View original document

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

Statement of
William McChesney Martin, Jr. ,
Chairman, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System,




before the
House Committee on Banking and Currency,
on
H. R. 3818

February 1, 1965

You have asked for comment on H. R. 3818, which would
repeal the requirement of present law that each Federal Reserve Bank
maintain a gold certificate reserve of at least 25 per cent against the
deposits it holds.

The bill would not affect the separate 25 per cent

requirement for Federal Reserve notes.
That conditions now call for some change in these require¬
ments seems clear.

By the end of 1964, the ratio of the Federal Reserve

Banks' gold certificate holdings to their deposits and notes combined
was 27, 5 per cent, down 2 points from a year earlier and only 2-1/2
points above the legal minimum now prescribed in Section 16.

If develop¬

ments well within the range of possibilities should be realized, the legal
minimum could be penetrated soon, possibly within a year.
Nevertheless the dollar is strong, and so is our economy.
We are enjoying vigorous economic growth, and have been reasonably
successful in maintaining a relatively stable average of prices,

American

goods and services are doing well in competition in world markets, as
indicated by the substantial surplus in our trade balance.

Therefore

action on this legislation can be taken now, not to deal with a dollar
crisis but to maintain the dollar's current strength,




-2-

Gold certificate reserves of the Federal Reserve Banks
reached their peak of $23. 4 billion in September 1949 when the total
U, S. gold stock amounted to about 70 per cent of the free world ! s
monetary gold.

Over the period from 1949 through 1964, net sales of

U. S. gold to foreign monetary authorities reduced our gold certificate
reserve by $8. 4 billion, as shown by the table attached to this statement.
In the same period, growth in Federal Reserve deposit liabilities and
notes in circulation absorbed in required reserves $3. 5 billion.

Over

these 15 years, therefore, Federal Reserve Bank holdings of gold
certificates in excess of the minimum required by statute have on
balance declined by $11. 9 billion.
In substantial part United States* sales of gold to foreign
monetary authorities since 1949 have reflected postwar recovery of the
free world from the monetary chaos created by the Second World War,
and the desire of the major foreign industrial countries to re-establish
convertibility of their currencies.

These countries sought to accomplish

this by accumulating monetary reserves partly in the form of gold and
partly in the form of dollar balances.

Between the end of 1949 and the

end of 1964, the dollar component of monetary reserves of foreign
countries rose by $10 billion (from $3 billion to $13 billion) while their
monetary gold stocks rose by $16 billion (from $9 billion to $25 billion).
Foreign private holdings of dollars also increased by $8 billion, from
about $3 billion to nearly $11 billion.




-3-

In the half century since the enactment of the Federal
Reserve Act, the function of gold in our monetary system has under¬
gone fundamental change.

More than three decades ago, coinage of

gold, redemption of bank notes and deposits in gold, and private
acquisition and holding of monetary gold were discontinued in this
country.

Domestically, these actions in effect ended the private use

of gold as a store of value.

Internationally, they enlarged the availa¬

bility of U. S. gold for official settlements with other governments in
response to the needs of our foreign commerce and investment.
Today, throughout the free world, when a citizen of one
country does business with a citizen of another — whether or not either
of them is an American--the chances are that they will settle their
accounts in U. S. dollars.

When foreign bankers, merchants, and

investors acquire in their transactions more dollars than they wish to
hold for working balance or investment purposes, they usually sell them
to their central bank.

The central bank may keep the dollars as part of

its monetary reserves or use them, if it desires, to purchase gold from
the U. S. Treasury.

On the other hand, if a country's international

settlements should use up its dollar balances, its central bank may
acquire dollars by selling gold to the U. S. Treasury.
In short, the readiness of the U. S. Treasury to buy and
sell gold at the fixed price of $35 an ounce in transactions with foreign
monetary authorities has greatly contributed to the willingness of




-4-

foreign monetary authorities and private foreign residents to hold a
growing total of dollar reserves and working balances.

Consequently,

the U. S. gold stock has come to play the dual role of supporting the
international convertibility of the dollar and of facilitating the interconvertibility of other currencies among themselves and into the dollar.
This dual role of the U. S. monetary gold has helped the
dollar to attain a unique position in international commerce and finance.
And the universal acceptability of dollars has greatly facilitated the
record expansion of international trade over the past 15 years, with
world trade rising from less than $60 billion to nearly $160 billion.
For this reason, the availability of U. S. monetary gold holdings to
meet international convertibility needs is a matter of vital importance
not only to the United States but to the entire present system of inter¬
national payments on which the free world relies.
These developments underscore the need for speedy
correction of the deficit in our international payments, which for all
too many years has been eroding our gold reserves.

