The Center of the Universe

St Croix, United States Virgin Islands

MOSLER'S LAW: There is no financial crisis so deep that a sufficiently large tax cut or spending increase cannot deal with it.

Federal Reserve to Return $76.9 Billion to US Treasury From What Central Bank Earned in 2011

Posted by WARREN MOSLER on January 10th, 2012

Yes, income the economy would have earned without QE…

7 Responses to “Federal Reserve to Return $76.9 Billion to US Treasury From What Central Bank Earned in 2011”

  1. jonf Says:

    Imagine how that works.


  2. Paul Palmer Says:

    Right about the same size as the payroll tax cut, I believe


  3. beowulf Says:

    “Right about the same size as the payroll tax cut, I believe”

    $60B per SS FICA point (uncapped Medicare FICA point closer to $80B),
    so two point reduction in SS FICA = $120B.

    Its a pity Obama’s American Job Act got shot down.
    4 points from employee side and 2 points from small business employers (call it equivalent to 1 point from all employers).
    That would have been a $300B fiscal loosening. There was another $150B or so of stimulus spending (including Dean Bakers’s work sharing plan) that made it not a half-bad proposal, though obviously a $900B package would have been twice as good.


    chewitup Reply:

    Correct me if I’m wrong. Payroll tax cut dollars would essentially be immediately spent on either goods and services or used to pay down debt. The 76.9 billion dollars was income that would not have been spent. It is interest income that would sit in portfolios. Nonetheless, it still removes net financial assets from the private sector. Thanks.



    right, no telling what the actual propensity to spend is on interest income from treasury securities.
    when i asked fed research people they said they thought it was reasonably high at the macro level.


    chewitup Reply:

    With a QE, what percent of those treasuries are owned by banks vs. managed money accounts? Some have blamed QE for a commodity price surge due to those dollars going into riskier investments. Propensity to spend may have actually been negative with QE.


    very few in banks.

    it’s not about ‘where those dollars go’ its about the subsequent term structure of rates.

    and it’s about frightening portfolio managers into making shifts, not their actual cash flows

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>