View original document

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

FRBSF Economic Letter
2021-12 | May 3, 2021 | Research from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco

The Last Resort in a Changing Landscape
Mary C. Daly
As lender of last resort, the Federal Reserve plays a vital role in maintaining a sound and
stable financial system. But the frequency and scale of Fed interventions following
disruptions like the Global Financial Crisis and COVID-19 are concerning. As the country
emerges from the pandemic, it’s time to focus on crafting more resilient policies, particularly
by addressing Treasury market vulnerabilities and providing greater prudential oversight. The
following is adapted from remarks by the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of San
Francisco to the Money Marketeers on April 15.

I grew up in Missouri surrounded by three rivers. Nearly every spring, at least one of them would flood.
Each time this happened, families, businesses, and sometimes whole communities, would be forced to
higher ground until the water receded and returned to its banks.
Public programs were there to assist. Teams helped people evacuate, temporary shelters were stood up
overnight, and financial support was provided for repairs and rebuilding. By many measures, these
responses were a win, repeated successes of a system meant to insure against these types of disasters.
But flooding was not a rare event, it happened almost every year. Against that backdrop, the prevailing
public policy seems incomplete. A patch against a problem that owed in part to known structural factors
such as geography, location, and regular weather patterns.
Which takes me to what I want to discuss today. Changes in our economic and financial landscape have left
us with a financial market infrastructure that is more vulnerable to disruptions. We saw this in the Global
Financial Crisis and in our recent experience with the unprecedented shock of COVID-19. As the lender of
last resort in the United States, the Federal Reserve was there to assist. In both cases, we intervened—
provided liquidity, stabilized markets, and ensured that the financial system could continue to fulfill its role
in the economy.
But the frequency and scale of our interventions are concerning. Without changes to our financial
infrastructure, the Federal Reserve may regularly be called to step in to stabilize markets during turbulent
periods. And not just for 100-year floods like COVID-19, but for more typical disruptions associated with
average shocks to the global and domestic economy.
The Federal Reserve’s role as lender of last resort will always be a critical backstop in the protection against
turmoil and dislocation caused by rare or extreme events. But to fulfill the role sustainably, we need to be

FRBSF Economic Letter 2021-12

May 3, 2021

the last, not the first, line of defense. Regularly relying on “save the day” interventions by the Federal
Reserve can be costly, resulting in public losses and undesirable risk-taking on the part of the private sector.
As policymakers, we must continually evaluate our actions. We must use all of our experiences, even those
from times of crises, to identify vulnerabilities and create a more resilient future. This means working
together, across regulatory agencies, to examine the events of last year and ask what needs to be done to
minimize the chances of future severe disruptions.
So as we begin to emerge from our battles against COVID-19, it is time to focus on crafting more complete
policies that leave us better prepared to weather future storms, big and small. Only then can we foster a
more stable, sound and resilient financial system.

A changing landscape
The financial sector is crucial for the smooth functioning of the economy. It enables the borrowing, lending,
and saving that supports growth. From that vantage point, it is a public resource, a critical infrastructure for
our shared prosperity.
But many shifts, exogenous to the financial system itself, are affecting its functioning. Most notable is the
decline in the neutral rate of interest, or r-star, which has been falling globally for the past three decades
(Holston, Laubach, and Williams 2017, Jordà and Taylor 2019). The decline reflects slow-moving structural
trends, including a step-down in productivity growth and shifts in the demand for savings and investment
associated with population aging (Carvalho, Ferrero, and Nechio 2016, Williams 2017). The decline in r-star
and other prevailing interest rates alone would challenge the profitability of financial firms. But lower
neutral rates of interest also mean that the Federal Reserve and other central banks, constrained by the
effective lower bound on interest rates, need to routinely employ “low-for-long” policies to achieve
mandated employment and price stability goals (Mertens and Williams 2019, Andrade et al. 2021).
The effects of these low-for-long policies have well-documented benefits of boosting economic growth,
which ultimately supports the financial system (Arias et al. 2020, Caldara et al. 2020, Bernanke, Kiley, and
Roberts 2019). But they are not without trade-offs. Over time, low interest rates can put pressure on the
business models of financial institutions, leading them to reach for yield, which can jeopardize the stability
of the financial system (Choi and Kronlund 2018, Di Maggio and Kacperczyk 2017, Financial Stability
Oversight Council 2020).
A related but additional development affecting the financial system is the broad-based increase in debt
levels and leverage ratios. Government policies enacted to offset the Global Financial Crisis in the late
2000s left many advanced nations with relatively high debt-to-GDP ratios (Badia and Dudine 2019). The
response to the COVID-19 pandemic has only intensified this trend. Debt has also surged in the private
sector, especially among nonfinancial corporate firms (Board of Governors 2020). Notably, much of this
increase in debt has been funded outside of the banking sector (Board of Governors 2020 and Financial
Stability Board 2020). While the rise in public and private debt have contributed to economic growth over
the past decade, the increased indebtedness has created vulnerabilities that the financial system has to
intermediate.

