*MNUCHIN TO PLACE $455 BLN UNSPENT CARES MONEY IN GENERAL FUND ... *TREASURY NEEDS CONGRESSIONAL APPROVAL TO USE GENERAL-FUND MONEY
Transferring to the general fund before Jan 1, 2026 would be in violation of the CARES Act
4027(a) is very clear that Congress' $500B appropriation to the ESF was to "carry out this subtitle."
4027(c)(2) is the only place in the subtitle that permits a transfer to the general fund, and it specifies that this is only "On January 1, 2026" (not "by" or "no later than")
Section 4027 of the CARES Act is quite clear about the timeline and set of purposes for which the ESF appropriation may be used:
Needless to say, the Fed should play no part in this if the return of funds is for the explicit purpose of violating the CARES Act. This is just partisan hardball; compliance with Mnuchin's intent to violate the CARES Act would only hurt the Fed's future crisis-response capacity
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Now for what I see as the most disappointing aspect to the Fed's framework review...the doubling down on inflation targeting.
I think the Fed rightly sees its primary error as one of insufficient accommodation, but the reasoning and remedy are both flawed medium.com/@skanda_97974/…
The thrust of this framework review has primarily centered around inflation. The Fed believes that inflation outcomes will self-perpetuate through the ever-unfalsifiable belief in the role of inflation expectations. By committing to more inflation, expectations will shift too...
I fear that as the Fed tries to educate the public about what it means for inflation to "average 2%," there is only going to be more attention paid to a fickle noisy messy macro variable that does not serve as a reliable guide to real-time macroeconomic analysis.
We didn't learn a whole lot about the Fed's forward guidance strategy aside from the fact that it will be related to the conclusion of the Fed's framework review. If the Fed needs some suggestions for how to proceed with state-contingent forward guidance medium.com/@skanda_97974/…
For those wondering, yes, these suggestions overlap with @employamerica's proposed #FloorGLI framework in that the goal is to achieve a baseline rate of employment and wage growth: medium.com/@skanda_97974/…
The Evans Rule had a number of flaws from which Sudiksha Joshi and I hope the Fed learns the right lessons...
To start with, the Fed really should look beyond consumer price inflation if they want to escape the asymmetric costs posed by the zero lower bound...
If you've finished your lunch and have an hour to spare before today's FOMC meeting, some suggestions for how the Fed should approach its forward guidance strategy:
I think the starting point for how the Fed should proceed with forward guidance starts with the Evans Rule. My co-author Sudiksha Joshi and I tried to first put some context around what the Evans Rule actually meant for the economy from 2012-14: medium.com/@skanda_97974/…
The Fed is obviously not an all-powerful institution. Fiscal policy is the more direct mechanism for providing affirmative support; the Fed is more constrained. But it doesn't mean the Fed is powerless either. Forward guidance is how the Fed can commit to "doing no harm"
Finished "Trade Wars Are Class Wars" last night. Most of my praise will prove redundant. If you're new to the discipline, this is much better than anything taught in intro, intermediate, or advanced macro.
I hope this can be a generational inflection point in macro thought
Strongest aspects: 1. The history alone is great. They draw from a number of underrated examples/precedents. The authors also show a deep care for placing events in their proper context. If only economic analysis was always rooted in such historical and contextual literacy...
2. The emphasis on accounting and balance of payments data. Prominent academics love to say "that's just accounting," mostly to avoid questioning investment-saving relationships. Damning that prominent credentialed economists are so BoP-illiterate (some get explicit mention)
Does Nikki Haley not know what we're doing for businesses right now? Sounds like she's also against PPP.
If your answer in recessions is "you should have saved more!" you fundamentally misunderstand the nature of recessions. Tbf, this error is also committed by folks on the left
If you want to earn more than you spend, you need someone else in the economy to correspondingly spend more than it earns.
Every dollar of surplus must find its source from a dollar of deficit (and vice versa)
The problem for households and businesses is that as private sector actors, they need to have extra cashflow (income after expenditures) if they have any hope of building something. They don't have stable sources of borrowing in order to run indefinite deficits.
It is mistaken to think that the Fed just exhausted its ammunition just now.
Yakov Feygin (@BuddyYakov) and I are calling for the Fed to commit to buying short-term state govt debt so that states have the financial flexibility to respond to the crisis. medium.com/@skanda_97974/…
The Fed ALREADY has the authority to enact this policy TODAY under Section 14(2)(b) of the Federal Reserve Act.
This would serve as targeted stimulus to precisely the actors that are on the front line of this crisis - state governments.
Unlike other intervening measures that rely on authority under Section 13(3) of the Federal Reserve Act, our policy does not require approval from the Secretary of the Treasury. The Fed can enact this policy unilaterally and instantaneously.