Connect with us

Finance

Trump’s next Fed chair pick already comes with a credibility problem

Published

on

The silhouette of a pedestrian is seen walking past the Marriner S. Eccles Federal Reserve building in Washington, D.C

Andrew Harrer | Bloomberg | Getty Images

If leading the Federal Reserve isn’t challenging enough, the next central bank chair faces an additional burden: credibility issues now that President Donald Trump has stepped up efforts to exert a heavy hand on monetary policy.

Whoever the successful candidate is could carry the specter of being there simply to do Trump’s bidding on interest rates, violating the Fed’s traditionally apolitical veneer.

To exert more influence in the near term, Trump reportedly is considering naming a “shadow chair” until the current occupant, Jerome Powell, leaves office next year, in an attempt to pressure the Fed into cutting rates.

The prospect leaves a series of thorny questions.

Beyond the awkward logistics of such an arrangement, there are potentially troublesome implications both institutionally for the Fed and for financial markets that count on it to make data-driven decisions free of outside influence.

“Naturally, this is an idea that leaves many investors feeling uneasy,” Dario Perkins, senior European economist at TS Lombard, said in a note Tuesday titled “Can We Trust the Next Fed Chair?” “Suddenly all the talk is of the Fed ‘losing independence’ and of there being a new era of ‘fiscal dominance’ – not helped by the fact that Trump is explicitly linking his demand for lower rates to reducing debt-servicing costs.”

Indeed, Fed officials generally make decisions in service to their twin goals, or “dual mandate,” namely to promote stable inflation or full employment.

Trump's painting the next Fed chair into a corner, says Harvard's Ken Rogoff

What Trump has been demanding is different — he has been hectoring Powell and his fellow Federal Open Market Committee officials, in increasingly belligerent terms, to cut rates to lower financing costs for the government’s ever-burgeoning debt load. Trump insists the Fed could save taxpayers some $800 billion by aggressively lowering its overnight funds rate, which currently sits at 4.33%.

Powell and his predecessors have repeatedly held the line that the public fiscal situation does not and will not play a role in rate decisions. Veering outside the traditional Fed decision-making parameters would pose further questions for the next chair’s credibility.

Advantages and disadvantages

“The real loser here is not Jay Powell but his successor,” Perkins wrote. “We don’t even know who that person is, and already there are strong doubts about their integrity and what sort of ‘deal’ they have made to secure the position. But it seems pretty clear that Powell’s replacement will come with a ‘tacit understanding’ to cut rates.”

To be sure, central bank experts acknowledge that there is some benefit to Trump wanting to get ahead of the game in naming the next Fed chair.

Powell’s term as chair ends in May 2026, so nominating a replacement perhaps a few months early would give the prospective nominee the chance to get through the Senate confirmation process and bone up on the myriad responsibilities that the position carries.

But Trump’s idea is different.

Such a “shadow chair,” under the market’s understanding and in conjunction with statements that Trump and his lieutenants have made on the matter, would be in place almost explicitly to undermine Powell. Should Powell not budge on pushing for rate cuts, the shadow chair could simply make public statements contrary to that position.

However, finding a candidate to fill that role might not be so easy considering the reputational risks.

“From the perspective of the nominee, there’s nothing good about being nominated far out in advance and being expected to serve as a shadow Fed chair. That can only end poorly,” said Lev Menand, an associate professor of law at Columbia Law School and author of the 2022 book, “The Fed Unbound: Central Banking in a Time of Crisis.”

“It could lead to reputational harm. It could lead to pressure on you to say or do things in the run up to actually taking office that you don’t want to say or do,” he added. “It could lead to your nomination being yanked. It could lead to all sorts of bad things. So there’s nobody who’s seeking the Fed chair job who’s going to want to be put up early, except someone who’s told you won’t otherwise get it.”

Markets might not like it

Fed's Bostic: July meeting too early to assess inflationary impact of tariffs

“A good case could be made for nominating the next Fed chair a few months before the handover in May 2026,” Krishna Guha, head of global policy and central bank strategy at Evercore ISI, said in a recent note. “But nominating the next Fed chair now with the expectation that this person would be an active alternative voice on monetary policy for the best part of year would confuse the market, making it harder for the Fed to shape rate expectations and potentially … in ways that would not help advance rate cuts.”

Trump has a further set of logistics to navigate as he pushes his desire for lower rates.

Rate cuts aren’t certain

There is only one upcoming vacancy on the board of governors, with Adriana Kugler’s term up at the end of January 2026.

