View original document

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

A meeting of the executive committee of the Federal Open Market
Committee was held in

the offices of the Board of Governors of the

Federal Reserve System in Washington on Monday, February 17, 1947,
at 10:40 a.m.
PRESENT:

Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.

Eccles, Chairman
Sproul, Vice Chairman
Draper
Evans
Leach
Mr. Morrill, Secretary
Mr. Carpenter, Assistant Secretary

Mr. Vest, General Counsel
Mr. Thomas,

Economist

Mr. Thurston, Assistant to the Chairman
of the Board of Governors
Mr. Miller, Assistant Vice President of
the Federal Reserve Bank of New York
Mr. Musgrave, Chief, Government Finance
Section, Division of Research and
Statistics, Board of Governors
This meeting was called for the purpose of discussing certain
open market and Treasury financing matters prior to a meeting at the
Treasury this afternoon to be attended by Messrs.

Eccles and Sproul,

Secretary of the Treasury Snyder, Under Secretary of the Treasury
Wiggins, and Fiscal Assistant Secretary Bartelt.
Upon motion duly made and seconded,
and by unanimous vote, the minutes of
the meeting of the executive committee
of the Federal Open Market Committee
held on January 10, 1947, were approved.
It

was agreed that, inasmuch as another meeting of the executive

committee would be held next week,

prior to the meeting of the full

Comittee. action should be taken at that time upon the ratification

-2-

2/17/47

of the transactions in the System account for the entire period from
January 9, 1947.

Upon motion duly made and seconded,
and by unanimous vote, the following let

ter to the Secretary of the Treasury
which was sent by Chairman Eccles on Feb
ruary 7, 1947, with the informal approval
of the members of the executive committee
was approved and its transmission to the
Treasury was ratified unanimously:
"In response to Mr. Bartelt's request, I am trans
mitting to you the current views of the Executive Committee
of the Federal Open Market Committee with respect to the
debt retirement program.
"The Executive Committee repeats its recommendations
of January 10 for retirement in full of the March 15 note
issue of 1.9 billion. The Committee now considers it de
sirable as well to pay in cash at least 1 billion of the
March 1 certificate issue.
"Expenditures during the month of January have been
considerably lower and receipts higher than had been ex
pected. Because of this and the retirement of only 1
billion dollars of February 1 certificates, it is now
estimated that the Treasury balance at the end of Febru
ary will be at 5.3 billion dollars. If cash payments in
March were limited to the March 15 note issue of 1.9 bil
lion, the Treasury balance at the end of March would
still be close to 5 billion, not counting 800 million
dollars of free gold derived from Monetary Fund trans
actions. With total cash payments on March maturities
of 2.9 billion, including 1 billion dollars of March 1
certificates, it is estimated that the Treasury balance
at the end of March will be approximately 3.8 billion,
excluding 800 million dollars of free gold. This will
be fully adequate to meet requirements for the last
quarter of the fiscal year.
"If actual expenditures for the fiscal year as a
whole fall short of the revised budget estimate of 42.9
billion, as appears likely, some further debt retirement
may well be possible in the second quarter.

2/17/47

-3

"Throughout February and March, the Treasury's bal
ance with the Federal Reserve Banks will be swollen by
heavy tax receipts. Accordingly, it will be possible to
pay for the March 1 retirement out of these balances,
thereby providing an offset to the preceding loss of re
serve funds from tax payments.
Also, it will be possible
to finance a substantial part or about 1 billion of the
March 15 retirement out of the Treasury balance with the
Federal Reserve.
The Committee recommends that the re
mainder be financed by call on war loan deposits rather
than by monetization at this time of the 800 million
dollar gold obtained from Monetary Fund transactions.
Even without such monetization, the recommended program
will more than offset losses of reserves due to tax pay
ments during the month of March."
Mr. Musgrave made a brief report with respect to the present
and prospective cash position of the Treasury during the remainder
of the current fiscal year and it

was the consensus that, when the

committee met at the end of February, consideration should be given
to further recommendations to the Treasury with respect to retirement
of Government debt during the balance of the fiscal year.
In accordance with the action taken at the meeting of the
executive committee on January 10, 1947,

there was presented a draft

of letter to Mr. Bartelt, Fiscal Assistant Secretary of the Treasury,
with further regard to the savings bond program of the Treasury.

