Group 1 - The U.S. government shutdown has led to the inability to release key economic data for October, marking a significant disruption in economic reporting [1][3] - The unemployment rate data for October will not be published for the first time since 1942, ending a 77-year streak of continuous reporting [3] - The White House has conflicting statements regarding the release of employment data, with some officials suggesting a complete halt while others indicate partial data may still be available [3] Group 2 - The absence of unemployment and CPI data creates uncertainty for manufacturing and retail sectors, affecting labor cost predictions and pricing strategies [4] - The bond market relies heavily on inflation data for pricing, and the lack of this information may lead to increased market volatility and resource misallocation [4] - Multinational companies are delaying investment plans in the U.S. due to concerns over unclear economic fundamentals [4]

Group 1 - The U.S. Senate is advancing a temporary funding bill, indicating a potential end to the prolonged government shutdown, which has lasted for 35 days and caused an estimated loss of $7 billion [3][6] - The temporary funding bill aims to provide funding until January 31, 2024, and includes key projects like food stamps and veterans' affairs [3][6] - The market is reacting positively to the potential passage of the funding bill, which is expected to stabilize basic services and provide a more predictable environment for businesses and consumers [3][6] Group 2 - The Federal Reserve is experiencing internal divisions regarding the potential for interest rate cuts in December, with some members advocating for continued cuts due to low inflation and stable employment, while others express caution [6][8] - Concerns are raised about the U.S. economy potentially facing a stagflation scenario reminiscent of the 1970s, with rising inflation expectations and slowing growth [6][8] - Recent economic data, such as the October ISM manufacturing PMI at 48.7 and a modest increase of only 42,000 jobs in the private sector, indicate a weakening economic landscape [6][8] Group 3 - Gold prices have surged, with spot gold exceeding $4,130 per ounce, reflecting a flight to safety and concerns over long-term monetary credibility [8][11] - Central banks globally, including China's, have been increasing their gold reserves, with China's reserves reaching 74.09 million ounces, marking a continuous increase for 12 months [8][11] - The market is advised to manage gold investments carefully, as while the long-term outlook is bullish, volatility may increase [11][15] Group 4 - The relationship between high interest rates, inflation expectations, and fiscal policy is critical for assessing the attractiveness of U.S. dollar assets [15][16] - The upcoming Senate vote, data releases, and the Federal Reserve's December meeting are pivotal events that will clarify the market's direction regarding gold, the strength of the yuan, and the pricing of dollar assets [16]