2

FRBSF Economic Letter 2021-12

May 3, 2021

Importantly, this increase in borrowing has had a significant impact on the U.S. Treasury market. And this
is the final aspect of the changed landscape that I will focus on. The Treasury market is the largest and most
liquid bond market in the world and is a critical component of the domestic and global financial
infrastructure. Broker-dealers provide the lion’s share of Treasury security intermediation and generally are
well-positioned to meet the demands of investors to buy or sell Treasury securities.
Over the past decade, Treasury securities have also become an increasingly important part of short-term
funding markets, for instance as collateral in repurchase agreements. And a sizable and growing share of
Treasury securities are held by financial entities, such as hedge funds or money market funds, that in times
of stress can find themselves needing to liquidate quickly to meet redemption demand. This can put
pressure on broker-dealers to absorb those sales.
The pressure on the Treasury market is magnified by the fact that Treasury securities remain a safe haven
investment for foreign official and private investors. Normally, this is a benefit to the U.S. economy, but in
periods of global stress, when liquidity is at a premium, it increases demands on Treasury clearing that go
far beyond the needs of domestic investors.
In all of these situations, broker-dealers are the primary intermediary tasked with meeting the demand for
liquidity. This normally works extremely well. But, as we saw last year, these intermediaries face regulatory
and internal risk limits that can challenge their ability to meet surges in demand for liquidity. Given the
growing size of the Treasury market, and the potential inability of broker-dealer balance sheets to keep up,
this intermediation channel could face more capacity pressure in the future. This issue has been raised by
various researchers (including Duffie 2020 and Liang and Parkinson 2020), but this is an open area of
study and one where no consensus has formed.

Lender of last resort: Crisis and response
The onset of COVID-19 and the financial and economic disruptions that it caused, exacerbated many of the
vulnerabilities embedded in the changing financial landscape. The crisis roiled financial markets. Even the
bedrock Treasury market experienced a severe disruption.
In the early days of March 2020, when it became clear that COVID-19 was a pandemic that would disrupt
the entire global economy, investor sentiment shifted quickly. Short-term funding markets became
especially stressed. A “dash for cash” among both domestic and foreign investors resulted in a run from
even relatively safe longer-dated Treasury securities to cash and Treasury bills (Acharya, Engle, and Steffen
2021). The rapid and large-scale repositioning caused trading volumes to surge and price volatility to spike.
Broker-dealers, facing their own internal risk and balance sheet limits, had difficulty meeting the demand
for cash. Bid-ask spreads widened, market depth fell, and the normally fluid Treasury market was strained.
Stress was particularly apparent in longer-dated off-the-run securities.
The Federal Reserve System and the New York Fed’s Open Market Trading Desk reacted immediately,
conducting a record number of open-market operations to restore and promote smooth market functioning
(Logan 2020a). This is exactly what the lender of last resort is tasked with accomplishing.

3

FRBSF Economic Letter 2021-12

May 3, 2021

Stepping back from the crisis and the unique features of the shock, the events of last March raise questions
about the resiliency of intermediation in the Treasury market during periods of market stress. A key lesson
from the Global Financial Crisis was that even rare events deliver important lessons. Following that crisis,
regulatory bodies across the globe made material changes to the financial system that paid dividends during
the COVID-19 crisis. For example, in the United States, the regulatory framework that came out of the
Dodd-Frank Act ensured that systemically important institutions entered the pandemic with sufficient
capital to facilitate the forbearance and lending that has been critical to our economic recovery (see Baily,
Klein, and Schardin 2017, Quarles 2020, and Brainard 2021). The question before us now is, what can we
learn from the events of March 2020, and how can we use those lessons to build a more resilient financial
system moving forward.

