
How the Federal Reserve fuels fiscal profligacy
Business News/ Global / How the Federal Reserve fuels fiscal profligacy Judy Shelton , The Wall Street Journal The central bank is the largest holder of U.S. debt, giving it undue influence on the federal budget. The Fed's portfolio of government-backed financial assets generates huge earnings from interest-rate payments. Gift this article
If Republicans are serious about reducing federal deficit spending, it is important to consider the effect the Federal Reserve has on the nation's budgetary outlook. If the numerical models imposed by the Congressional Budget Office drive fiscal policy, lawmakers also need to understand what they portend for monetary policy.
If Republicans are serious about reducing federal deficit spending, it is important to consider the effect the Federal Reserve has on the nation's budgetary outlook. If the numerical models imposed by the Congressional Budget Office drive fiscal policy, lawmakers also need to understand what they portend for monetary policy.
The Fed once was committed to 'normalizing" its balance sheet—shrinking its footprint in credit markets by reducing the size of its portfolio of Treasury debt and mortgage-backed securities. Chairman Jerome Powell noted in a 2019 speech that large-scale asset purchases by the Fed over the previous 10 years had been viewed from the outset as 'extraordinary measures to be unwound, or 'normalized,' when conditions ultimately warranted."
But according to CBO estimates, the Fed won't be reducing its holdings of Treasury securities over the next decade. Instead, it will increase them significantly. The Fed owns $4.2 trillion in U.S. government debt in the form of Treasury bills, notes and bonds. The CBO projects the Fed's holdings of Treasurys will climb to $9.9 trillion in 2035—more than double today's amount.
For perspective, the central bank owned less than $500 billion in Treasurys before the 2008 global financial crisis. The CBO predicts that the Fed's share as a percentage of federal debt held by the public will rise to 20% in 2035 from 16% in 2025. Through multiple rounds of quantitative easing, including vast new purchases of Treasurys during the 2020 pandemic, the Fed has become the largest single holder of U.S. national debt.
The blowout of the Fed's balance sheet has enlarged its powers and prominence. Aside from the Fed's ability to influence interest rates that directly affect the cost of financing government debt—now 16% of total federal spending—the ramifications of the nation's compromised debt funding raise disturbing questions about the commingling of government functions.
To what extent do the consequences of past actions by the central bank now impinge on the fiscal options facing lawmakers? The Fed's complicity in fueling the inflation that was largely driven by excessive government spending in recent years appears to have rendered monetary officials leery of economic activity—to the point of leaning toward restrictive interest rates at the expense of productive economic growth.
All of which leads to the fundamental challenge of defining the appropriate role of a central bank in a free-market economy. The Fed's portfolio of government-backed financial assets generates huge earnings from interest-rate payments. By law, after covering its own expenses, the Fed must remit these earnings to the Treasury. Therein lies an inherent conflict of interest: Federal Reserve remittances have been a significant source of revenue to the federal budget, providing more than $835 billion from 2013-22.
While Fed officials portray this fiscal bonanza as an incidental consequence of monetary policy, at least one member of Congress has expressed open appreciation. In July 2020, during Mr. Powell's semiannual testimony before the House Financial Services Committee, Rep. Brad Sherman (D., Calif.) applauded the Fed for consistently remitting its 'profit" to the Treasury, adding: 'I think you should focus on it because it is very important."
The Fed's main tool for conducting monetary policy is to pay interest on the cash balances of commercial banks and money-market funds kept on deposit at the Fed. Since September 2022, interest payments from the Fed totaling $607 billion have exceeded its own interest income—which means those earnings from the Fed's portfolio have been going to private banks and mutual funds rather than the Treasury. Legislators might be interested to know that 44% of the money the Fed is currently paying on $3.4 trillion in reserve balances is going to foreign banks.
Congress could rescind the Fed's authority to pay interest on reserve balances, which was granted in October 2008 as part of an emergency package. The Fed would likely return to traditional open market operations as its main tool for conducting monetary policy. Banks would respond by moving their cash into Treasury securities, bringing down interest rates. Even better, banks might increase lending to the private sector.
