文/ 清华大学国家金融研究院新结构金融学研究中心副主任 沙楠 ，清华大学五 道口金融学院讲席教授、南方科技大学商学院讲席教授 周皓 美联储政策制定过程不能完全脱离美国政治与意识形态的影响，尤其国会 可对其决策展开质询和监督，这些都极其考验美联储决策层，特别是主席 平衡的艺术，即在维护独立性的同时，如何考量金融监管职能扩大对货币 政策的影响，如何在党派分歧加剧背景下避免政治干扰，如何抑制通胀的 同时避免经济衰退等。基于此，本文将以美联储重大变革为脉络，梳理独 立性的演变，并对其前景进行展望。 2025年美国总统特朗普上任以来，政治方面的压力正试图对美联储的决策过程产生影响，诸如其对美联储理事库克提出解职要求，其提名新任理事人选米 兰的快速入职，美联储下任主席遴选程序的高调启动，以及政府内阁成员对联储利率政策的公开且频繁评论，等等，相关事件接连上演，频次密集，这对 美联储的独立性地位带来一定的挑战。而中央银行的独立性一旦受损，美元信用的基础将被削弱，金融市场也必将迎来动荡。可以说，独立性正是美联储 如今具有极高信誉度和广泛影响力的基石与核心所在。 美联储成立至今已有百余年历史，其独立性地位并非一蹴而就。在此过程中 ...

Core Insights - The discussion at the 2025 Bund Annual Conference highlighted the varying impacts of artificial intelligence (AI) across different industries, with a particular focus on the banking sector, where AI builds on decades of information technology advancements, presenting new development opportunities and significant marginal changes [1][2] Group 1: AI's Impact on Monetary Policy - The former governor of the People's Bank of China, Zhou Xiaochuan, indicated that the influence of AI on central banking functions, especially monetary policy and macroprudential regulation, requires further observation and research [1] - During his tenure, discussions at the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) concluded that the impact of AI on monetary policy was not yet evident, despite AI's potential to affect data collection and processing related to price and micro-behavior [1] - Zhou noted that monetary policy is a slow variable that adjusts with economic cycles, which do not change rapidly, suggesting a disconnect between AI's fast-paced data processing and the slower nature of monetary policy adjustments [1] Group 2: Regulatory Challenges and International Cooperation - There is a growing call for transparency and explainability in AI models used by financial institutions, but the complexity of machine learning and deep learning may lead to "black box" models that pose regulatory challenges [1] - Zhou emphasized the need to address the potential mismatch between AI models that utilize high-frequency data and the long-term stability required for financial soundness and macroeconomic control [2] - He also pointed out the potential for international cooperation in enhancing AI infrastructure within the financial sector, which could lay the groundwork for future collaborative efforts [2]

Core Viewpoint - The financial industry is at a transformative crossroads due to the rise of artificial intelligence (AI), which is seen as a significant marginal change rather than just a technological tool [2] Group 1: Evolution of Banking - The nature of the banking industry has fundamentally changed over the past 60 to 70 years, evolving from traditional banking to a data processing industry [2] - Core banking functions such as payment, pricing, risk measurement, and marketing now heavily rely on data analysis and model computation [2] - The relationship between humans and machines has shifted from human-led to machine-led, with humans primarily acting as interfaces between machines and customers [2] Group 2: Impact of AI on Employment - The application of AI in banking is expected to significantly reduce the workforce size due to the reliance on data analysis and reasoning models [2] - Customer behavior has evolved, with more clients preferring machine interactions over human involvement, further driving AI's role in banking [2] Group 3: Opportunities and Challenges in Regulation - AI presents both opportunities and challenges in regulatory frameworks, particularly in areas like anti-money laundering, where machine learning can identify suspicious activities from vast datasets [3] - In financial stability, machine learning may help predict critical moments in the market, but it requires handling unstructured data and social sentiment [3] Group 4: Transparency and Policy Implications - The "black box" nature of AI models conflicts with the need for transparency in regulatory requirements, and over-reliance on short-term data can lead to misalignment with long-term financial stability [4] - AI's influence on central bank policies, particularly the dual-pillar framework of monetary policy and macroprudential regulation, requires further observation and research [4] - While AI can enhance data collection and analysis for monetary policy decisions, the slow nature of monetary policy adjustments necessitates a cautious approach to avoid unnecessary volatility [4]

