It's make your mind up time for the MPC. Either today or next month, the Bank of England's Monetary Policy Committee has to decide whether to continue with the current policy of "quantitative easing", or take a rest.
I don't know what will happen. There's a spirited debate within the committee on this, and I suspect the members don't know themselves.
In effect, the discussion comes down to this: do you think that QE is mainly about the quantity of money you put into the system - or the degree of "ease" that it provides?
Let me explain. One way to think about QE is as a topping-up exercise. Thanks to the recession, the Bank thinks that nominal GDP - the amount of national output in cash terms- is about 9% lower than it would be in "normal" times. That roughly corresponds to the £125bn the MPC is due to have spent by the end of this month (it's spent about £110bn so far).
If you thought QE was a one-off exercise to get the amount of cash flowing through the economy back up to more normal levels, and encourage similar growth in cash GDP, you could say the job was more or less done. All you need to do is stand back, and wait for that dollop of money to work its way through the system.
That way of looking at QE points in the direction of putting the policy on pause for a while after the £125bn is spent. Or, to let the markets down gently, you might say you were going to spend the final £25bn of the £150bn originally authorised by the chancellor, but at a slower rate.
But that's if you think of QE as a one-off injection. A lot of people think of the policy rather differently, as an ongoing stimulus, requiring continual injections of cash.
Economists who emphasize the policy's effect on government bond yields - and thus long-term borrowing rates - tend to think of it in this way. They think it would be disastrous to stop now.
As I've discussed in the past, QE is an "all things to all men" kind of policy - its supporters have a lot of different explanations for why it will work.
Some focus on the direct impact on the money supply, others on the level of bank reserves and the quantity of bank lending, and still others on the impact on public and private borrowing rates (I went through the various channels in some detail on 5 March).
Up until now, it hasn't really mattered which one you support. In fact, Bank officials have tended to talk of all these mechanisms operating at the same time. But now it is starting to matter.
That's because, if you think that the quantitative, money supply channel is what matters, the job might almost be done. But if your focus is on government bond yields and the level of bank lending, QE has barely begun. Government bond yields are now almost exactly where they were when the policy started.
As I've said many times before, a lot of other things have been happening since March - notably an explosion in estimates of government borrowing. But if you think bond yields are the key channel through which QE supports the economy, you're not going to want to turn the tap off anytime soon.
As ever, it's (even) more complicated than this. For starters, as we know, these are not normal times for the demand for money, so that one-for-one correlation between the amount injected into the economy and the level of nominal GDP may not hold. If people simply hang on to the cash, you might need to spend more to have the same effect.
However, by spending £125bn, the MPC has already assumed a much higher degree of cash hoarding than you would normally expect. The Bank is assuming that these usual multiplier effects - through the banks lending on the money, which in turn gets deposited and lent on to others - largely do not apply. Even in these strange times for the financial system, £125bn is an awful lot of cash to inject into the economy in five months.
It's striking that the governor, Mervyn King, has always tended to stress the quantitative side of QE - the impact on the broad money supply, and cash GDP. At repeated press conferences he has gone out of his way to downplay the likely effect of QE on bank lending, and (to a lesser extent) government bond yields.
You might think that would point him in the direction of giving QE a rest, either at the end of this month or (more likely) the month after that.
But we also know that he thinks the economy could be much weaker coming out of this recession than the optimists hope. And that the fears of inflation resulting from QE (such as those voiced by Liam Halligan on Today this morning) are greatly overdone.
So, it's a dilemma. For what it's worth, I think they could announce a further £25bn in asset purchases today, but they won't decide what happens after that until at least their August meeting, when they will also have new inflation report forecasts to consider.
We'll find out soon enough.
Update, 12:30: The statement stands for itself: the MPC has indeed deferred a major decision on the future of QE until the August meeting, when they will have the new economic forecasts in the Inflation report in front of them.
Many had expected them to authorise a further £25bn in purchases, to lessen market uncertainty in early August when the existing £125bn will have been spent. They could then have discussed at the August meeting whether to ask the chancellor to underwrite purchases of more than £150bn, or to put the policy on hold.
It is interesting that they did not feel able to pre-announce any additional purchases under QE at this time, despite the risk of creating market uncertainty between now and August.
Clearly, they do not consider the continuation of the policy to be a done deal. It may not be the most likely outcome, but on the basis of this decision there is a real possibility that QE will be put on hold after the end of this month.