If the Fed chooses to maintain interest rates aimed at restricting economic activity, it would mean selling a portion of its portfolio securities—thus shrinking its $6.7 trillion balance sheet in accordance with the original plan. But there's a complication. From the CBO's perspective, this would trigger recognition of the Fed's $927 billion in cumulative unrealized losses on its portfolio, wiping out the Fed's earnings from interest payments. No 'profits" from Fed operations, no remittances to the Treasury.
The accounting conundrums of federal agencies are wearying to the soul. But to accept passively the inexorable enlargement of government would be fully demoralizing. We must confront the Fed's effect on the federal budget because robbing Peter to pay Paul leads to further government encroachment. Taxpayers will ultimately pick up the tab.
Ms. Shelton is a senior fellow at Independent Institute and author of 'Good as Gold: How to Unleash the Power of Sound Money." Topics You May Be Interested In Catch all the Business News, Market News, Breaking News Events and Latest News Updates on Live Mint. Download The Mint News App to get Daily Market Updates.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Economic Times
3 hours ago
- Economic Times
US stocks tick higher on rate cut hopes; earnings in spotlight
Wall Street is holding steadier on Tuesday following its see-saw ride that bracketed the weekend. ADVERTISEMENT The S&P 500 was inching up by 0.1% in early trading, coming off its best day since May, which followed its worst day since May. The Dow Jones Industrial Average was up 77 points, or 0.2%, as of 9:35 a.m. Eastern time, and the Nasdaq composite was 0.1% higher. Worries are still high that President Donald Trump's tariffs may be hurting the economy. But increased hopes for cuts to interest rates by the Federal Reserve later this year, along with a stream of stronger-than-expected profit reports from U.S. companies, are helping to support the market. Palantir Technologies helped lead the way after the provider of artificial-intelligence platforms reported a stronger profit for the latest quarter than analysts expected. The AI darling also raised its forecast for revenue over the full year, and its stock climbed 7.5% after it had already doubled for the year so far coming into the day.'We continue to see the astonishing impact of AI leverage,' CEO Alex Karp rose 4.5% after the chemical company likewise topped analysts' expectations for profit and revenue. It also raised its forecast for profit over the full year, even though it's expecting to take a $20 million hit because of tariffs in the second half of 2025. ADVERTISEMENT They helped to offset a 0.7% slip for Yum Brands after the company behind KFC, Taco Bell and Pizza Hut reported results for the latest quarter that came up just short of analysts' & Hers Health tumbled 12.2% even though the telehealth company reported a profit that topped analysts' expectations. Its revenue fell short of forecasts. ADVERTISEMENT The pressure is on companies to report bigger profits after the U.S. stock market surged to record after record from a low point in April. The big rally fueled criticism that the broad market had become too stock prices to look like better bargains, either companies need to produce bigger profits, or interest rates need to fall. The latter may happen in September, when the Federal Reserve has its next meeting. ADVERTISEMENT Expectations have built sharply for a rate cut at that meeting since a report on the U.S. job market Friday came in much weaker than economists expected. Lower interest rates would make stocks look less expensive, while also giving the overall economy a boost, but the potential downside is that they could push inflation yields sank sharply after Friday's release of the jobs report, and they haven't recovered. The yield on the 10-year Treasury was holding at 4.22%, where it was late Monday and down from 4.39% just before the release of the jobs report. ADVERTISEMENT In stock markets abroad, indexes rose across much of Europe and Asia. India's Sensex was an outlier and dipped 0.4% on concerns over trade tensions with the United States as the Trump administration pushes for cutbacks in the country's oil purchases from Russia. (You can now subscribe to our ETMarkets WhatsApp channel)
&w=3840&q=100)

First Post
3 hours ago
- First Post
Jobs data firestorm: Trump blasts ‘rigged' numbers after poor hiring revisions
President Trump fired the BLS commissioner after accusing the agency of rigging job numbers. The firing follows sharp downward revisions to job data for May and June, raising concerns about political interference and economic data reliability read more The monthly jobs report is already highly watched on Wall Street and in Washington, but it has taken on additional importance since President Donald Trump sacked the officer in charge of it on Friday. Trump said that June's job data were 'RIGGED' to make him and other Republicans 'look bad,' but he offered no evidence. Erika McEntarfer, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) commissioner nominated by former President Joe Biden, was fired following Friday's employment report, which revealed that hiring was poor in July and had practically came to a halt in May and June, just after Trump imposed massive tariffs. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Economists and Wall Street investors have traditionally regarded job data as credible, with share prices and bond yields frequently responding dramatically when they are announced. However, Friday's revisions were extraordinarily large, the greatest outside of a recession in five decades. In addition, the surveys utilised to generate the report face issues due to diminishing response rates. Despite this, most economists do not doubt them. 'The bottom line for me is, I wouldn't take the low collection rate as any evidence that the numbers are less reliable,' Omair Sharif, founder and chief economist at Inflation Insights, a consulting firm, said. Heather Boushey, a top economic advisor in the Biden White House, noted that without Trump's firing of McEntarfer, there would be more focus on last week's data, which points to a slowing economy. 'We're having this conversation about made-up issues to distract us from what the data is showing,' Boushey said. 'Revisions of this magnitude in a negative direction may indicate bad things to come for the labour market.' Here are some things to know about the jobs report: Economists and Wall Street trust the data Most economists say that the Bureau of Labor Statistics is a nonpolitical agency staffed by people obsessed with getting the numbers right. The only political appointee is the commissioner, who doesn't see the data until it's finalized, two days before it is issued to the public. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Erica Groshen, the BLS commissioner from 2013 to 2017, said she suggested different language in the report to 'liven it up', but was shot down. She was told that if asked to describe a cup as half-empty or half-full, BLS says 'it is an eight ounce cup with four ounces of liquid.' The revised jobs data that has attracted Trump's ire is actually more in line with other figures than before the revision. For example, payroll processor ADP uses data from its millions of clients to calculate its own jobs report, and it showed a sharp hiring slowdown in May and June that is closer to the revised BLS data. Trump and his White House have a long track record of celebrating the jobs numbers — when they are good. Securing the data Rigging the numbers would be difficult. Hundreds of economists and statisticians are involved in compiling the monthly jobs report, and they follow 'transparent, well-established methodologies,'' Heidi Shierholz, the Labor Department's chief economist in the Obama administration, wrote in a commentary Friday. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'It is very, very difficult to tamper or to interfere with these numbers,'' Elaine Chao, Labor secretary in the George W. Bush administration, told CNBC Monday. In the week before the numbers are released, she said, 'the process is very much locked down'' with about 40 people involved in the final preparations. 'If anything were to be awry, I think one of these 40 people in the final analysis would have spoken up,'' Chao said. The BLS commissioner only sees the numbers after they are final — usually the Tuesday before the report comes out on Friday. The White House Council of Economic Advisors gets a look and a briefing from the commissioner or BLS staff on Thursday, Groshen said. These are the figures Trump is attacking Trump has focused on the revisions to the May and June data, which on Friday were revised lower, with job gains in May reduced to 19,000 from 144,000, and for June to just 14,000 from 147,000. Every month's jobs data is revised in the following two months. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Trump also repeated a largely inaccurate attack from the campaign about an annual revision last August, which reduced total employment in the United States by 818,000, or about 0.5%. The government also revises employment figures every year. Trump charged the annual revision was released before the 2024 presidential election to 'boost' Vice President Kamala Harris's 'chances of Victory,' yet it was two months before the election and widely reported at the time that the revision lowered hiring during the Biden-Harris administration and pointed to a weaker economy. Here's why the government revises the data The monthly revisions occur because many companies that respond to the government's surveys send their data in late, or correct the figures they've already submitted. The proportion of companies sending in their data later has risen in the past decade. Every year, the BLS does an additional revision based on actual job counts that are derived from state unemployment insurance records. Those figures cover 95% of US businesses and aren't derived from a survey but are not available in real time. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Betsey Stevenson, a University of Michigan professor and former chief economist at the Labor Department, stressed that the government also needs to be able to release the data in a timely manner, so that companies have a sense on a monthly basis about how the economy is faring. The revisions help to ensure the timely release while improving accuracy over time, she said, adding that lawmakers need to make investments to modernize data collection. 'The trade offs between cost, speed, and accuracy are decisions made by Congress,' she said. 