Report Industry Investment Rating No relevant content provided. Core Views of the Report - The political power within the Federal Reserve Board is in a fragile balance. Trump's personnel arrangements have tilted the policy scale towards the dovish side, threatening the Fed's independence. If Trump gains a majority on the board, the implementation of monetary policy independence will face greater resistance [6][28][43]. - The Fed may be facing the trend of "fiscal dominance" again. High - level government debt, expanding fiscal deficits, and political pressure are forcing monetary policy to compromise with fiscal needs rather than firmly control inflation. However, the Fed needs to maintain a certain degree of independence on the surface to avoid inflation expectations getting out of control and U.S. debt risks spiraling [6][67][68]. - There is an obvious maturity mismatch problem in the Fed's balance sheet, with a high proportion of long - term assets. After the end of the balance - sheet reduction, the Fed may increase short - term Treasury bond holdings to optimize the maturity matching [6][119]. - The ON RRP balance has significantly declined and is approaching exhaustion, and the TGA scale is still below the average in recent years. If the Fed continues to shrink its balance sheet, the ON RRP may not effectively hedge liquidity fluctuations, and bank reserves may face downward pressure. The Fed may restart "reserve - management bond purchases", which is beneficial to short - duration assets [6]. Summary by Directory 1. Fed Decoded: History, Organization, and Decision - Making Framework 1.1 Fed Historical Context - The evolution of the Federal Reserve reflects continuous innovation and change in monetary policy in response to different economic crises. In 2025, it returned to the "Flexible Inflation Target" (FIT) framework, aiming to more strictly anchor the 2% inflation target while retaining flexibility in responding to the employment market [14]. 1.2 Fed Organizational Structure - The Fed consists of the Board of Governors, 12 Federal Reserve Banks and their branches, and the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC). The Board of Governors is the highest decision - making body, and the Federal Reserve Banks play an important role in operations. The FOMC is the core decision - making body for monetary policy [18][19]. - Currently, Trump is trying to influence the Fed's leadership composition through personnel arrangements. Although the Fed is trying to show unity, if Trump gets a majority on the board, his control over monetary policy will be further strengthened [28][29]. 1.3 Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) - The FOMC holds eight regular meetings a year to discuss economic and financial conditions and formulate monetary policies. The post - meeting statement is the core document for understanding monetary policy trends [37]. - The voting records in the statement are important sources of information on the Fed's policy stance. There are different levels of influence within the Fed, with the chair having the strongest voice, the seven governors having permanent voting rights, and other members having different voting rights [39][40]. - The political power within the Fed's board is in a fragile balance. Trump's actions have tilted the policy towards the dovish side, and if he gets a stable majority, the implementation of monetary policy independence will face greater resistance [41][43]. 2. What Does the Return Mean? - The Return of "Fiscal Dominance" Pressure to FIT 2.1 The Origin of the "Dual Mandate" - After World War II, the Fed's monetary policy was restricted by the Treasury. In 1951, the "Treasury - Fed Agreement" marked the beginning of the Fed's independent formulation of monetary policy. In 1977, the Fed was given the "dual mandate" through legislation [47][52]. 2.2 The Birth of the Flexible Inflation Targeting - Since the 1990s, central banks around the world have increased policy transparency. In 2012, the Fed's "Flexible Inflation Targeting" (FIT) framework was formally established, with a long - term inflation target of 2% [56][57]. 2.3 Addressing the Challenge of Long - Term Low Inflation: The Formation and New Consensus of the FAIT Framework - In 2020, the Fed introduced the FAIT framework to deal with the long - term low - inflation and zero - lower - bound dilemma. Its core idea is to allow inflation to moderately exceed 2% for a period to compensate for previous periods of low inflation [58][59]. 2.4 Framework Adjustment: Return from FAIT to FIT - In 2025, the Fed returned to the FIT framework. The FAIT framework failed to control inflation during the pandemic, and the return to FIT aims to strengthen the Fed's credibility in inflation targeting and ease market inflation expectations [62][66]. - The Fed may be facing the trend of "fiscal dominance" again, but it needs to maintain a certain degree of independence on the surface [67][68]. 3. Is the End of Balance - Sheet Reduction Near as ON RRP Approaches Exhaustion? 3.1 Understanding the Fed's Price - Based Tools - The Fed's price - based tools form an "interest rate corridor" system to keep the market interest rate within the target range. The main tools include the Federal Funds Rate (FFR), Interest Rate on Reserve Balances (IORB), Overnight Reverse Repurchase Agreement (ON RRP), Discount Rate, and Standing Repo Facility (SRF) [81][86][100]. - The IORB and ON RRP form a "double - floor" system to absorb excess liquidity. The ON RRP is the "hard floor" of the interest rate corridor, and the IORB is the "soft ceiling" of the Effective Federal Funds Rate (EFFR) [91][92][99]. 3.2 Understanding the Fed's Balance Sheet - The Fed's balance sheet has expanded significantly due to quantitative easing policies during the global financial crisis and the COVID - 19 pandemic. There is a maturity mismatch problem, with a high proportion of long - term assets [108][119]. - The Fed's liabilities mainly include currency, the Treasury General Account (TGA), reserves, and reverse repurchase agreements. The Fed may adjust its securities holdings by increasing short - term Treasury bonds to optimize the maturity matching [115][119]. 3.3 Will Balance - Sheet Reduction Be Suspended as ON RRP Is Exhausted? - Since June 2022, the Fed has been reducing its balance sheet. The decline in the ON RRP balance is the main manifestation of the liability reduction, and bank reserves have remained relatively stable. Currently, the reserve market is still in an abundant state, and the Fed may restart "reserve - management bond purchases" [120]. 4. What to Expect After Balance - Sheet Reduction? - "Reserve - Management Bond Purchases" May Restart - The Fed may restart "reserve - management bond purchases" by increasing short - term Treasury bond holdings to maintain sufficient reserves, which can also optimize the balance - sheet structure and support the demand for short - term Treasury bonds, benefiting short - duration assets [6].

Group 1 - The Federal Reserve's interest rate cut expectations are causing significant market reactions, with investors anticipating a reduction to 3.75%-4.00% in October and another cut in December, despite conflicting economic data [1][3] - The U.S. economy is showing signs of division, with GDP growth nearing 4% while employment data indicates job losses, particularly in retail and manufacturing sectors [3][5] - The government shutdown has delayed key economic reports, including the non-farm payroll and consumer price index (CPI), creating uncertainty for policymakers ahead of the October 28 meeting [3][5] Group 2 - There are differing opinions among Federal Reserve officials regarding the need for rate cuts, with some expressing concern over job market stability while others focus on inflation risks [5][10] - The impact of tariffs and immigration policies is evident, as companies are struggling with rising costs and labor shortages, leading to potential profit margin compression [7][8] - Economists note that while companies are currently managing costs through efficiency improvements, this may not be sustainable, and price increases could be necessary in the future, potentially exacerbating inflation [8][10]

