M2 Velocity and Expected Inflation in Korea: Implications for Interest Rate Policy

인플레와 M2 유통속도(流通速度)

This paper attempts to identify key determinants of long run movements of real M2 by using the Johansen procedure for estimating and testing cointegration relations. It turns out that the real M2 equation has been stable over the long run despite rapid changes in financial structure since 1975. Moreover, the real M2 equation can be reduced to a velocity equation with the opportunity cost variable, expected inflation less the weighted average rate paid on M2 deposits, being the key determinant. However, it does not work to use a market interest rate such as the yield on corporate bonds in place of expected inflation for calculation of the opportunity cost. In the U.S., a market interest rate can be used, but not in Korea. Presumably, two somewhat different reasonings can be used to explain this result. One is that the yield on corporate bonds may not adequately reflect the inflationary expectations due to regulations on movements in interest rates. The other is that M2 deposits are not readily substitutable with such assets as corporate bonds because of market segmentations, regulations, and so on. From the policymaker's point of view, this implies that the inflation rate is an important indicator of a policy response. On the other hand, policymakers do not regard movements of the yield on corporate bonds as an important policy indicator. Altogether, the role of interest rates has been quite limited in Korea because of incomplete interest rate liberalization, an underdeveloped financial system, implementation procedures of policy measures, and so on. The result that M2 velocity has a positive cointegration relation with expected inflation minus the average rate on M2 implies that frequent adjustments of the regulated rates on M2 will be necessary as market conditions change. As the expected inflation gets higher, M2 velocity will eventually increase, given that the rates on M2 do not change. This will cause higher inflation. If interest rates are liberalized, then increases in market interest rates will result in lagged increases in deposits rates on M2. However, in Korea a substantial portion of deposit rates are regulated and will not change without the authority's initiatives. A tight monetary policy will cause increases in a few market interest rates. But the market mechanism, upward pressure for interest rate adjustments, never reaches regulated deposit rates. Hence the overall effects of tight monetary policy diminish considerably, only causing distortions in the flow of funds. Therefore, frequent adjustments of deposit rates are necessary as market conditions such as inflationary expectations change. Then it becomes important for the policymaker to actively engage in adjusting regulated deposit rates, because the financial sector in Korea is not fully developed.

인플레기대심리(期待心理)의 지속으로 통화량규제(通貨量規制)의 중요성이 부각되는 가운데 투자금융회사의 업종전환(業種轉換), 금리자유화추진(金利自由化推進) 등으로 각종 통화지표(通貨指標)의 움직임이 불안정해질 우려 때문에 통화정책운용(通貨政策運用)에 어려움을 주고 있다. 그러나 본고(本稿)의 연구결과(硏究結果)에 의하면 70년대 중반 이후 금융환경(金融環境)이 급변하여 왔음에도 불구하고 실질(實質)M2는 실질(實質)GNP 및 기회비용(機會費用)(예상(豫想)인플레율(率)에서 M2가중평균수신금리(加重平均受信金利)를 뺀 것)과 장기적으로 안정적인 관계를 가지며, 이는 유통속도(流通速度)와 기회비용간(機會費用間)의 정(正)의 장기적 균형관계로 간략화 시킬 수 있는 것으로 나타났다. 따라서 사안(事案)의 성격에 따라서 다르겠으나 앞으로의 금융구조변화(金融構造變化)가 반드시 M2유통속도(流通速度)의 움직임을 불안정하게 할 것으로 미리 단정할 필요는 없겠다. 또한 예상(豫想)인플레율(率)이 M2가중평균수신금리(加重平均受信金利)를 지속적으로 상회한다면 유통속도(流通速度)도 그 간의 하락추세에서 벗어나 궁극적으로 상승하게 되며, 이는 기존의 금융정책기조(金融政策基調)의 변화를 요구하는 것이다. 즉 금리자유화(金利自由化)가 이루어져 있지 않은 현여건(現與件) 하에서나 혹은 향후(向後)에 일부(一部) 금리(金利)만을 자유화할 경우에는 정책당국이 시장기능(市場機能)을 대신하여 예상(豫想)인플레율(率)의 변화를 감안하여 수신금리(受信金利)를 수시로 조정하여야 한다. 또한 실물적(實物的) 요인(要因)이 아닌 금융산업개편(金融産業改編)과 같은 금융적(金融的) 요인(要因)에 의한 통화증가가능성(通貨增加可能性)이 존재한다면 수신금리(受信金利)를 탄력적(彈力的)으로 상향조정함으로써 실물경제(實物經濟)에 대한 충격을 최소화하는 등 금리정책(金利政策)의 중요성을 제고하여야 한다.