Core Insights - The evolution of the U.S. financial regulatory system reflects a history of crisis reflection and reform balancing, significantly impacting global financial regulation [1] Group 1: Formation of Dual Regulatory Framework - The U.S. financial regulatory framework is characterized by the coexistence of state and federal regulation, which developed over time from the initial state-centric governance to a more significant federal role [2][3] Group 2: Impact of Major Financial Crises - The 1929 Great Depression led to fundamental changes in the regulatory framework, including the establishment of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the separation of commercial and investment banking [4][5] - The 2008 financial crisis prompted a comprehensive review and reform of the financial regulatory system, addressing issues of regulatory gaps and overlaps [6][7] Group 3: Evolution of Federal Reserve's Role - The Federal Reserve, established in 1913, has evolved to play a central role in maintaining financial stability and supervising financial institutions, with its responsibilities expanding significantly over the decades [8][9] - The Dodd-Frank Act enhanced the Federal Reserve's role in macroprudential regulation and systemic risk prevention, allowing it to oversee systemically important financial institutions [10] Group 4: Emergency Measures During COVID-19 - In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, U.S. regulatory agencies implemented emergency measures, including a $2 trillion stimulus package and various liquidity support programs to stabilize the economy [11][12][13] - The extensive economic relief measures, while stabilizing the economy, have also contributed to rising inflation, presenting ongoing challenges for the Federal Reserve [14]

Core Viewpoint - The People's Bank of China and the China Securities Regulatory Commission have introduced the "Financial Infrastructure Supervision Management Measures" to enhance the regulatory framework for financial infrastructure, effective from October 1, 2023 [1][2]. Group 1: Regulatory Framework - The new measures aim to establish a unified and efficient regulatory framework for financial infrastructure, addressing the complexity and openness of the current financial system [1][2]. - The measures include 6 chapters and 37 articles, focusing on the regulation of financial infrastructure operations, risk management, and corporate governance [1][2]. - The introduction of the concept of "systemically important financial infrastructure" and its recognition standards is a significant aspect of the new regulations [2][3]. Group 2: Impact on Financial Market - The implementation of the measures is expected to positively impact the financial market by enhancing the transparency and efficiency of core processes such as clearing, settlement, and registration [2]. - In the long term, a well-structured and effectively governed financial infrastructure will support cross-border financial cooperation and the internationalization of the Renminbi, increasing China's influence in global financial rule-making [2][3]. Group 3: Compliance and Enforcement - Financial infrastructure operators are required to operate with licenses, and illegal establishment or provision of financial infrastructure services is strictly prohibited [3]. - The measures emphasize a collaborative regulatory approach, ensuring compliance and stability in the operation of financial infrastructure [3]. - The ongoing efforts will focus on building a resilient financial infrastructure system that supports high-quality economic development [3].

Core Viewpoint - The "Financial Infrastructure Supervision and Management Measures" has been approved and will take effect on October 1, 2025, aiming to strengthen the regulation and construction of financial infrastructure in China [1][3]. Group 1: Definition and Importance of Financial Infrastructure - Financial infrastructure includes systems for asset registration, clearing and settlement, trading facilities, important payment systems, and credit systems, serving as a crucial backbone for financial market operations [2]. - The establishment of a robust financial infrastructure is essential for ensuring the safety and efficiency of financial markets, especially in the context of complex international environments and rapid financial technology advancements [2][9]. Group 2: Regulatory Framework - The management of financial infrastructure will follow the principle of "who approves, who supervises, who is responsible," with specific regulatory responsibilities assigned to the China Securities Regulatory Commission and the People's Bank of China [4][5]. - The new measures will integrate financial infrastructure regulation into a macro-prudential regulatory framework, enhancing collaboration among regulatory bodies [5]. Group 3: Entry Requirements for Financial Infrastructure Operators - Financial infrastructure operators must be legally established entities in China, with clear governance structures, adequate capital, and necessary operational facilities [8]. - Foreign financial infrastructure providers must meet specific conditions, including a minimum of three years of operational experience and compliance with regulatory standards in their home countries [8]. Group 4: Risk Management - The measures emphasize the need for a robust risk management framework to identify, measure, monitor, and manage various risks associated with financial infrastructure operations [9]. - Financial infrastructure operators are encouraged to establish risk management committees based on relevant principles, allowing flexibility in their governance structures [9].