Building the resiliency of the financial system
There are many potentially important topics for study, but I will focus on two that are particularly salient to
the idea of building more resiliency in the financial system: short-term funding markets and greater
prudential oversight for the banking system.
Treasury and short-term funding markets
For the Treasury market, a number of possible reforms are currently being discussed (Smith 2021). These
include the Federal Reserve creating a domestic standing repurchase facility to backstop markets in times of
stress and making permanent the temporary FIMA—Foreign and International Monetary Authorities Repo
Facility—to help support smooth market functioning. These actions would provide assurance to markets
that liquidity will be available in times of stress, but they could also leave financial markets more dependent
on their existence. So, further careful study is required.
Outside of the Federal Reserve, expanding trading platform access to more entities and using central
clearing for Treasury cash markets could reduce the burden on broker-dealers and lessen the liquidity
crunch in times of stress. Additionally, reconsidering the inclusion of reserves or even Treasuries in the
regulatory leverage-ratio requirements for broker-dealers, particularly when markets are strained, could
further facilitate capacity for clearing (see, for example, Liang and Parkinson 2020, Duffie 2020, Treasury
Market Practices Group 2019, and U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission 2020). Again, these changes
and expansions have potential benefits and costs so further careful study is warranted.
Looking beyond the direct functioning of the Treasury market, the stability of hedge funds and money
market funds is an important priority (U.S. Department of the Treasury 2021, U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission 2021). These entities have structural funding risk that can easily spike in times of stress,
contributing to the severity of runs. The Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) and the Securities and
Exchange Commission have signaled some movement in shoring up the resiliency of these funds, something
I see as critical to ensuring that we are prepared for the next stressful shock.
Expanding prudential oversight
But fixing the Treasury market and reforming other short-term funding markets is just one piece of
ensuring a healthy financial system going forward. The proximity of the effective lower bound on interest
rates and the necessity to keep policy rates low for longer after a downturn, can, as I mentioned earlier,

4

FRBSF Economic Letter 2021-12

May 3, 2021

result in reach-for-yield behavior among financial firms. So, we also need to find ways to foster and
maintain sustainable increases in leverage.
Regulators already have a variety of regulatory and supervisory tools that provide an effective first line of
defense, including capital requirements, leverage ratios, and stress tests. These tools have proven successful
at keeping the banking sector healthy and well capitalized over the business cycle, a characteristic that has
served us well as we work through the pandemic (Baily et al. 2017, Quarles 2020, Brainard 2021).
But new risks emerge as the economy evolves, and we need to ensure that we are prepared for what is
ahead. The banking sector is just one part of the financial system. Shadow banking was a problem during
the Global Financial Crisis, and with the rapid growth of the fintech sector, there is much to consider
outside our traditional areas. At the Federal Reserve, we continuously monitor the resilience and
vulnerabilities of the financial system as a whole and publish our assessment in our Financial Stability
Report (Board of Governors 2020). And the FSOC is actively working to ensure that all the regulatory
bodies are coordinating, so that the right policy levers can be activated (Financial Stability Oversight
Council 2020). But more work may need to be done to ensure that other parts of the financial infrastructure
remain sound and stable.

Policy for a changing world
Turning back to where I started, I often think about my experience growing up near a flood plain. The
frequent disruptions of the rivers to peoples’ lives and livelihoods. It reminds me of the importance of a last
resort backstop. Protection against losses too big for any one of us to bear. But the experience also taught
me the value of prevention. Of building resiliency and minimizing the chances that a backstop is needed at
all.
What the rivers of Missouri really taught me is that optimal public policies are those that manage and
mitigate risks. Backstops and prevention that result in consistently better outcomes.
This is the balance we will need to strike to ensure that our ever-changing financial system continues to
fulfill its role as critical public infrastructure.
Mary C. Daly is president and chief executive officer of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.

