Trump's Executive Orders Leave Imprint on the Fed
President Trump has so far restrained himself from trying to meddle with the Federal Reserve on matters related to monetary policy during his second term. But some of the more than 50 executive orders he has signed since returning to the White House are leaving an imprint on the central bank.
The latest evidence is a decision by the Fed to halt hiring for permanent workers. The central bank has removed all job postings listed on its website aside from a single summer internship opportunity.
The Fed acted after Mr. Trump mandated a governmentwide hiring freeze, ordering that no federal position vacant at that time could be filled and no new positions created. The only exemptions were granted for jobs related to military personnel, immigration enforcement, national security and public safety.
As a wholly independent organization that strives to operate apolitically, the Fed is not legally obligated to carry out decrees by the executive branch. But its decision to do so in certain cases reflects a strategy of sorts: Align with the executive branch when the Fed sees it is appropriate and lawful and, above all else, safeguard the independence of the central bank's monetary policy decisions.
'The Fed has historically zealously guarded its independence,' said Jeremy Kress, a former Fed banking regulator who is now co-faculty director of the University of Michigan's Center on Finance, Law & Policy. 'The Fed is trying to demarcate some boundaries of executive influence.'
Jerome H. Powell, the Fed chair, touched on aspects of this approach at a news conference last week when pressed about changes taking place at the central bank since the start of Mr. Trump's second term.
That included whether the Fed remained committed to diversity, equity and inclusion efforts in the wake of Mr. Trump's executive order instructing federal workers to cease such activities.
'As has been our practice over many administrations, we are working to align our policies with the executive orders as appropriate and consistent with applicable law,' Mr. Powell said.
The Fed recently removed a 'Diversity and Inclusion' section from its website. The section highlighted the central bank's efforts to 'promote equal employment opportunity and diversity' and included a pledge to 'work to foster diversity in procurement, with a focus on minority-owned and women-owned businesses.' Regional Federal Reserve banks have followed suit.
The decision to adhere to the executive order on hiring mirrored a similar one made by Janet L. Yellen when she led the Fed during Mr. Trump's first term. As outlined in the Fed's Annual Performance Report for 2017 — Ms. Yellen's final full year as chair — the central bank 'voluntarily complied' with a temporary hiring freeze as well as a memorandum from the Office of Management and Budget for government agencies to enhance 'efficiency and effectiveness.'
Even the Fed's practice of releasing an annual report since the mid-1990s reflects its choice to be in lock step with prevailing law when it sees fit. The Fed has long explained its decision to publish one yearly as embodying the 'spirit' of the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993, which required federal agencies to prepare a strategic plan and a report.
Mr. Trump's actions targeting climate-related initiatives have also had an impact. The Federal Reserve Bank of New York recently dropped out of cosponsoring a conference with New York University's Stern School of Business, according to a document seen by The New York Times.
The event, which is still set to take place in May, plans to focus on the 'impact of climate migration on economic output, household welfare and consumption' and 'the effect of natural disasters and disaster mitigation on output and financial stability,' among other topics.
The San Francisco Fed will now no longer host a virtual seminar on climate economics that it had regularly organized since 2020, a person familiar with the matter said. Upcoming sessions were recently postponed, and videos of earlier sessions have been removed from its website.
One economist who was a regular attendee expressed the sense that, for researchers, highlighting or putting a priority on climate-related work was no long considered a good idea.
The Fed announced just days before Mr. Trump's inauguration that it was withdrawing from an international group of central banks and regulators focusing on climate-related risks in the financial sector, the Network for Greening the Financial System. Mr. Powell told reporters last week that he had decided to bring the matter to the Fed's Board of Governors 'some months ago' but that he was 'aware of how it can look.'
'It was really not driven by politics. It was driven by the disconnect between the work of the N.G.F.S. and our mandate,' he said, referring to the Fed's congressionally designated goals of maintaining a healthy labor market and achieving low, stable inflation.
The pullback extends to professional enrichment, as Peter Tufano, a professor at Harvard Business School who organizes a course for researchers on climate finance, witnessed firsthand.
Last fall, employees at 14 central banks and financial regulators around the world — including seven in the United States — were slated to participate in the free sessions, which are open to academics, practitioners and policymakers. Soon after the inauguration, Dr. Tufano said, the federal employees who had enrolled in the 2025 events contacted him to withdraw, citing directives from the new administration.
Some said they were not even supposed to look at the course materials, which include papers and classes on asset pricing, carbon disclosure and how climate change affects household finances.
'It's the first time in my life I've had a set of students who uniformly wanted to learn something and were told that they weren't allowed to do that,' Dr. Tufano said.
