Obviously the Fed heard about all the spending the dryer-sheet-recycling crowd is now talking about, and figured it must be time.
50 billion a month! This is like QE in reverse. I don't think they will actually do it. It is a massive tightening.
Any thoughts?
It's $30B a month for Treasuries (starting at $6B), and $20B a month for mortgage and agency bonds (starting at $4B), so it totals to $50B a month after 12 months.The news I saw stated they would begin at $6B/mo, increasing by $6B every three months, with a cap of $30B/ mo.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-fed-idUSKBN1952NA
The initial cap for the reduction of the Fed's Treasuries holdings would be set at $6 billion per month, increasing by $6 billion increments every three months over a 12-month period until it reached $30 billion per month.
For agency debt and mortgage-backed securities, the cap will be $4 billion per month initially, rising by $4 billion at quarterly intervals over a year until it reached $20 billion per month.
The balance sheet would shrink if they just don't replace the bonds that mature.
They want to knock $2 - $2.5T off the balance sheet. At $50B/mo that's still 3.5-4 years to get it done.
And when they get thru with that they will still have a balance that is larger than anything we've ever seen before the crisis.
If you get someone hooked an amphetamines and crack it takes a while to bring them down...and they will undoubtedly relapse. This may take a generation to fully right the ship.
I think it's currently around $4.4T and they aim to take it down to $2-2.5TThis is what I was thinking... still slow IMO...
But, then posts say they are going to start slow and take a year to get to the cap... so now we are talking 5 years....
Or, if you think about it a total of 15 (that is FIFTEEN) YEARS from when the financial crisis first started...
And also as mentioned, they STILL will be way more in assets then previous history... from what I can see on a quick search they had $870 billion before the crisis...
Currently at $4.7 trillion... get rid of $3 trillion you still have $1.7 trillion or almost twice as bid as before the crisis....
Fed's new normal balance sheet could be hugeBut because the economy has grown and the financial world has changed so much since then, officials say there is no going back to the old level. More likely, these officials say, the Fed will aim for a balance sheet size of $2.5 trillion, or a reduction over several years of about $2 trillion.
...
The biggest reason why there's no going back to the old balance sheet is currency. For a variety of reasons, the amount of currency in circulation has grown 7 percent a year on average over the past five years, or 3 percentage points faster than in the five years before the crisis. People are simply expressing a desire to hold more cash — ironic in a financial world that is growing more digital — and the central bank's job is to simply meet that desire for cash passively.
About $1.5 trillion of cash is currently in circulation and, if current growth rates continue, that level will be north of $2 trillion in the next five years, providing a floor for just how small the balance sheet can get.
Other factors will combine to keep it large. Unlike before the crisis, the Treasury now keeps most of its money on account at the Fed. At the end of 2007, the Treasury kept just $4.5 billion at the Fed; by the end of 2016, it was $374 billion. Most banking experts think this is a good idea. Commercial banks, which used to service the Treasury's general account, are now subject to capital and liquidity requirements that make holding the Treasury account too costly. The Fed doesn't have to follow those rules.
The same is true for foreign central banks, which hold an additional $250 billion on account at the Fed. Both Treasury and foreign central bank deposits are essentially considered "hot money," meaning it can be quickly withdrawn, threatening liquidity at commercial banks. So experts think it should be on account at the Fed.
Add all three major sources together — currency and Treasury and foreign central bank deposits — and the minimum size of the balance sheet is already easily at $2.5 trillion.
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4081782-fed-balance-sheet-reduction-scaring-anyoneSometime later this year, the Fed will begin limiting the amount of maturing Treasury securities and mortgage-backed securities that it reinvests, initially bringing its balance sheet down by $10 billion each month as its holdings are redeemed. Those amounts will gradually increase each month until after a year balance sheet reduction reaches a pace of $50 billion per month. That compares with a net increase of $100 billion/month on the way up during QE1. Given current Fed security holdings of $4.2 trillion, this would reduce the Fed's security holdings by about 14% per year once it gets into full swing.
I think it's currently around $4.4T and they aim to take it down to $2-2.5T
The Fed's balance sheet would be larger today anyway without QE.
QE was a long process, so it makes sense that the unwind would be long too.
Fed's new normal balance sheet could be huge
Thanks for the link...
Help explain why it is going up so much than before... now going to hold the money of the US gvmt and foreign gvmts totaling about $625 billion... that is not quite half of the increase if they keep the BS at $2.5 trill, but it is a big part...
Have they bought high quality bonds or high yield? Would be interesting to know how their portfolio have fared?
So I wonder what effect this will have on Interest Rates going forward ?
Will they have to increase Rates to attract enough Buyers to fill the void they're leaving behind ??
I don't understand the reasoning that the financial markets are large and would have little effect and yet they want to save it for future QE. Why would that have any effect? Seems to me it QE worked to loosen the markets, and I certainly heart 'Don't fight the FED' enough, than unwinding the balance sheet would tighten it.
Not posted for argument, just don't understand what appears to be two sides of same coin.
Not necessarily. Gold/precious metals are usually harbors if high inflation is anticipated.And by extension, if Interest Rates are moving higher, it would seem to follow that Gold / Precious Metals would move lower. no ?