'The president seems frustrated by his own party's policy choices around national statistics.' Factors that cause revisions Figuring out how many new jobs have been added or lost each month is more complicated than it may sound. For example, if one person takes a second job, should you focus on the number of jobs, which has increased, or the number of employed people, which hasn't? (The government measures both: The unemployment rate is based on how many people either have or don't have jobs, while the number of jobs added or lost is counted separately). STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Each month, the government surveys about 121,000 businesses and government agencies at over 630,000 locations — including multiple locations for the same business — covering about one-third of all workers. Still, the government also has to make estimates: What if a company goes out of business? It likely won't fill out any forms showing the jobs lost. And what about new businesses? They can take a while to get on the government's radar. The BLS seeks to capture these trends by estimating their impact on employment. Those estimates can be wrong, of course, until they are fixed by the annual revisions. The revisions are often larger around turning points in the economy. For example, when the economy is growing, there may be more startups than the government expects, so revisions will be higher. If the economy is slowing or slipping into a recession, the revisions may be larger on the downside. Revisions seem to be getting bigger STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The revisions to May and June's job totals, which reduced hiring by a total of 258,000, were the largest — outside recessions — since 1967, according to economists at Goldman Sachs. Kevin Hassett, Trump's top economic advisor, went on NBC's 'Meet the Press' on Sunday and said, 'What we've seen over the last few years is massive revisions to the jobs numbers.' Hassett blamed a sharp drop in response rates to the government's surveys during and after the pandemic: 'When COVID happened, because response rates went down a lot, then revision rates skyrocketed.' Yet calculations by Ernie Tedeschi, an economic advisor to the Biden administration, show that while revisions spiked after the pandemic, they have since declined and are much smaller than in the 1960s and 1970s. Other concerns about the government's data Many economists and statisticians have sounded the alarm about things like declining response rates for years. A decade ago, about 60% of companies surveyed by BLS responded. Now, only about 40% do. The decline has been an international phenomenon, particularly since COVID. The United Kingdom has even suspended publication of an official unemployment rate because of falling responses. And earlier this year the BLS said that it was cutting back on its collection of inflation data because of the Trump administration's hiring freeze, raising concerns about the robustness of price data just as economists are trying to gauge the impact of tariffs on inflation. US government statistical agencies have seen an inflation-adjusted 16% drop in funding since 2009, according to a July report from the American Statistical Association. 'We are at an inflection point,' the report said. 'To meet current and future challenges requires thoughtful, well-planned investment … In contrast, what we have observed is uncoordinated and unplanned reductions with no visible plan for the future.


Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
POTUS narrows fed chair choice down to four, bessent opts out
US President Donald Trump said Tuesday that he has narrowed his potential choices for heading the Federal Reserve to four candidates, but that Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent (in pic) is no longer in the running. Trump did not specify the full list of people he was considering. However, Bessent has been viewed as a possible pick by the president, as Fed Chair Jerome Powell 's term at the helm of the independent central bank ends May 2026. Productivity Tool Zero to Hero in Microsoft Excel: Complete Excel guide By Metla Sudha Sekhar View Program Finance Introduction to Technical Analysis & Candlestick Theory By Dinesh Nagpal View Program Finance Financial Literacy i e Lets Crack the Billionaire Code By CA Rahul Gupta View Program Digital Marketing Digital Marketing Masterclass by Neil Patel By Neil Patel View Program Finance Technical Analysis Demystified- A Complete Guide to Trading By Kunal Patel View Program Productivity Tool Excel Essentials to Expert: Your Complete Guide By Study at home View Program Artificial Intelligence AI For Business Professionals Batch 2 By Ansh Mehra View Program All eyes are on Trump's decision, with the president repeatedly criticizing the Fed's determination to hold off interest rate cuts as policymakers gauge the economic effects of tariffs. Trump has openly called Powell a "numbskull" and "moron". "I love Scott, but he wants to stay where he is," Trump told a TV channel in an interview, referring to Bessent. "I'll take him off, because I asked him just last night: Is this something you want? 'Nope, I want to stay where I am'," Trump added. "He actually said, 'I want to work with you'." Live Events "I said, 'That's very nice. I appreciate that'," Trump said. For now, the early resignation of Fed governor Adriana Kugler, effective Friday, opens a vacancy for Trump to fill. Kugler's replacement will serve out the remainder of her term ending in January. But Trump also signaled Tuesday that his choice for Fed governor could end up being his pick to replace Powell. Among the contenders to succeed Powell are former Fed governor Kevin Warsh and National Economic Council director Kevin Hassett .