Changes have also occurred on the regulatory side. Michael Barr, the Fed's vice chair for supervision, announced just weeks before Mr. Trump became president again that he would step down from his role to avoid a lengthy legal battle with Mr. Trump that he feared would damage the central bank.
On other regulatory matters, however, the Fed has been more reluctant to comply with directives from the executive branch. Rule changes of that nature also require the seven-person Board of Governors to vote.
Mr. Kress cited the Fed's decision in 2021 to disregard an executive order by President Joseph R. Biden Jr. calling on regulators to strengthen oversight of bank mergers. In explaining the decision at an event in April, Mr. Barr said the central bank already had a 'pretty robust process that follows our existing guidelines in this area.'
These decisions in the aggregate have generated unease but also understanding about how the Fed decides which orders to comply with and which to ignore and about its overarching interest in protecting its independence in setting interest rates.
'They'll give up almost everything to try to maintain independent monetary policy and not have to raise and lower interest rates to suit the president,' said Glenn Rudebusch, a former senior adviser at the San Francisco Fed who spearheaded the climate seminar just over four years ago. 'They're willing to pare away quite a bit of other stuff for that.'
The Fed declined to comment beyond pointing to Mr. Powell's statement at the January news conference. The Federal Reserve Banks of New York and San Francisco declined to comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Oil tanks 6% as Iranian retaliation against US spares energy supply
Oil futures slid 6% on Monday as Iran appeared to spare the energy market while the country launched missiles targeted at a US air base in Qatar in retaliation for US bombings on Iranian nuclear sites. Brent crude (BZ=F), the international benchmark, dropped to $72 per barrel. West Texas Intermediate (CL=F) also fell roughly 6% to trade below $70 per barrel. The declines came after Iranian state media said it launched missile attacks against a US air base in Qatar, matching the number of bombs dropped by the US over the weekend, in a move the Associated Press said signaled "a likely desire to deescalate." Prior to the retaliatory move, Wall Street weighed various scenarios after President Trump announced on Saturday that the US struck three Iranian nuclear facilities, including the threat of Iran closing the Strait of Hormuz, a critical chokepoint for oil flows. On Monday morning, President Trump posted on social media: "To The Department of Energy: DRILL, BABY, DRILL!!! And I mean NOW!!!" "The main reason for this stability is that energy infrastructure has largely been spared from direct attacks, with number of oil tankers transiting through the Strait of Hormuz remaining steady," JPMorgan's Natasha Kaneva and her team wrote on Monday morning. On Sunday, futures spiked after Iran's parliament voted to close the Strait of Hormuz, but the final decision rests with Iran's Supreme National Security Council and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The oil market is now factoring in "a one-in-five chance of a material disruption in Gulf energy production flows, with potential for crude prices to reach the $120-130 range," Kaneva wrote. "Yet, beyond the short-term spike induced by geopolitics, our base case for oil remains anchored by our supply-demand balance, which shows that the world has enough oil," she added. She also noted that "with fewer reliable partners in the Middle East and limited regional appetite for a broader conflict, Iran faces a constrained set of options and a heightened set of risks as it deliberates its course of action." Other possible retaliatory moves from Iran could include supporting Yemen's Houthi rebels in renewed attacks on commercial shipping, or going after energy infrastructure in neighboring countries. If crude climbs into the $120 to $130 range, analysts predict gasoline and diesel prices could rise by as much as $1.25 per gallon. "Consumers would be looking at a national average gasoline price of around $4.50 per gallon — closer to $6.00 if you're in California," Lipow Oil Associates president Andy Lipow said in a Sunday note. The key issue isn't just the potential for supply disruption, but how long it lasts, Rebecca Babin, senior energy trader at CIBC Private Wealth, told Yahoo Finance on Sunday. "If infrastructure is hit but can be quickly restored, crude may struggle to hold gains," she said. "But if Iran's response causes lasting damage or introduces long-term supply risk, we're likely to see a stronger and more sustained move higher." Last week, JPMorgan analysts noted that since 1967 — aside from the Yom