% (orthodox-only framing). PARTIAL otherwise.
formal test & threshold
test: us_disinflation_2022_2024_decomposition threshold: SUPPORTED: Fed-attributable share in [25%, 50%]. REFUTED: Fed share <15% OR >75%.
Method
- Template
lp_iv- Clustering
none- Sample
- 1 countries · 2019 – 2025
- Evidence type
- causal
Local-projection IV with Romer-Romer narrative monetary-policy shock as instrument for proxy-FFR shock. Decompose 6.1pp CPI disinflation into Fed-attributable, supply-shock-attributable (GSCPI normalisation), energy-attributable (Brent reversion), and fiscal-fade components. Bernanke-Blanchard 2023 NK model used as benchmark structural decomposition for cross-validation.
Data
| Variable | Source | Transform |
|---|---|---|
cpi_headline_yoy outcome | fred:CPIAUCSLtier 1 | pct_change_yoy |
cpi_core_yoy outcome | fred:CPILFESLtier 1 | pct_change_yoy |
pce_core_yoy outcome | fred:PCEPILFEtier 1 | pct_change_yoy |
shelter_cpi_yoy outcome | fred:CUSR0000SAH1tier 1 | pct_change_yoy |
goods_ex_food_energy_cpi outcome | fred:CUSR0000SACL1Etier 1 | pct_change_yoy |
fed_funds_target treatment | fred:DFEDTARUtier 1 | level |
shadow_rate_wu_xia treatment | fred:WUXIASHADOWRATEtier 1 | level |
fed_balance_sheet_walcl treatment | fred:WALCLtier 1 | log_diff |
ny_fed_global_supply_chain_pressure channel | fred:T5YIFRtier 1 | level |
oil_price_brent channel | imf_pcps:POILBREtier 1 | log_diff |
cbo_fiscal_impulse channel | fred:FYFSGDA188Stier 1 | pct_gdp |
nominal_wage_growth_atlanta_fed channel | fred:FRBATLWGT12MMUMHWGOtier 1 | level |
usd_broad_index control | fred:DTWEXBGStier 1 | log_diff |
vix control | fred:VIXCLStier 1 | level |
● ready · ● pending · ● reconstruct-needed
Detailed result card
Result card - fed_2022_rate_cycle_inflation_response_lag
Verdict: PARTIAL - headline CPI fell 5.77pp; non-core wedge explains 55.3% and the core upper bound is 44.7%, but the registered shadow-rate/narrative-IV share is not loaded
Exact Local Decomposition Bound
- Headline CPI YoY, 2022-06: 8.599
- Headline CPI YoY, 2024-12: 2.830
- Headline disinflation: 5.769
- Core CPI disinflation: 2.576
- Non-core wedge disinflation: 3.193
- Core CPI max Fed-sensitive share (%): 44.651
- Non-core wedge share (%): 55.349
- Fed target upper-bound hike (bp): 525.000
- Oil YoY reversal: 52.785
- Fiscal deficit narrowing, 2021-2024 (pp GDP): 5.494
Interpretation
The local CPI component data support the claim's non-predominance condition as an upper-bound exercise: the entire core-CPI decline is only a 44.7% share of headline disinflation, while the non-core headline-minus-core wedge accounts for 55.3%. This is not a full Romer-Romer/shadow-rate decomposition, so the result stays PARTIAL rather than SUPPORTED.
Variables missing for the registered causal design
- fred:WUXIASHADOWRATE
- fred:FRBATLWGT12MMUMHWGO
- ny_fed:GSCPI
- romer_romer:narrative_monetary_shock
Generated by engine/runs/fed_2022_rate_cycle_inflation_response_lag/replication.py at 2026-05-17T20:57:45+00:00
Strongest opposing argument
Every hypothesis ships with its charitable opposing argument. The framework earns credibility by handling objections at their strongest, not weakest.
Notes
Quantitative decomposition rather than binary test. Romer-Romer narrative-IV style with Bernanke-Blanchard 2023 supply/demand decomposition as benchmark.