The US side almost only mentioned there had been only three [3] QEs.
In fact after QE3, it was extended once [QE4!], after which, there are no more extensions, but still it keeps on buying securities in the market [QE5!] with the cash from maturities of government securities or commercial papers.
All along, many people expect explosive inflation or hyperinflation to occur after 2010, it never really happen, why? Because most of the purchases of commercial paper and government securities are purchased from the banks and the banks since then kept the cash returned with the Fed at 0.25% P.A. There is liquidity but it did not show up in the market, it went to the Fed instead, there isn't much unsecured lending or relaxation of lending standards, in fact they are actually tightened.
Why layman didn't benefit from QE?
Because not many people hold those sub standard securities, even if they do, they cannot sell it to the Fed.
Secondly, they cannot borrow from the banks at cheap rates without good securities, many ultra wealthy families and hedge funds can, thus no trickle down effects for the layman.
Finally, US laws do not allow the Fed to purchase direct government securities from the Treasury, otherwise, there will be monetization of the debt. So the Fed purchases from specialized dealers [investment banks in short], this again is giving money to their coffers because of buy sell spreads.
After the crisis, there are rumors that the Fed purchased at par for those sub standard securities which do benefit the coffers of the banks and if you track the banks for the three years after 2008, their trading profits surge, the above could be the reasons.
This is also the reason why ECB cannot perform similar functions as the Fed since they cannot benefit some banks and discriminate others with so many nations watching what they are doing. When the Fed does it, it benefits some banks but overall it benefits the whole nation as it strengthen the financial system, if the ECB does the same, it might benefit the PIIG banks but not those of other nations. Will other nations be willing to share the pain, ECB knows at least Germany is objecting to it.
Now we come to BS reductions of the Fed and its side effects.
The liquidity the banks have in 2008 did not show up in the economy at the beginning since without good collateral, they wouldn't lend a dime, therefore the bulk of the capital stays with the Fed as reserves. Amount are said to be in excess of 2 Trillion dollars.
When the Fed increases interest rates, the knee jerk reaction should be to make use of the 2T dollars reserve and lend it out. It also didn't happen because if you look at the stock market, organic growth of profits are hard to come by, they are either created by improving the EPS, ie reducing the outstanding number of shares by share buyback or by acquisitions. Corporations do not have expansion plans and the need to borrow a lot from the banks.
Therefore, BS reduction likely is just reducing banks' reserves kept at the Fed. Then again the cash Fed gets back on maturities will be sent to the Treasury. Now that the US government has more cash, will this reduce the need for her to borrow and issue fewer securities remains to be seen.
Posts
