View PDF

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

3/19/2020

Minutes of the Meeting of the Treasury Borrowing Advisory Committee of the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association May …

Minutes of the Meeting of the Treasury Borrowing Advisory
Committee of the Securities Industry and Financial Markets
Association May 2nd
July 17, 2017

The Committee convened in a closed session at the Hay Adams Hotel at 9:00 a.m. All members,
with the exception of Christine Hurtsellers, were present. Counselor to the Secretary Craig
Phillips, Fiscal Assistant Secretary David Lebryk, Acting Assistant Secretary for Financial Markets
Monique Rollins, Director of the O ice of Debt Management Fred Pietrangeli and Deputy
Director of the O ice of Debt Management John Dolan welcomed the Committee. Other
members of Treasury sta present were Dave Chung, Ken Phelan, Jared Roscoe, Tom
Katzenbach, Chris Cameron, Mike Puglia and Kanna Nakamura. Federal Reserve Bank of New
York sta members Nathaniel Wuer el, Frank Keane, Ellen Correia-Golay, and Nick Steele were
also present.
Director Pietrangeli began with a discussion on receipts and outlays. Pietrangeli noted
fiscal year-to-date through March, corporate receipts are lower than the same period of the
previous year, due largely to a statutory change in the due date for certain corporate taxes, from
mid-March to mid-April. Pietrangeli next noted that in FY 2017 Q2, outlays were higher due to
increased Medicare and Medicaid payments, increased inflation adjustments on TIPS, and an
increase in Social Security program enrollment. The decline in SLGS issuance reflected the debt
limit related closing of SLGS window. In FY 2017 Q3 bill issuance is expected to decline,
reflective of April tax receipts and operating using extraordinary measures to address the debt
limit.
Pietrangeli continued by noting that the net marketable borrowing needs based on dealer
estimates are higher than recent CBO estimates, with wide ranges, due to the remaining
uncertainty regarding the timing and pace of fiscal policy ahead of the administration’s full
budget expected by market participants sometime in May. Uncertainty in the estimates is also
driven by the range of expectations around the pace and timing of the “normalization” of the
Fed SOMA portfolio. If the Fed begins redeeming its Treasury portfolio, this will increase the net

https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-release/sm0071

1/6

3/19/2020

Minutes of the Meeting of the Treasury Borrowing Advisory Committee of the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association May …

marketable borrowing required, which could further be increased by an upside surprise in fiscal
spending.
Finally, Pietrangeli provided an overview of Treasury’s cash management framework, which was
first implemented in May 2015. He noted that, since the announcement, Treasury could have
withstood a loss of market access for an average of 7 days and would have been protected
against losing market access for 5 days approximately 79 percent of the time. The debt limit
impasse of 2015 was noted as the predominant reason for Treasury missing its 5-day liquidity
target 21 percent of the time. The Committee noted that the cash management framework
remained prudent, noting that a larger liquidity bu er would likely serve Treasury well. Several
members noted that periodic debt ceiling constraints, which forced Treasury to reduce the cash
balance, were counterproductive.
Next, the Committee turned to a presentation on potential issuance strategies in the event that
the Federal Reserve normalizes the SOMA portfolio and begins to redeem its Treasury holdings.
The Committee commented on the potential timing and pace of the normalization process as
well as any pricing impacts on fixed income markets. The Committee believes that the financing
gap will likely need to be addressed by additional issuance that could begin in short-maturity
coupons and bills. However, over a longer-period, it would likely be preferable to spread the
increase in issuance across the curve in order to better stay below the estimated maximum
issuance sizes, according to the semi-annual survey of primary dealers.
In terms of market impact, studies of the impact of large scale asset purchases were viewed as
setting an upper bound for yield increases. The market expected resumption of secondary
market purchases once the desired balance sheet is achieved was also viewed as potentially
mitigating the market impact. Therefore, any slowdown in the pace of Treasury redemptions
could ease the market impact, as it would limit the speed at which the funding would need to be
replaced by marketable borrowing.
Lastly, the Committee commented on the demand for ultra-long debt, noting that the regular
and predictable issuance policy should remain the central consideration to minimize Treasury’s
funding cost over time. While an ultra-long is most likely to be demanded by those with longerdated liabilities, the Committee does not see evidence of strong or sustainable demand for
maturities beyond 30-years. The Committee recommended that further work be done to study
these demand dynamics to get a better sense of where an ultra-long bond might price, which
could be above or below the longest maturity debt issuance based on the pricing of domestic
ultra-long derivatives, ultra-long bonds abroad, and theoretical models.
https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-release/sm0071