References
Acharya, Viral V., Robert F. Engle III and Sascha Steffen. 2021. “Why Did Bank Stocks Crash during COVID-19?” National
Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 28559 (March). https://www.nber.org/papers/w28559
Andrade, Philippe, Jordi Galí, Hervé Le Bihan, and Julien Matheron. 2021. “Should the ECB Adjust Its Strategy in the Face of a
Lower r*?” Centre de Recerca en Economia Internacional Working Paper, (February 3). https://crei.cat/wpcontent/uploads/2021/02/EAAGLBM_January2021-1.pdf
Arias, Jonas, Martin Bodenstein, Hess Chung, Thorsten Drautzburg, and Andrea Raffo. 2020. “Alternative Strategies: How Do
They Work? How Might They Help?” Federal Reserve Board of Governors, Finance and Economics Discussion Series
2020-068. https://doi.org/10.17016/FEDS.2020.068
Badia, Marialuz Moreno, and Paolo Dudine. 2019. “New Data on World Debt: A Dive into Country Numbers.” IMFBlog,
International Monetary Fund, December 17. https://blogs.imf.org/2019/12/17/new-data-on-world-debt-a-dive-intocountry-numbers/

5

FRBSF Economic Letter 2021-12

May 3, 2021

Baily, Martin Neil, Aaron Klein, and Justin Schardin. 2017. “The Impact of the Dodd-Frank Act on Financial Stability and
Economic Growth.” RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences, 3, (1, January), pp. 20-47.
https://www.rsfjournal.org/content/rsfjss/3/1/20.full.pdf
Bernanke, Ben S., Michael T. Kiley, and John M. Roberts. 2019. “Monetary Policy Strategies for a Low-Rate Environment.”
Federal Reserve Board of Governors, Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2019-009.
https://doi.org/10.17016/FEDS.2019.009
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. 2020. “Financial Stability Report.” November.
https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/2020-november-financial-stability-report-purpose.htm
Brainard, Lael. 2021. “Some Preliminary Financial Stability Lessons from the COVID-19 Shock.” Speech at the 2021 Annual
Washington Conference, Institute of International Bankers (via webcast), March 1.
https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/brainard20210301a.htm
Caldara, Dario, Etienne Gagnon, Enrique Martínez-García, and Christopher J. Neely. 2020. “Monetary Policy and Economic
Performance since the Financial Crisis,” Federal Reserve Board of Governors, Finance and Economics Discussion Series
2020-065. https://doi.org/10.17016/FEDS.2020.065
Carvalho, Carlos, Andrea Ferrero, and Fernanda Nechio. 2016. “Demographics and Real Interest Rates: Inspecting the
Mechanism.” European Economic Review 88, pp. 208–226.
Choi, Jaewon, and Mathias Kronlund. 2018. “Reaching for Yield in Corporate Bond Mutual Funds.” The Review of Financial
Studies 31(5 May), pp. 1,930–1,965.
Di Maggio, Marco, and Marcin Kacperczyk. 2017. “The Unintended Consequences of the Zero Lower Bound Policy.” Journal of
Financial Economics 123(1, January), pp. 59–80.
Duffie, Darrell. 2020. “Still the World’s Safe Haven? Redesigning the U.S. Treasury Market after the COVID-10 Crisis.”
Hutchins Center Working Paper 62, Brookings Institution, June 22. https://www.brookings.edu/research/still-theworlds-safe-haven/
Financial Stability Board. 2020. “Global Monitoring Report on Non-Bank Financial Intermediation.” December 16.
https://www.fsb.org/2020/12/global-monitoring-report-on-non-bank-financial-intermediation-2020/
Financial Stability Oversight Council. 2020. “Annual Report.” https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/financial-marketsfinancial-institutions-and-fiscal-service/fsoc/studies-and-reports/annual-reports
Holston, Kathryn, Thomas Laubach, and John C. Williams. 2017. “Measuring the Natural Rate of Interest: International
Trends and Determinants.” Journal of International Economics 108, supplement 1 (May), pp. S39–S75.
Jordà, Òscar, and Alan M. Taylor. 2019. “Riders on the Storm.” FRB San Francisco Working Paper 2019–20.
https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/working-papers/2019/20/
Liang, Nellie, and Pat Parkinson. 2020. “Enhancing Liquidity of the U.S. Treasury Market Under Stress.” Hutchins Center
Working Paper 72, Brookings Institution, December. https://www.brookings.edu/research/enhancing-liquidity-of-the-us-treasury-market-under-stress/
Logan, Lorie K. 2020a. “The Federal Reserve’s Market Functioning Purchases: From Supporting to Sustaining.” Remarks at
SIFMA Webinar, July 15. https://www.newyorkfed.org/newsevents/speeches/2020/log200715
Logan, Lorie K. 2020b. “Treasury Market Liquidity and Early Lessons from the Pandemic Shock.” Remarks at BrookingsChicago Booth Task Force on Financial Stability Meeting (via videoconference), October 23.
https://www.newyorkfed.org/newsevents/speeches/2020/log201023
Mertens, Thomas M., and John C. Williams. 2019. “Monetary Policy Frameworks and the Effective Lower Bound on Interest
Rates.” American Economic Association Papers and Proceedings 109 (May), pp. 427–432.
Quarles, Randal K. 2020. “What Happened? What Have We Learned from It? Lessons from COVID-19 Stress on the Financial
System.” Speech at the Institute of International Finance, Washington, DC (via webcast), October 15.
https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/quarles20201015a.htm
Smith, Brian. 2021. “Remarks at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s Annual Primary Dealer Meeting.” April 8.
https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy0116