After commenting on various points to be taken into consideration
and raising the question whether steps should be taken this year to
assure reinvestment of funds invested in Series C bonds maturing
next year, the draft of letter read in part as follows:

2/17/47
"In taking such action, two approaches might be con
sidered. Investors in maturing issues might be granted
the privilege of reinvesting the proceeds in Series E
Savings Bonds without counting such purchases against
the $3,750 purchase price limit. As investment in Series
E Bonds is available to individuals only, this provision
would be limited to personal holdings of maturing C bonds.
However, even with such reinvestment privilege, the owner
of maturing issues would still
suffer some setback at the
time of mturity since newly purchased E Bonds would carry
a lower rate of interest in initial years.
To avoid this,
they might be given an option between reinvestment in E
Bonds and investment in a special new bond which would
extend the approximate yield obtained from the maturing
issue for an additional ten-year period.
Such a special
bond which would be nonmarketable might carry a maturity
of 10 years, be redeemable at par by the investor at any
time after one year of holding and carry an interest
rate of 2-3/4 per cent payable annually.
"The committee is aware that the case for offering
special refunding privileges to holders of maturing C
Bonds is less compelling than will be the case with
future E Bond maturities since holdings of C Bonds are
less widely distributed. This is evidenced by the fact
that C Bonds were issued mostly in large maturities and
purchased predominantly by investors who exhausted the
full permissible annual purchase value of $7,500.
Nevertheless, the committee believes that it will be
advantageous to permit an exchange of maturing C Bonds
into Series E Bonds outside the regular purchase limit
on E Bonds and to consider the desirability of providing
holders of maturing C Bonds with an alternative form of
investment as discussed above. Since some of the matur
ing funds invested in C Bonds would not be reinvested in
Treasury debt if no special reinvestment privilege was
granted, such a policy would contribute to maximizing
Also, such action
debt holdings outside the banks.
would serve to set a pattern for a longer view on the
E Bond program, a pattern which might induce current
purchases of E Bonds and discourage redemption of out
standing issues prior to maturity."
Chairman Eccles said that, since the majority of the committee
appeared to favor such a letter, he would not object to it

but that,

2/17/47

-5

inasmuch as the maturing Series C bonds appeared to be held prin
cipally by large rather than small savers, he did not think the
suggestion that holders of maturing Series C bonds be permitted
to reinvest the proceeds of such bonds in the special 2-3/4 per
cent security was desirable or necessary.
it might not be objectionable if

He felt,

however, that

such reinvestment were limited to

$2,000 or $2,500 annually, as that would permit the smaller saver
to reinvest his holdings without making it

possible for the large

investor to have the same privilege to the full extent of his per
missible annual holdings.

He questioned whether the Treasury

would be willing to accept the suggestion and said that, since the
Treasury had already determined what its

policy would be for this

year with respect to maturing Series C bonds, there was no need
to send the proposed letter at this time, and that it

might be

held for further consideration later in the year when the question
of Treasury policy was taken up again when it

should be discussed

in the light of what the longterm savings rate should be.
The draft of letter
was read and discussed
and there was unanimous agreement that there was
no pressing reason for its being sent at this
time and that the matter should be put on the
agenda for discussion at a meeting of the full
Committee in the fall so that the views of the
Committee could be formulated in ample time for
consideration by the Treasury before a decision
was reached with respect to its policy during
It was also agreed that an interim let
1948.
ter should be sent to Mr. Bartelt stating that