Core Viewpoint - The "Financial Infrastructure Supervision and Management Measures" has been approved and will take effect on October 1, 2025, aiming to enhance the regulatory framework for financial infrastructure in China [1][3]. Group 1: Definition and Importance of Financial Infrastructure - Financial infrastructure includes systems for asset registration, clearing and settlement, trading facilities, important payment systems, and credit systems, serving as a crucial backbone for financial market operations [2]. - The establishment of a robust financial infrastructure is essential for ensuring the safety and efficiency of financial markets, especially in the context of complex international environments and rapid financial technology advancements [2][9]. Group 2: Regulatory Framework - The management of financial infrastructure will follow the principle of "who approves, who supervises, who is responsible," ensuring alignment with national strategies and economic needs [4]. - The China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) will oversee new financial infrastructures related to securities and futures, while the People's Bank of China (PBOC) will manage payment systems and credit systems [4][5]. Group 3: Entry Requirements for Financial Infrastructure Operators - Financial infrastructure operators must be legally established entities in China, with clear governance structures, adequate capital, and necessary operational facilities [8]. - Specific conditions include having a sound risk management framework and compliance with regulatory requirements, particularly for foreign entities providing cross-border services [8]. Group 4: Risk Management and Security - The measures emphasize the need for a robust risk management framework to identify, measure, and manage various risks, including credit and liquidity risks [9]. - While the establishment of a risk management committee is recommended, it is not mandatory for all operators, reflecting adjustments made after public consultations [9].

Core Viewpoint - The speculation surrounding the potential replacement of Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell is intensifying, with concerns about the independence of the Fed amid political pressures, particularly from former President Trump [2][6]. Group 1: Political Pressure and Market Reactions - Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan, emphasized the necessity for the Fed to resist political interference to maintain long-term market trust [2]. - Trump's public calls for Powell's resignation have raised serious concerns about the Fed's independence, impacting market sentiment [2][6]. - The market has reacted to the possibility of a new Fed chair, with U.S. Treasury yields declining and the dollar index slightly retreating, indicating investor sentiment towards potential policy changes [6]. Group 2: Potential Successor - Betts - Betts, a potential successor to Powell, has a strong background in macroeconomic research and hedge fund management, previously serving as CIO at Soros Fund Management [3]. - He has expressed a preference for a more flexible and pragmatic monetary policy stance, showing concern over high interest rates potentially stifling economic growth [3][4]. - Betts has indicated that the Trump administration will focus on finding a replacement for Powell after Labor Day, suggesting a timeline for potential leadership change [2]. Group 3: Monetary Policy Implications - If Betts were to succeed Powell, the market anticipates a shift towards a more flexible or even dovish monetary policy, which could accelerate the pace of interest rate cuts [6]. - The current high inflation and geopolitical risks in the U.S. may lead to a more accommodative stance under Betts, which could positively impact the cryptocurrency market, as evidenced by Bitcoin reaching historical highs [6]. - Betts has previously highlighted the importance of closely monitoring economic data rather than relying solely on predictive models, advocating for a balanced approach to macroprudential regulation [4][5].

Core Viewpoint - The European Central Bank's Governing Council emphasizes the importance of maintaining the existing resilience of the banking system through macroprudential regulatory measures [1] Group 1 - The Governing Council calls on national macroprudential authorities to ensure the stability and resilience of the banking sector [1]

Core Viewpoint - The integration of AI in the financial sector presents significant risks, including model hallucination, algorithmic opacity, and over-reliance on a few tech companies, necessitating a governance framework involving multiple stakeholders [1][3][4]. Group 1: AI Risks in Finance - Model hallucination poses a challenge due to the high data accuracy required in finance, which can lead to inappropriate applications in certain areas [3]. - Algorithmic opacity complicates regulatory oversight and risk management, making it difficult to trace accountability [3]. - The increasing reliance on a few large tech companies by financial institutions may amplify traditional risks and create systemic vulnerabilities [3][4]. Group 2: Governance Framework - A governance ecosystem should include six key stakeholders: financial institutions, consumers, tech companies, industry governance organizations, regulatory bodies, and financial professionals [4][5]. - Financial institutions must ensure that AI technologies are suitable for their specific business scenarios to avoid unnecessary complexities and risks [4]. - There is a need for human intervention in critical decision-making processes to enhance controllability and risk management [5]. Group 3: Regulatory Approaches - Regulatory bodies should adopt a balanced approach, allowing for innovation while ensuring risk management through trial and error in a controlled environment [5][6]. - Enhanced regulatory measures should be implemented for systemically important financial institutions, including additional stress testing and higher capital requirements [7][8]. - Cross-market and cross-institutional risk monitoring should be strengthened to address the interconnected risks posed by AI technologies [8].