The President, in

his Economic Report, has stressed the seriousness of the problem, and
has unequivocally stated that "we must and will reduce and eliminate"
the deficit.
In consequence of the large and persistent deficit in
the U. S. balance of payments after 1957, many foreign countries
accumulated dollar balances in excess of their needs for working




-5-

balances, reserves, and investments.

Their monetary authorities

used such excess dollar balances to purchase gold from the U. S.
Treasury and the resulting decline in the U. S. gold stock has contri¬
buted to the sharp reduction in the System's reserve ratio.
In order to avoid any deflationary impact from this out¬
flow, the Federal Reserve offset the effects of the decline in its gold
certificate holdings by expanding its holdings of U. S. Government
securities.

In addition, the Federal Reserve further increased its

Government security holdings in order to sustain an expansion of bank
credit consistent with a growing economy and a relatively stable average
of prices.
Over the years ahead, the continued growth of U. S.
economic activity will require continuing monetary expansion consistent
with a stable dollar.

Under prospective conditions, it appears all but

certain that the gold certificate reserve ratio of Federal Reserve Banks,
for domestic monetary reasons alone, will steadily decline, even if
gold sales to foreign monetary authorities are small.

Of course, any

substantial further outflow of gold would accentuate the decline.
Accordingly, the time is ripe for legislative action that
will, as President Johnson said in his Economic Report last week,




-6-

". . . place beyond any doubt the ability of
the Federal Reserve to meet its responsibility
for providing an adequate but not excessive
volume of bank reserves, "
and
". . . place beyond any doubt our ability to
use our gold to make good our pledge to main¬
tain the gold value of the dollar at $35 an ounce
with every resource at our command. "
As you know, the President himself expressly requested
that Congress "eliminate the arbitrary requirement that the Federal
Reserve Banks maintain a gold certificate reserve against their deposit
liabilities, " The specific provisions to accomplish this are encompassed
in H. R. 3818, introduced by your Chairman.
To me, the question before us is a practical one.

H. R,

3818 offers a pragmatic response, proportioned to the present circum¬
stances.

By removing the reserve requirement against deposits, it

would free approximately $4, 8 billion in gold now earmarked for cover
purposes and raise the total free gold certificate holdings to about
$6. 2 billion.
Moreover, by retaining the traditional gold "backing11
for Federal Reserve notes, the proposal would be reassuring to those
who, in their continuing concern for the stability of the dollar, see in
a gold cover requirement an important element of strength.

The value

of any currency is so much a product of confidence that one should not
disregard this advantage of H. R. 3818.




-7-

The removal of the reserve requirement against
deposits would seem to me fully adequate to meet our present and
foreseeable needs and sufficiently ample to remove any doubt any¬
where about our ability to defend the dollar abroad, and to further
advance the progress of our domestic economy.
I might note here that, on an earlier occasion, Congress
reduced the gold reserve requirements by lowering the percentage of
reserves required against Federal Reserve notes as well as deposits in
the Federal Reserve Banks,

Specifically, in 1945, Congress reduced the

gold cover requirements from 40 per cent against notes and 35 per cent
against deposits to the present figure of 25 per cent for both.

That

action was taken after the amount of free gold certificates had dropped
from $12, 4 billion at the beginning of the war to $3. 2 billion by mid-1945.
If an across-the-board reduction of the present 25 per cent requirement
were to be made now--say to 15 per cent — it would release about $5. 5
billion of the earmarked gold, as compared to the $4. 8 billion released
by H. R. 3818.
From a technical viewpoint this approach may be just as
sound as that taken by H. R. 3818, What counts, in my judgment, is
which approach would be more acceptable to the public.

And from that

standpoint , I believe it is preferable to preserve the 25 per cent require¬
ment for Federal Reserve notes and thus to keep intact the symbolic tie
between our circulating currency and gold.




• 8-

The Congress could, on the other hand, take a more allout approach and repeal the gold cover requirements altogether.

This

would release our entire gold certificate holdings of $15 billion bysevering the last statutory link between the volume of our Federal
Reserve notes in circulation and gold.

The theory here is that, since

neither Federal Reserve notes nor deposits in Federal Reserve Banks
can be redeemed in gold, there is no need to have any gold "backing11
against either of them.

Further, it is suggested that outright repeal

of both gold reserve requirements would eliminate the possibility
that Congress might be called upon to take further action later.

Those

who would keep the "discipline11 of gold, however, answer that this very
possibility offers added protection against irresponsible public policies.
While judgments differ as to the value of this kind of
statutory protection, we need not attempt at this time to resolve forever
the problem of whether or not a gold cover requirement serves a useful
end.

We need only to adapt our traditional cover requirements so that

we can better meet present and foreseeable needs.