Core Insights - The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting held on September 16-17 resulted in a 25 basis point cut in the benchmark interest rate to a range of 4% to 4.25% amidst unprecedented circumstances due to a government shutdown affecting key economic data [1][4][6] - The absence of critical economic indicators such as non-farm payrolls and inflation metrics has created a challenging decision-making environment for the Federal Reserve, balancing employment concerns against persistent inflation [5][6][14] Rate Cut Context - The decision to lower interest rates comes in the context of a data blackout caused by the government shutdown, complicating the Fed's ability to assess economic conditions [3][4] - The employment market is showing signs of slowing growth, while inflation remains stubbornly high, creating a difficult balancing act for policymakers [5][6] Internal Divisions - There are significant internal disagreements within the Federal Reserve regarding the approach to interest rate cuts, with some officials advocating for more aggressive measures due to emerging employment concerns [9][12] - Conversely, a faction of officials emphasizes caution, focusing on the risks posed by high inflation and the potential consequences of loosening monetary policy too quickly [10][11][12] Risk Assessment - The Fed is weighing the risks associated with employment and inflation, recognizing that current interest rates may have delayed effects on the labor market [14][15] - Persistent inflation above target levels poses a risk of altering consumer and business expectations, complicating future monetary policy decisions [15] Market Expectations - Market sentiment indicates a high probability (92.5%) of another rate cut in October, reflecting uncertainty surrounding the economic impact of the government shutdown and internal Fed divisions [17][18] - The complexity of the situation is heightened by varying expectations from different market participants regarding future rate cuts, creating a challenging environment for forecasting [18] Conclusion - The Federal Reserve is navigating a complex landscape characterized by data shortages, internal disagreements, and the need to balance employment and inflation risks, making future monetary policy decisions fraught with uncertainty [20]

Core Insights - The Boston Federal Reserve's research report indicates that the sharp rise in U.S. household inflation expectations poses a greater risk to the Federal Reserve's ability to achieve its 2% inflation target compared to previous instances [1] - Unlike during the pandemic, the current rise in inflation expectations is not primarily driven by food and energy prices, significantly increasing the likelihood of sustained inflation expectations above policy targets [1] Group 1 - The report, authored by Boston Fed researchers Philippe Andrade and Michael Wicklein, analyzes data from the University of Michigan's consumer survey [1] - Current inflation expectations are more similar to the situation in the late 1970s, where inflation rates surged but the correlation between expected and actual price changes was weak, leading the Fed to initiate aggressive rate hikes to restore credibility [1] - The report highlights that the inflation expectation surge in the early 1970s and during the pandemic was largely explained by sharp increases in energy and food prices, but the current rise in expectations is not closely tied to price increases [1] Group 2 - Researchers warn that the inability to explain the rise in expectations through short-term price fluctuations suggests a significant increase in the risk of inflation expectations becoming "unanchored," similar to the late 1970s [1] - However, the report emphasizes that, at present, these risks remain within a controllable range [1]

Core Insights - The recent report from the Boston Fed indicates that the sharp rise in inflation expectations poses a greater risk to the Federal Reserve's ability to control prices compared to previous periods [1] - Unlike during the pandemic, the current increase in households' one-year inflation expectations is not primarily driven by food and energy prices, raising the risk of sustained inflation above the Fed's 2% target [1][4] - The researchers draw parallels to the late 1970s when inflation surged, leading the Fed to implement an aggressive rate hike cycle [1][4] Inflation Expectations - Since the beginning of the year, American households have been adjusting to the aggressive trade policies of the Trump administration, leading to rising consumer inflation expectations [4] - The report highlights that the inflation expectations surge in the early 1970s and during the pandemic was largely explained by sharp increases in energy and food prices, but the current rise in expectations is less correlated with price increases [4] - The inability to explain the rise in inflation expectations through price increases suggests a significant risk of "de-anchoring" similar to the late 1970s, although these risks are currently deemed manageable [4] Consumer Surveys - Federal Reserve officials have characterized the high inflation expectations from the University of Michigan survey as "outliers," noting that other inflation expectation indicators remain aligned with the 2% target [4] - In a notable survey by the New York Fed, consumer inflation expectations for the next year rose to 3.4% in September, with three- and five-year expectations exceeding the Fed's 2% target by a full percentage point [4]