Kippur War in 1973 — none of the 11 major military conflicts involving Israel have had a lasting impact on oil prices. In contrast, events directly involving major regional oil producers, such as the first Gulf War in 1990, the Iraq War in 2003 and the imposition of sanctions on Iran in 2018, have all led to meaningful and sustained moves in oil markets. "During these episodes, we estimate that oil traded at a $7–$14 per barrel premium to its fair value for an extended period," JPMorgan's Kaneva wrote. They added that the most significant and lasting price impacts historically come from "regime changes" in oil-producing countries, whether that be through leadership transitions, coups, revolutions, or major political shifts. "While demand conditions and OPEC's spare capacity shape the broader market response, these events typically drive substantial oil price spikes, averaging a 76% increase from onset to peak," Kaneva wrote. The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and its allies (OPEC+) had raised output in the months leading up to Israel's strike on Iran on June 13. Ines Ferre is a Senior Business Reporter for Yahoo Finance. Follow her on X at @ines_ferre. Click here for in-depth analysis of the latest stock market news and events moving stock prices Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Fed officials are starting to break rank and join Trump
Some Federal Reserve officials are joining President Donald Trump in calling for lower interest rates as soon as July. Fed Vice Chair for Supervision Michelle Bowman on Monday downplayed the potential impacts of Trump's tariffs on prices and said the US central bank should swiftly lower rates to preserve the labor market's health. 'It is time to consider adjusting the policy rate,' Bowman said. 'Should inflation pressures remain contained, I would support lowering the policy rate as soon as our next meeting in order to bring it closer to its neutral setting and to sustain a healthy labor market.' Bowman is the second Fed official to join Trump in calling for lower borrowing costs. On Friday, Fed Governor Christopher Waller said tariffs will likely only result in a 'one-off' increase in inflation. Both Bowman and Waller are Trump appointees. For months, Fed officials have said they prefer to wait to see how Trump's major policy shifts affect the US economy first before considering further rate cuts. At its policy meeting earlier this month, the Fed kept its benchmark lending rate unchanged for the fourth consecutive time. But that strategy hasn't sat well with Trump, who has relentlessly lashed out at the central bank and its leader, Fed Chair Jerome Powell, for not lowering rates. Trump has hurled various insults at Powell, describing him as a 'fool' and a 'numbskull.' Now, the Fed's wait-and-see posture is slowly crumbling, even as tensions in the Middle East heat up, which raises the risk of higher global energy prices. And the jury is still out on the ultimate impact of Trump's tariffs. Bowman said it's possible the Israel-Iran conflict — which escalated over the weekend with the US striking at three Iranian nuclear sites — results in higher commodity prices. And there's still the lingering possibility of Trump's trade war also pushing up prices, she said. Still, that may not even result in higher consumer prices because businesses don't have much leverage to hike prices this time around, Bowman said. 'I am certainly attentive to these inflation risks, but I am not yet seeing a major concern, as some retailers seem unwilling to raise prices for essentials due to high price sensitivity among low-income consumers and as supply chains appear to be largely unaffected so far,' Bowman said. Bowman isn't the only Fed official seemingly not worried about the potential economic impact of the Israel-Iran conflict. Powell has said higher energy prices spurred by the conflict will likely be short lived. 'When there's turmoil in the Middle East, you may see a spike in energy prices, but it tends to come down. Those things don't generally tend to have lasting effects on inflation, although of course in the 1970s, they famously did,' Powell said in a news conference following the Fed's June 17-18 policy meeting. 'But, we haven't seen anything like that now. The U.S. economy is far less dependent on foreign oil than it was back in the 1970s,' he added. Economists have said the economic impact of the current conflict largely depends on how out of hand it gets. A forecast from analysts at EY-Parthenon shows that the US economy could contract by a massive 1.9% annualized rate if the Middle East plunges into an all-out regional war. But in a 'contained' scenario, the US economy could contract only slightly. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Gold ETFs Shine in 1H: Will the Bloom Continue in 2H?