2/6

3/19/2020

Minutes of the Meeting of the Treasury Borrowing Advisory Committee of the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association May …

The Committee suggested that other ways that Treasury might tap potential demand from longduration investors. To that end, the Committee recommended that Treasury consider issuing a
zero coupon 50-year bond, and coupon maturities between 10- and 30-years, preferably the
reintroduction of the 20-year. Finally, the Committee recommended against issuing a 100-year
bond due to limited pension or insurance cash flows beyond 50-years and the preferable
attributes of stripped 30-year bonds to meet a similar duration as a 100-year coupon bond.
The Committee adjourned at 12:30 p.m. for lunch.
The Committee reconvened at the Department of the Treasury at 5:00 p.m. All Committee
members, with the exception of Christine Hurtsellers, were present. The Chair presented the
Committee report to Secretary Mnuchin.
A brief discussion followed the Chair’s presentation, but did not raise significant questions
regarding the report’s content.
The Committee then reviewed the financing for the remainder of the April through June quarter
and the July through September quarter (see attached).
The meeting adjourned at 6:00 p.m.

_____________________________

Fred Pietrangeli
Director of the O ice of Debt Management
United States Department of the Treasury
May 2, 2017

https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-release/sm0071

3/6

3/19/2020

Minutes of the Meeting of the Treasury Borrowing Advisory Committee of the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association May …

Certified by:

_________________________________

Jason Cummins, Chairman
Treasury Borrowing Advisory Committee
Of The Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association
May 2, 2017

_________________________________

Stuart Spodek, Vice Chairman
Treasury Borrowing Advisory Committee
Of The Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association
May 2, 2017

https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-release/sm0071

4/6

3/19/2020

Minutes of the Meeting of the Treasury Borrowing Advisory Committee of the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association May …

Treasury Borrowing Advisory Committee Quarterly
Meeting
Committee Charge – May 2, 2017
Fiscal Outlook
Taking into consideration Treasury’s short, intermediate, and long-term financing requirements,
as well as uncertainties about the economy and revenue outlook for the next few quarters, what
changes to Treasury’s coupon auctions do you recommend at this time, if any?
Normalization of the Federal Reserve SOMA Portfolio
Consistent with the discussion at February 2017 TBAC meeting, in the event that the Federal
Reserve normalizes the SOMA portfolio and begins to redeem its Treasury holdings, Treasury
would like the Committee’s views on funding these redemptions. Please comment on the
potential timing and pace of the normalization process as well as any pricing impacts on fixed
income markets.
Estimated Demand for Potential Ultra-Long Treasury Issuance
Treasury would like the Committee to comment on the demand for ultra-long debt (e.g. 50-year
and/or 100-year maturities)? What factors would Treasury need to consider when structuring
ultra-long issuance (e.g. settlement date, issuance frequency, issuance sizes), who would be the
end user of such issuance, and what is the anticipated level of demand from this constituency
both at present and over the coming years? If Treasury were to issue an ultra-long security to
meet this projected market demand, at what price relative to its current 30-year bond o ering
could Treasury reasonably expect the ultra-long to price?
Financing this Quarter
We would like the Committee’s advice on the following:
The composition of Treasury notes and bonds to refund approximately $49.7 billion of
privately-held notes maturing on May 15, 2017.
The composition of Treasury marketable financing for the remainder of the April-June 2017
quarter, including cash management bills.
https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-release/sm0071

5/6

3/19/2020

Minutes of the Meeting of the Treasury Borrowing Advisory Committee of the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association May …

The composition of Treasury marketable financing for the July-September 2017 quarter,
including cash management bills.
current_TBACRecommendedFinancingTableQ32017.pdf
current_TBACRecommendedFinancingTableQ22017.pdf

https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-release/sm0071

6/6


Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, One Federal Reserve Bank Plaza, St. Louis, MO 63102