Group 1 - Goldman Sachs issues a rare acceleration warning, indicating that the U.S. economy is likely to re-accelerate next year rather than experience a soft landing, which could complicate monetary policy by 2026 [2] - The report highlights three key factors contributing to the upward risk for GDP: resilient labor market, fiscal stimulus, and loose financial conditions, with the GDP growth forecast for Q3 raised to an annualized rate of 2.6% [2] - If these favorable conditions materialize, GDP growth could exceed 3.5% in the first half of next year, significantly above the market consensus of 1.8% [2] Group 2 - Two scenarios are presented for trading strategies: Scenario A involves a dovish new chair with slow action on tightening, suggesting long positions in inflation-linked assets and short positions in the dollar [3] - Scenario B anticipates independent rate hikes starting in Q2 2026, recommending steepening the yield curve and investing in financial stocks while shorting long-duration bonds [3] - The report warns that volatility is likely underestimated, with the current MOVE index at 90, well below the historical average of 120, indicating potential for a sell-off in the bond market if data continues to exceed expectations [3] Group 3 - Investors are advised to prepare for tools that benefit from a steepening yield curve and to closely monitor the political dynamics between the White House and the Federal Reserve, as the 2026 interest rate path may hinge on personnel decisions rather than inflation data [4]

Core Viewpoint - The likelihood of Trump dismissing Powell is considered low due to the high difficulty, low reward, and significant risks involved. Trump is more likely to influence the Federal Reserve by announcing a successor in advance, but the impact on reshaping the Fed may be limited due to internal policy disagreements [1][3]. Group 1 - Trump's criticism of Powell reflects the spread of "fiscal anxiety," exacerbated by the passage of the "Big Beautiful Bill," which indicates a growing reliance on pro-cyclical deficits, leading to high debt issuance costs and declining long-term bond acceptance [1]. - Pressuring the Federal Reserve is viewed as a "damaging tactic" to address fiscal anxiety, which may have immediate effects but significant side effects, increasing the probability of a "triple whammy" scenario in the stock, bond, and currency markets if investors perceive threats to the Fed's independence and transparency [1]. - The recent stablecoin legislation aims to alleviate the Treasury's debt issuance pressure while stripping the Fed of its authority to issue digital currency, thereby creating a "shadow Fed" represented by stablecoin issuers, which expands the White House's control and regulatory scope over the money supply [1]. Group 2 - Historical experience shows that the credibility of the Federal Reserve in maintaining price stability is crucial. The case of Burns during Nixon's presidency illustrates the risks of political pressure leading to overly accommodative monetary policy, which can create long-term inflationary pressures [3]. - The loss of the Fed's independence and a "stop-and-go" approach to monetary policy could increase the risk of unanchored inflation expectations, making it costly to restore credibility once lost [3]. - The mechanisms designed to ensure the Fed's independence present three significant obstacles for Trump in achieving his rate cut goals [2][5].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the pressure exerted by President Trump on the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates, highlighting the implications for the Fed's independence and the capital markets [1][2][3]. Group 1: Trump's Visit and Pressure on the Fed - Trump's visit to the Federal Reserve is the first by a sitting president in nearly 20 years, aimed at pressuring Chairman Powell to lower interest rates [3]. - Trump suggested that reducing rates by three percentage points could save the U.S. over $1 trillion [3]. - Market expectations for Fed rate cuts have increased, with traders now anticipating a reduction of 76 basis points in 2026, up from an earlier expectation of 25 basis points [3]. Group 2: Allegations Against Powell - Congressman Luna has accused Powell of perjury regarding the $25 billion renovation of the Fed's headquarters, claiming he misrepresented the project's luxury features and budget adjustments [6]. - The allegations come amid ongoing pressure from Trump and his allies, aiming to undermine Powell's authority and potentially set the stage for his removal [6][9]. - Powell has denied the allegations and initiated an internal review of the renovation project to restore public trust [6]. Group 3: Market Reactions and Long-term Risks - Short-term market reactions show a rise in stock indices like Nasdaq and S&P 500, indicating a focus on corporate earnings rather than political turmoil [7]. - The bond market reflects increased risk aversion, with a decline in the 10-year Treasury yield by approximately 6 basis points [7]. - Long-term risks include challenges to the Fed's independence, which could lead to inflation expectations becoming unanchored and damage the credibility of the U.S. dollar [7][10]. Group 4: Legal and Internal Factors - Legally, removing the Fed Chairman requires "just cause," and if the perjury allegations are not substantiated, it may be difficult to remove Powell [9]. - Internal opposition exists, with moderate figures like Treasury Secretary Mnuchin opposing the removal, citing the current economic stability [9]. Group 5: Conclusion and Investor Guidance - The situation is characterized as a political struggle using moral issues, with limited short-term market impact but potential long-term systemic risks due to the erosion of the Fed's independence [10]. - Investors are advised to monitor the judicial investigation and Trump's policy direction, prioritizing assets that can withstand volatility, such as gold and short-term Treasuries, while being cautious of long-term credit risks associated with dollar assets [10].