-6-

2/17/47

the committee had in mind his request for reasons
for the position stated in the letter addressed
to him under date of December 27, 1946, but that
inasmuch as the matter was not an urgent one at
this time the committee would take it up again
toward the end of the year when consideration
was to be given to the policy to be followed in
1943 and the views of the committee would be
discussed at a meeting with representatives of
the Treasury in ample time for consideration by

the Treasury before a decision on future policy
was made.
In accordance with the decision at the meeting on January 10,
the following letter, and the memorandum referred to therein, had

been prepared and were sent to the Secretary of the Treasury on
January 22, 1947, with the informal approval of the members of the
committee:

"I am enclosing a memorandum which discusses the
possible issuance by the Treasury of a long term secu
rity. This memorandum represents the tentative results
of the thinking of members of the executive committee
of the Federal Open Market Committee and its staff.
I am sending it to you, at this time, in case you care
to bring up the subject, in general terms, with the
investor groups which I understand you are meeting
during the course of the next two or three weeks.
"If they are not interested in a bond of the type
suggested, it seems to us that the question of a long
term issue might well be placed on the shelf for the
time being.
On the other hand, if they are interested,
I think it would be worthwhile for your people and ours
to work out the specific terms of such an offering. We
could then look at it again, and the Committee would be
prepared to discuss it with you in terms of a definite
recommendation."

Upon motion duly made and sec
onded, and by unanimous vote, the
letter and memorandum were approved
end their transmission to the Treasury
was ratified unanimously.

2/17/47

-7
In connection with the above matter, Chairman Eccles out

lined for the information of the other members of the committee his
discussion on January 24, 1947, with the group of bank representa
tives, which had met with the Secretary of the Treasury the day
before, with respect to Treasury financing policy and particularly
of the issuance by the Treasury of a long-term security.

He said

he was satisfied that the group recommended the issuance of a
marketable security on the general principle that they were
opposed to the type of issue proposed in the committees's memorandum
[sic]
to the Treasury for the reason that it
gation.

was in effect a demand obli

Chairman Eccles also said that he discussed with the group

the renewal of the authority of the Reserve Banks to purchase up to
$5 billion of Government securities directly from the Treasury.
That question, he said, had been raised specifically during the
discussion by the Treasury, the views of the group having been
requested by the Treasury, and there was a sharp division of opinion
among members of the group with the final compromise that they would
offer no objection to the extension of the existing authority for a
period of 3 years.

Chairman Eccles made the further statement that

a bill which would make permanent the existing authority had been
submitted to the Chairmen of the Banking and Currency Committees
and it

was his understanding that it

would be introduced by the

Chairman of the Senate Committee and would be taken up by the
House Committee shortly together with the proposed amendment of

2/17/47

-8

Section 13 of the Federal Reserve Act relating to industrial loans
by the Federal Reserve Banks and proposed legislation giving the
Board authority to regulate consumer credit.
In a further discussion of whether the Treasury should issue
a long-term security Mr. Sproul stated that the Secretary of the
Treasury was meeting today with representatives of the insurance
companies and that unless there was a demonstrable need for long
term Treasury securities for the investment of funds of insurance
companies and other large holders of savings funds that could not
be invested in other desirable ways, the position of the executive
committee should be as stated in its letter of January 22, 1947,
to the Treasury that the matter be placed on the shelf for the
time being.
Chairman Eccles referred to the problem of marketing the
securities of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Develop
ment and stated that, when determining its

policy with respect to

the issuance of a long-term Treasury security, the Treasury would
consider the effect of such an issue on the willingness of insti
tutionrl investors in this country to purchase the securities of
the International Bank.
Mr. Miller stated that if the Treasury should announce that
it had decided not to issue any further long-term securities the
market for Treasury obligations would rise sharply, and it

was

-9

2/17/47

agreed that the Treasury should not make any definite statement of
its plans if

it

should decide not to offer such an issue.

