Fed's Barr (voter) says smaller Fed balance sheets would likely increase Fed interventions and that reducing liquidity rules to shrink the Fed balance sheet is not a good idea
Says:
- Lowering liquidity requirement would simply increase stability risks.
- If anything, liquidity requirement should go up, not down.
- Skeptical that liquidity coverage ratio tweak would really affect reserve demand.
- Smaller balance sheet could drive more money to Fed liquidity facilities.
- Moving back to scarce reserves would bring lots of trade offs.
- Fed is working to move balance sheet duration to match broader Treasury market.
- Creating reserves is costless to Fed.
- Effective monetary policy implementation is about rate control.
- Fed monetary policy toolkit has been working well for a long time.
Context
Fed's Barr expressed concerns about reducing liquidity requirements, indicating that it could lead to increased stability risks rather than improvements. He emphasized that a smaller balance sheet might necessitate more Fed interventions, suggesting that maintaining or enhancing liquidity standards could be vital for effective monetary policy in the current environment. This adds a hawkish tone to future monetary policy discussions, potentially impacting interest rates and risk sentiment in the markets.
Trade the TapeGet this analysis live, the moment it breaksNewsquawk's real-time dashboard delivers market-moving headlines and instant context to your desk before the rest of the market reacts.
Open Dashboard#UNITED STATES#USD#JAPAN#UNITED KINGDOM#IMPORTANT#FOREX#FIXED INCOME#ASIAN SESSION#FEDERAL RESERVE#CENTRAL BANK#DXY