Experts warn about the 'crumbling infrastructure' of federal government data

Also Federal Reserve is not part of the US Government.

> Before May 2020, M2 consists of M1 plus (1) savings deposits (including money market deposit accounts); (2) small-denomination time deposits (time deposits in amounts of less than $100,000) less individual retirement account (IRA) and Keogh balances at depository institutions; and (3) balances in retail money market funds (MMFs) less IRA and Keogh balances at MMFs.

> Beginning May 2020, M2 consists of M1 plus (1) small-denomination time deposits (time deposits in amounts of less than $100,000) less IRA and Keogh balances at depository institutions; and (2) balances in retail MMFs less IRA and Keogh balances at MMFs. Seasonally adjusted M2 is constructed by summing savings deposits (before May 2020), small-denomination time deposits, and retail MMFs, each seasonally adjusted separately, and adding this result to seasonally adjusted M1.

EDIT: Of course since M1 is what really changed, M2 is effectively the same.

What exactly changed according to the FRED definition? Before May 2020: M2 included: M1 (currency in circulation + checking accounts + other transaction accounts) Savings deposits (including money market deposit accounts, MMDAs) Small-denomination time deposits (under $100,000, excluding IRA and Keogh balances) Retail money market mutual fund balances (excluding IRA and Keogh balances) Thus, M2 = M1 + Savings deposits (including MMDAs) + Small time deposits + Retail MMFs.

After May 2020: M1 was expanded to include savings deposits and money market deposit accounts (previously, savings and MMDAs were NOT part of M1; they were only part of M2). Since savings and MMDAs moved into M1, the definition of M2 no longer needs to separately add these categories—they are already captured within M1. Thus, after May 2020, the Fed simplified the definition to:

M2 = (New) M1 + Small-denomination time deposits + Retail MMFs

But importantly, note the following:

M1 itself was significantly expanded (now including savings and money market deposits), causing M1 to spike substantially overnight.

M2 overall did NOT lose or gain any category. It still includes all the exact same accounts and balances. It simply shifted the categorization of savings deposits and MMDAs into M1, so these no longer need separate listing when describing M2.

Here's a link to a Q&A about the change, and the relevant explanation.

"3. Why are savings deposits being recognized on the H.6 statistical release as a transaction account? Posted: 12/17/2020

A. As announced on March 15, 2020, the Board of Governors reduced reserve requirement ratios on net transaction accounts to 0 percent, effective March 26, 2020. This action eliminated reserve requirements for all depository institutions and rendered the regulatory distinction between reservable “transaction accounts” and nonreservable “savings deposits” unnecessary. On April 24, 2020, the Board removed this regulatory distinction by deleting the six-per-month transfer limit on savings deposits in Regulation D. This action resulted in savings deposits having the same liquidity characteristics as the transaction accounts currently reported as “Other checkable deposits” on the H.6 statistical release.

To account for the change in their liquidity characteristics, savings deposits will be recognized as a type of transaction account on the H.6 statistical release"

Anyway, I think we understand each other.

So explaining M2 in terms of M1 only works if you include those definition in the equation. Otherwise it will falsely look like M2 fell by the amount that M1 rose.

Well, they seem to get along pretty well in any case :).

They changed the m1 definition in the middle of the largest m1 increase in history. It messed up all the graphs and you couldn’t get a sense of the scale of the printing.