If we keep the gold

cover requirement for our currency, our free gold certificate holdings
of more than $6 billion will be enough to accommodate normal growth
in circulating Federal Reserve notes for some time to come.
We face the prospect of some additional gold losses this
year.

But if we persevere in our strong efforts to correct our balance

of payments deficit, we can look forward to a cessation of gold outflow




-9-

and, over the longer-run, a gradual growth of our gold stock from world
supplies, at times in consequence of international settlements and at
times by sharing in new production.
In considering these proposals, I think we must be care¬
ful to keep in mind that, regardless of what is done about legal require¬
ments, there is an inescapable practical requirement that we maintain
an adequate gold stock to back up the role of the dollar as a keycurrency in world trade.

Hence the need to conserve our gold stock

will continue to exert a disciplinary influence on monetary and other
policies, and a statutory gold reserve requirement for notes will
serve to emphasize this need.
All of us need to be mindful that sound money is not
established by statute alone.

In the end, our nation cannot have sound

money unless its monetary and fiscal affairs are well managed.

The

fundamental elements in keeping our financial house in order are thus
sound and equitable fiscal and monetary policies.
It may be helpful to your consideration of legislation for
me to say at this point a few words about the present provisions of the
law respecting the suspension of gold reserve requirements.

The

Board's authority in this regard is contained in Section ll(c) of the
Federal Reserve Act.

It provides that we can suspend the gold reserve

requirements for a period of 30 days, and renew such suspensions for
15-day periods thereafter.




-10-

Upon action to suspend the requirements, the Board
would have to establish a tax on the Reserve Banks graduated upward
with the size of their reserve deficiencies.

The tax could be very

small so long as the reserve deficiencies were confined to the reserves
against deposits and the first five percentage points of any deficiencies
against Federal Reserve notes.

But if the reserve deficiencies should

penetrate below 20 per cent of the Federal Reserve notes outstanding,
the tax would undergo a fairly steep graduation in accordance with
statutory specifications.
The Federal Reserve Act further specifies that, should
the reserve deficiencies fall below the 25 per cent requirement against
notes, the amount of the tax must be added to Reserve Bank discount
rates.

But if the deficiencies were confined to reserves

against

Reserve Bank deposits, the required penalty tax could be nominal and
no addition to Reserve Bank discount rates would be necessary.
From a technical point of view, it might be possible under
existing law for the Board to suspend gold reserve requirements
indefinitely, since there is no limit on the number of times the Board
might renew suspensions for periods of 15 days each.

Yet it seems clear

that the purpose of the provisions for suspension was to facilitate
adjustments by those Reserve Banks whose reserves fall temporarily
below required levels, and not to provide a solution to a national problem
of more than temporary import.




-11-

In a world in which the role of the dollar as an inter¬
national means of payment and a reserve asset has been under criticism,
it is important for the Congress to assure the world of the availability
of U. S. monetary gold for legitimate monetary uses in international
commerce, to reaffirm the relationship between the dollar and gold,
and to reassert the intention of the U. S. to maintain an adequate gold
reserve for the dollar.

Enactment of H. R. 3818 would accomplish this

triple purpose.
In conclusion, I would re-emphasize that we do not need
now to resolve this question of gold cover for all time, for monetary
arrangements and institutions are constantly evolving in accordance
with domestic and international needs, and these changes call for
adaptation from time to time in monetary legislation.

The all-important

need for legislation at this juncture is to assure the world that U. S.
monetary gold is always available to maintain the convertibility of the
dollar and that the United States will honor its debts and liabilities in
the form of foreign dollar holdings—as I have said many times before-down through the last bar of gold, if that be necessary.




CONSOLIDATED RESERVE POSITION OP THE
FEDERAL RESERVE BANKS
(Dollars in millions)
September
21.

December
31.
1963

December
31,
1964

Reserve Bank deposits

$17,523

$18,392

$19,454

Federal Reserve notes

23,248

32.878

35.342

Liabilities requiring reserves

$40,771

$51,270

$54,796

Required reserves against deposits

$ 4,381

$ 4,598

$ 4,864 2/

5,812

8.220

8.835

$10,193

$12,818

$13,699

13,247

2,419

$23,440

$15,237

$15,075

29.77.

27.5%

Item

Required reserves against notes
Total required reserves
Free gold certificate holdings
Gold certificate reserves
Ratio of gold certificate
reserves to deposit and
note liabilities

57.5% 1/

1.376 2/

1/ Postwar peak.
2/ Elimination of required reserves against deposits, as recommended
in the President's Economic Report, would raise free gold certificate
holdings to $6,240. "Free gold" includes some additional gold held by
the Treasury (amounting to $240 million on December 31, 1964) that is not
pledged as cover for gold certificates or U. S. notes.