Powell’s time as chair runs out in May 2026, but he can stay on as governor until 2028. In the past, most Fed chairs have stepped down after the time at the helm ended; should Powell not go that route, he would then force Trump to name a current sitting governor as his successor, eliminating presumptive candidates such as Bessent, former Governor Kevin Warsh and current National Economic Council leader Kevin Hassett.

Moreover, the chair is just one voter out of 12 on the Federal Open Market Committee. While there currently are disparate views from policymakers on how quickly rates should come down, there are no members who have indicated they support the kind of cuts Trump seeks.

Investors will get a further peek into the Fed’s thinking when minutes of the June FOMC meeting are released Wednesday.

“This is all somewhat unprecedented how things would develop,” Menand said. “But I think that it’s safe to say that depending on how it’s rolled out, it could really ultimately unsettle expectations and change how some of these dynamics unfold in the fall.”

Markets expect the Fed will start cutting again in September, but the path from there is unclear. Should Trump name the shadow chair in the fall, it comes with the risk of both unsettling markets, and of causing problems for whomever he picks.

“Depending on who it is, it could have no effect, really at all, on Powell’s ability to govern for the remainder of his term, or it could actually be quite disruptive,” Menand added. “What would actually happen if the person was named in advance? The devil would be in the details.”

The Fed really can't cut until they see solid evidence of weakening, says MetLife's Drew Matus

Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO

Continue Reading

Finance

Treasury Bond Volatility Forces Bessent to Double Debt Buyback Size as Yields Swing

Published

on

Bessent

A turbulent week in the U.S. Treasury market prompted the Treasury Department to sharply increase the size of its long-term debt buyback program, as bond prices fell even while equity markets pushed toward record highs. The divergence has drawn attention from fixed-income strategists who see it as a signal of underlying investor unease about federal borrowing levels.

What Happened This Week

U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told CNBC on Thursday, August 20, 2026, that the Treasury had doubled the size of its long-term debt buyback operations, moving from roughly $2 billion to at least $4 billion per operation. Bessent indicated the figure could climb further, saying “we’re going to increase the size of the buyback,” and noted the accelerated pace could exceed the announced $4 billion threshold per issue.

Buybacks allow the Treasury to repurchase outstanding government bonds directly from the market, which can help support prices and dampen yield volatility during periods of stress. The expanded program came as stocks staged a late-week recovery: the S&P 500 and Russell 2000 both advanced on Friday, August 21, even as Treasuries logged mild losses, according to Bloomberg market data.

Why Bond and Equity Markets Are Diverging

Capital.com senior market analyst Daniela Hathorn described the week’s dynamic as markets “ending the week on a softer tone after the relative calm of early August was disrupted by renewed pressure in global bond markets, another rise in oil prices, and growing uncertainty around the Federal Reserve’s next move.” She noted that higher long-term borrowing costs are increasingly challenging elevated equity valuations, even as U.S. equities pull back modestly from record highs.

This divergence — equities near record levels while bonds sell off  is unusual and reflects two different sets of investor concerns. Equity investors have remained focused on corporate earnings strength, particularly from large technology companies ahead of Nvidia’s closely watched August 26 earnings report. Bond investors, by contrast, are more directly exposed to concerns about the scale of federal borrowing, highlighted this week by the national debt crossing the $40 trillion threshold for the first time.

The Fed and Treasury “Working in Opposite Directions”

Wilmington Trust senior bond portfolio manager Wil Stith told Yahoo Finance that current conditions reflect “the Fed and the Treasury basically working in sort of opposite directions,” adding that the imbalance will likely require the Federal Reserve  which he described as having “the larger sandbox”  to adjust the federal funds rate rather than relying on Treasury market interventions alone to manage yields.

Notably, the bond market’s reaction to the Treasury’s buyback expansion was relatively muted; strategists described the move as being largely absorbed without a major rally, suggesting the underlying pressure on yields stems from factors, such as inflation persistence and debt sustainability concerns, that a buyback program alone cannot resolve.

What Comes Next

Markets are now looking to two major events in the days ahead: Nvidia’s earnings report on Wednesday, August 26, and the Federal Reserve’s Jackson Hole Economic Symposium, running August 27-29. This will be the first Jackson Hole gathering under new Fed Chair Kevin Warsh, whose public communication style and policy signals remain less established than his predecessors’, according to market commentary from Regards of Wall Street.

For investors, the key metrics to watch are the size and frequency of future Treasury buyback operations, movements in the 10-year Treasury yield, and any policy signals from Warsh’s keynote address. Continued yield volatility alongside record equity valuations would suggest the market imbalance identified this week has not yet been resolved.

