Fed IG Report: No administrative misconduct found in review of Fed building project in Washington, though management deficiencies were identified

Inspector general reviews of this kind have historically ended in management critiques rather than prosecutions, and the pattern here is familiar: cost overruns attributed to a mix of inflation, thin subcontractor bidding and design changes, with fault assigned to process rather than individuals. The market relevance has never been the building itself but the pressure campaign around it, since the project's overruns were repeatedly cited in arguments for removing Fed leadership and, by extension, in questions about institutional independence. With the misconduct channel now closed, attention shifts to whether the political criticism of Fed leadership subsides or simply migrates to other grounds, since campaigns of this kind have tended to persist in form even as their pretexts change. The 'management deficiencies' language gives critics a residual talking point but not a legal one. As an input to the policy path it is nil; as an input to the Fed-independence premium that has periodically surfaced in the long end and in the dollar, it removes one live tail risk rather than resolving the broader tension.