Gold has been on a powerful upward trajectory this year, fueled by strong safe-haven demand amid Trump's tariff chaos and escalating geopolitical tensions, weakening U.S. dollar and growing expectations of Federal Reserve rate cuts. The yellow metal has posted monthly gains for five straight months as of May, its longest run since 2017. It hit a new all-time high of $3,500 in April and then retreated from this level. Gold has moved up 27% since the start of the to a report by Axis Securities, gold is on track to reach a milestone with a six-month winning streak not seen in over two decades (read: Gold Up 27% YTD: How Long Will the Rally Last?).Given the surge in gold prices, gold mining ETFs are blooming in the first half, with many analysts expecting further gains in the second half. The mining companies act as leveraged plays on the underlying metal prices and, thus, tend to experience more gains than their bullion cousins in a rising metal Gold Miners ETF SGDM is leading the pack, jumping 65% since the start of the year, followed by gains of 63.7% for Themes Gold Miners ETF AUMI, 61% for VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF GDXJ, 59.7% for Global X Gold Explorers ETF GOEX, and 58.8% for iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF have highlighted several reasons for the solid rally in gold and its outlook: President Donald Trump's set of tariffs has lured investors to shift to defensive investments. Gold is often used to preserve wealth during financial and political uncertainty and usually does well when other asset classes struggle. Additionally, the inflationary pressure caused by new tariffs will benefit the precious metal's status as a hedge against rising prices. A weaker dollar and sustained central bank buying also buoyed gold's rally this year. The central banks are dominant buyers of gold as they seek to diversify their reserves away from the U.S. dollar. According to a recent survey conducted by the World Gold Council, about 95% of central banks believe their gold reserves will increase over the next 12 months. Though the Fed has kept interest rates steady at the latest meeting, an imminent rate cut can be in the cards in the next couple of months. Lower interest rates reduce the opportunity cost of holding non-yielding assets like gold, increasing its attractiveness over fixed-income investments such as now forecast gold to trade between $3,500 and $3,700 as investors seek refuge from escalating geopolitical tensions and rising inflation risks. Goldman Sachs reiterated its bullish long-term view on gold, highlighting strong central bank demand. Goldman forecasts gold to reach $3,700 by the end of 2025 and $4,000 by mid-2026. In a recession scenario, accelerating ETF inflows can lift gold to $3,880 by year-end. Year to date, the two largest gold ETFs — SPDR Gold Shares GLD and iShares Gold Trust IAU — have attracted more than $11 billion in combined inflows, according to SPDR Gold Shares alone has taken in nearly $7 billion, ranking it No. 13 among all ETFs by asset flows (read: Why Gold ETFs Offer the Best Safe Haven Right Now). Let us delve into each ETF below:Sprott Gold Miners ETF (SGDM)Sprott Gold Miners ETF follows the Solactive Gold Miners Custom Factors Index, which aims to track the performance of larger-sized gold companies whose stocks are listed on Canadian and major U.S. exchanges. It holds 37 stocks in its basket. Canada takes the top spot at 75.2%, followed by 17.6% in the United States. Sprott Gold Miners ETF has amassed $418.6 million in its asset base and trades in a lower volume of around 42,000 shares a day. It charges 50 bps in annual fees from investors. Themes Gold Miners ETF (AUMI)Themes Gold Miners ETF seeks to track the Solactive Global Pure Gold Miners Index, which identifies the largest 30 companies by market capitalization, deriving their revenues from gold mining. It holds 28 stocks in its basket, with Canadian firms accounting for 58.6% of the portfolio, followed by Australian firms with a 27.5% share. Themes Gold Miners ETF has accumulated $10.4 million in its asset base. It charges 35 bps in fees per year and trades in a lower average daily volume of 7,000 Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ) VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF offers exposure to small-capitalization companies that are involved primarily in the mining of gold and/or silver and tracks the MVIS Global Junior Gold Miners Index. Holding 92 stocks in its basket, Canadian firms dominate the fund's portfolio with a 47.8% share, whereas Australia (20.4%) and South Africa (6.4%) round out the top three. VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF has an AUM of $5.7 billion and charges 51 bps in annual fees. It trades in a heavy volume of around 5 million shares a day on X Gold Explorers ETF (GOEX) Global X Gold Explorers ETF provides exposure to companies involved in the exploration of gold deposits and tracks the Solactive Global Gold Explorers & Developers Total Return Index. It is home to 51 stocks. Canadian firms dominate the fund's return at 54.1%, followed by Australia (27.6%) and the United States (8.8%). Global X Gold Explorers ETF is unpopular and illiquid, with an AUM of $66.5 million and an average daily volume of 17,000 shares. The expense ratio comes in at 0.65% (read: Should You Buy Gold or Gold Miners Now?).iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF (RING) iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF offers exposure to companies that derive the majority of their revenues from gold mining. It follows the MSCI ACWI Select Gold Miners Investable Market Index and holds 42 securities in its portfolio. Canadian firms take more than half of the portfolio, while the United States takes the next spot at 17.2% share. RING is the cheapest choice in the gold mining space, charging just 39 bps in fees and expenses. iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF has been able to manage assets worth $1.5 billion and trades in a good volume of 275,000 shares per day. Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report SPDR Gold Shares (GLD): ETF Research Reports iShares Gold Trust (IAU): ETF Research Reports VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ): ETF Research Reports iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF (RING): ETF Research Reports Sprott Gold Miners ETF (SGDM): ETF Research Reports Global X Gold Explorers ETF (GOEX): ETF Research Reports Themes Gold Miners ETF (AUMI): ETF Research Reports This article originally published on Zacks Investment Research ( Zacks Investment Research