 

Continue Reading

Finance

Cross-Border Settlement Innovation and Real-Time Payment Architecture

Published

on

The global banking system is undergoing a comprehensive modernization of cross-border payment infrastructure. Driven by real-time settlement networks, open banking APIs, and interoperable messaging standards, financial institutions and multinational corporations are eliminating multi-day delays and reducing transaction costs associated with legacy international wire transfers.

Transition to Real-Time Gross Settlement Networks
Historically, international business-to-business (B2B) payments relied on complex correspondent banking relationships involving intermediary fees and processing delays. In 2026, the widespread adoption of ISO 20022 messaging protocols alongside interconnected Real-Time Gross Settlement (RTGS) systems allows direct, end-to-end processing of cross-border transfers.

Commercial banks are providing corporate clients with continuous, 24/7 payment clearing capabilities. Real-time transaction confirmation and automated FX rate locking allow international businesses to settle cross-border trade obligations within minutes, significantly reducing counterparty risk.

Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) Interoperability
Wholesale Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) pilot initiatives are reaching operational maturity across several key financial centers. Collaborative multi-CBDC platforms enable participating central banks and commercial institutions to settle foreign exchange and international trade transactions directly on shared distributed ledgers.

These wholesale digital currency networks eliminate traditional clearinghouse delays and minimize foreign exchange slippage. Enterprise treasury departments benefit from enhanced liquidity management, as cross-border cash balances can be deployed and repatriated instantaneously.

Corporate Treasury Transformation
For enterprise treasurers, instant cross-border settlement transforms cash management strategies:
– Working Capital Optimization: Reduced transaction float allows companies to lower precautionary cash reserves and optimize short-term liquidity investments.
– Automated Reconciliation: Enriched data formats embedded in ISO 20022 payment messages streamline automated general ledger posting and invoice matching.
– Reduced Processing Overhead: Account-to-account (A2A) real-time clearing bypasses costly intermediary correspondent banking fees.

Strategic Financial Priorities
1. Upgrade Treasury Systems: Ensure internal core enterprise software supports real-time ISO 20022 payment messaging standards.
2. Leverage Instant Clearing Rails: Utilize direct payment networks to lower cross-border transaction fees and eliminate settlement delays.
3. Evaluate Multi-Currency Liquidity: Modernize liquidity management frameworks to capitalize on 24/7 real-time settlement capabilities.

Continue Reading

Finance

Private Credit Expansion and Regulatory Oversight in 2026 Capital Markets

Published

on

The global private credit market has solidified its role as a fundamental pillar of enterprise finance, expanding rapidly across middle-market lending, asset-backed finance, and infrastructure financing. As non-bank financial institutions capture a larger share of corporate debt origination, global regulatory bodies are increasing oversight to evaluate market transparency and systemic risk interconnections.

Growth Drivers in Direct Lending
Direct lending platforms have continued to attract substantial institutional allocations from pension funds, sovereign wealth entities, and insurance companies seeking attractive risk-adjusted yields. Private debt funds offer corporate borrowers customized financing structures, faster execution timelines, and confidentiality compared to syndicated loan markets.

In 2026, private credit managers are increasingly financing larger corporate transactions, providing multi-billion-dollar credit facilities for buyout deals and corporate restructurings. The flexibility of private debt contracts—featuring unitranche pricing and tailored covenant packages—has made direct lending the preferred capital source for middle-market enterprise sponsors.

Regulatory Scrutiny and Systemic Risk Assessment
The rapid growth of non-bank intermediation has drawn heightened scrutiny from financial regulators in North America and Europe. Because private debt agreements are negotiated privately without public exchange disclosures, central banks are evaluating potential vulnerabilities related to asset valuation consistency and fund liquidity profiles.

Regulatory agencies are introducing guidelines aimed at improving reporting standards for private investment vehicles managing institutional assets. Key focus areas include monitoring leverage ratios within private credit funds and evaluating indirect credit exposures between commercial banking institutions and private debt funds.

Navigating Elevated Refinancing Costs
With benchmark interest rates remaining elevated, private debt borrowers face higher debt service obligations on floating-rate credit facilities. Financial advisory firms report an increase in proactive liability management strategies, including payment-in-kind (PIK) interest options, equity infusions from sponsors, and covenant modifications.

Private credit managers with deep operational capabilities are actively working alongside portfolio companies to optimize working capital and maintain cash flow coverage ratios during periods of higher borrowing costs.

Key Financial Takeaways
1. Mainstream Asset Class: Private credit has expanded beyond niche alternative asset status into a core corporate finance solution.
2. Enhanced Transparency Standards: Regulatory frameworks are evolving toward greater disclosure requirements for private debt managers.
3. Proactive Risk Management: Lenders and sponsors must prioritize debt sustainability and active portfolio monitoring amid high benchmark rates.

Continue Reading

Trending