At this point Mr.
Account, who had been in

Rouse, Manager of the System Open Market
attendance at the meeting of insurance

company representatives with the Secretary of the Treasury this
morning,

joined the meeting.
There were then distributed to the members of the committee

copies of the memorandum prepared pursuant to the action taken at
the meeting of the committee on January 10, 1947, with respect to
actions that might be taken with respect to Treasury bills.

The

memorandum was read and discussed and a number of changes were
made therein.
At the conclusion of the discussion,
upon motion duly made and seconded, and
by unanimous vote, the memorandum was
approved in the following form, as a
basis for preliminary discussion with
the Treasury at the meeting this after
noon, preparatory to consideration of
policy with respect to Treasury bills
at the meeting of the full Committee
next week:

"CHANGES IN TREASURY BILL POLICIES
"Treasury and Federal Reserve policies and proce
dures followed during the war with respect to Treasury
bills need to be reviewed now that the period of heavy
war finance has passed, with a possibility of adjusting
them to changed conditions. Two aspects of these pol
icies should be considered:
(A) weekly replacement of Federal Reserve
maturities, and
of the posted buying rate
Elimination
(B)
and repurchase option.

-10-

2/17/47
"(A)

Replacement of Federal Reserve Bill Maturities

"Existing arrangements through which the Reserve System
purchases the new weekly issues of Treasury bills involve
cumbersome procedures and unnecessary expense in order for
the System to comply with the law against direct purchases
from the Treasury. Since most of the bills are held by the
Reserve System, it seems unnecessary to continue the pro
cedure of buying through dealers in order to maintain the

formality of a market operation.
"The weekly refunding operations could be simplified
by permitting holders of maturing bills to exchange them
for the new issue of bills. Under this procedure the
Treasury would provide that bills awarded on tenders could
be paid for either by cash or by surrender of a like face
amount of the maturing issue of bills, with an adjustment
for the discount. Pending any other change in policies,
the rate could continue to be determined as at present.
The Federal Reserve System would offer tenders for the
amount of maturing bills held in the System and option
accounts and would not need to continue the present
arrangement whereby dealers bid for the bills and sell
them to the System.
"This change in refunding procedure could be
introduced immediately and without other changes in
bill policy but in connection with it, a general revi
sion of policy on Treasury bills may also be considered.
"(B) Elimination of Posted Buying Rate and Repurchase

Option
"The posted rate of 3/8 per cent on the buying and

repurchase of Treasury bills by the Federal Reserve Banks
was a wartime measure designed to influence market rates
for Government securities and encourage banks to make
full use of their reserves. Under current conditions
these arrangements no longer serve their original pur
pose. With a pegged certificate rate and only 2 billion
dollars of bill holdings outside the Federal Reserve
Banks, certificates have replaced bills as the principal
market instrument for investment of short-term funds and
for the adjustment of reserve positions of banks.
"In considering the termination of the buying rate
and repurchase option, decisions need to be made with
respect to:

-11-

2/17/47
"(1)
(2)

Timing of the actions
New policy regarding amounts of bills
issued and rates
(3) Added cost to Treasury and effect on
System earnings
"(1) Timing - Because of the emphasis that the market
may place on the elimination of the buying rate, the change
should be made when it is desired to exert some pressure or
restraining influence. Accordingly, it might be postponed
until there is a curtailment in the debt retirement program
to the point of lifting the pressure on member bank reserve
positions, which has prevailed during the period of large
scale debt retirement, r until private credit expansion
appears to be proceeding at too rapid a rate. April might
be a propitious time for such action. The change whenever
made would apply only to bills issued subsequently; exist
ing privileges would continue to apply to issues of bills
outstanding at the time of the change until they mature.
"(2) Bill policy - If the posted buying rate and
repurchase option on Treasury bills are eliminated, there
are various possibilities as to policies that may be fol
lowed in issuing bills and establishing rates.
"(a) One possibility would be to permit the bill
rate to rise toward the certificate rate which the Fed
eral Reserve System would continue to maintain at the
Treasury issuing rate of 7/8 per cent, and bills would
be permitted to find their level in the market.
The
System would continue to refund its holdings of bills
into new bills to the extent that they were not taken
by the market.
In view of the higher rate, the market
probably would take more bills than at present.
"(b) Another possibility would be for the Treasury
to discontinue entirely the issuance of bills and re
place maturing bills with additional issues of certif
icates. With the certificate rate supported at a fixed
level and the bill
rate permitted to rise to approximately
the same level, it may be said that there is little reason
to have outstanding two short-term instruments serving
essentially the same purpose.
A third possibility would be for the System
"(c)
to stabilize the market for bills not at 3/8 but at
approximately a rate which would permit the Treasury
to continue to issue one-year certificates with a 7/8
per cent coupon. The certificate rate would be main
t ined largely and indirectly through the supported
bill rate.