6

FRBSF Economic Letter 2021-12

May 3, 2021

Treasury Market Practices Group. 2019. “Best Practices for Treasury, Agency Debt, and Agency Mortgage-Backed
Securities Markets.” July.
https://www.newyorkfed.org/medialibrary/Microsites/tmpg/files/TMPG_BestPractices_071119.pdf
U.S. Department of the Treasury. 2021. “Readout of Financial Stability Oversight Council Meeting on March 31, 2021.”
Press release, March 31. https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy0093
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. 2020. “SEC Proposes Rules to Extend Regulations ATS and SCI to Treasuries
and Other Government Securities Markets.” Press release, September 28. https://www.sec.gov/news/pressrelease/2020-227
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. 2021. “SEC Requests Comment on Potential Money Market Fund Reform
Options Highlighted in President’s Working Group Report.” Press release, February 4.
https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2021-25
Williams, John C. “Three Questions on R-Star.” FRBSF Economic Letter 2017-05 (February 21).
https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economic-letter/2017/february/three-questions-on-r-starnatural-rate-of-interest/

Opinions expressed in FRBSF Economic Letter do not necessarily reflect the views of the management
of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco or of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System. This publication is edited by Anita Todd and Karen Barnes. Permission to reprint portions of
articles or whole articles must be obtained in writing. Please send editorial comments and requests for
reprint permission to Research.Library.sf@sf.frb.org

Recent issues of FRBSF Economic Letter are available at
https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economic-letter/
2021-11

Wilson

Where Is the U.S. COVID-19 Pandemic Headed?
https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economic-letter/2021/april/whereis-us-covid-19-pandemic-headed/

2021-10

Lofton /
Petrosky-Nadeau /
Seitelman

Parental Participation in a Pandemic Labor Market
https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economicletter/2021/april/parental-participation-in-pandemic-labor-market/

2021-09

Diwan /
Lu /
Spiegel

Capitol Flow Surges and Rising Income Inequality
https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economicletter/2021/march/capital-flow-surges-and-rising-income-inequality/

2021-08

Glick /
Kouchekinia

Disagreement about U.S. and Euro-Area Inflation Forecasts
https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economicletter/2021/march/disagreement-about-us-and-euro-area-inflation-forecasts/

2021-07

Daly

Lessons from History, Policy for Today
https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economicletter/2021/march/lessons-from-history-policy-for-today-speech/

2021-06

Kwan

Resilience of Community Banks in the Time of COVID-19
https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economicletter/2021/march/resilience-of-community-banks-in-time-of-covid-19/

2021-05

Eyméoud/
Contrasting U.S. and European Job Markets during COVID-19
Petrosky-Nadeau/
https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economicSantaeulàlia-Llopis/ letter/2021/february/contrasting-us-and-european-job-markets-during-covid-19/
Wasmer