2/17/47

-12-

"Since bills do not carry a fixed-rate coupon, their
rate could be supported without public announcement of a

fixed rate; this would have the advantage of permitting
some flexibility within a narrow range. The System would
engage in open-market operations in bills for the purpose
of stabilizing the bill rate at the desired level and
would refund its weekly maturities through exchanges as
proposed under (A) above. The Treasury would continue
to issue bills weekly in amounts required to supply the
market demand for bills at the rate maintained and also
such amounts as the Reserve System would need to hold.
In view of the higher rate, banks and other holders
might take more bills than at present. The System
might replace some of its holdings with certificates
sold by the market.
"If at any time in the future, conditions should
make it desirable to permit short-term rates to rise,
any change in the rate at which bills are supported by
the System would be made only after consultation with
and concurrency by the Treasury.
"These changes in policies and practices would make
the Treasury bills again a useful market instrument and
would permit greater flexibility in monetary and debt
management policies, without interfering with the policy
of stabilizing interest rates.
"(3) Federal Reserve earnings and interest cost
to the Treasury - Elimination ofthe buying rate and

repurchase option on Treasury bills raises questions of
Treasury financing costs and System earnings. The rise
in the bill rate or the substitution of certificates
for bills would increase Federal Reserve earnings,
which are already very large, and would also increase
the interest cost to the Treasury. Federal Reserve
earnings will continue at a high level indefinitely,
as it is very unlikely that there will be any substan
tial reduction in the total amount of the System's
holdings of Government securities in the foreseeable
future.
"In order for the System to pass on to the
Treasury any earnings above its requirements for
expenses and surplus, two approaches may be consid
ered:
"(a) Use may be made of a heretofore dormant
provision of the Federal Reserve Act. Paragraph 4
of section 16 of that Act authorizes the Board of

-13-

2/17/47

"Governors to charge the Federal Reserve Banks interest
on whatever amount of Federal Reserve notes they issue
in excess of the amount of gold certificates held by
the Federal Reserve Agent as collateral security for
such notes. The rate of interest charged could be
fixed by the Board from time to time so as to absorb
the excess earnings of the Reserve Banks, and the
amounts collected could be turned over to the Treasury.
This would require no legislation and could be made
effective by Board action immediately.
"(b) Another possibility is to impose a tax on
the earnings of the Federal Reserve Banks (similar to
This would require legisla
the old franchise tax).
tion.

"Either provision would make it possible to re
turn to the Treasury not only the additional earnings
obtained by the System from higher rates on Treasury
bills (perhaps 50 million dollars or more a year) but
also some of the earnings of the System on its port
folio at existing rates (from 50 to 75 million dol
lars a year)."
Inasmuch as the Federal Reserve Bank of New York continued
to have ample authority under the direction issued at the meeting
to effect transactions for

of the committee on January 10, 1947,

the System account, and since another meeting of the committee was
to be held on Thursday of next week,

it

was decided to take no

action at this time to renew the authority of the New York Bank.

Thereupon the meeting adjourned.

Secretary
Approved:
Chairman.