How Warsh Could Shape Fed Policy

President Trump's pick to run the Federal Reserve, Kevin Walsh, now faces a quicker path to confirmation after the Justice Department dropped its investigation of current Fed Chair Jerome Powell on Friday. So what are the implications for Fed policy and marketing? if Walsh is confirmed as Fed chair. I'm Allison Nathan and this is Goldman Sachs 16.

To discuss what we know about Walsh, his potential approaches to Fed policy, and the confirmation process ahead, I'm sitting down with Rob Kaplan, Vice Chairman of Goldman Sachs and former president of the Dallas Fed. Rob, welcome back to Exchanges. Great to be with you, Allison. Always nice to be here.

So Rob, as always seems to be the case when we have you on here, there's a lot to talk about. But before we get into the policy of all of this, just wanted a level set, can you give us an update on where we are in Kevin Walsh's confirmation process? And how much uncertainty is still at play there? Regarding Kevin Warsh, I think the path is clear. Now that the Justice Department has dropped its case.

It's at the Inspector General. Warsh then is going to get confirmed. Senator Tillis has reiterated that. And I would expect Kevin Warsh to be in the seat for his first FOMC meeting in June. Rob, let me just ask you one more thing. This process has seemed unusually politicized, but given all of your experience and many years of the Fed, is that actually the case? Let me tell you the parts that created some political considerations.

First of all, going back into the fall, the president called for J PAL to step down or to leave, and there was a question whether he could fire him. I actually think the criticism of J PAL on monetary policy I think that's par for the course. Calling for him to leave early is unusual. The pursuit of Cook

And the thought that they might be able to replace her early and have her leave created some political concern. And the big concern was that the administration would get control of the board of governors. And the fear in the fall was they might replace all the bank presidents or a number of them. That did not materialize either. Jay is still there, Cook is still there, and they just r extended all the president's terms by five years. They did that in December. It wasn't reported on widely.

And so I think now, despite the criticism, I think it's more of a conventional process going forward.

Okay, so talk a little bit more about that. You have known Kevin Warsh as we've talked about before, Rob, for many years. Again, remind us how you would generally characterize his monetary policy framework. So Kevin Warsh was a governor member under Ben Bernanke during the global financial crisis. he is w remembered as a lieutenant to Bernanke, but he's remembered even more for in I think two thousand eleven, he voted for

another round of quantitative easing, but in the meeting he said, I'm gonna go along, but I don't think we should do this. And then he gave speeches afterwards saying he thinks it's a mistake. And so his signature from that point was I think to paraphrase, he thinks the Fed should have emergency power f for the balance sheet, but the bars should be very high for using QE. And so he felt that in two thousand eleven. I'm sure he felt that post COVID.

in twenty twenty one. Use it use the balance sheet during emergency, but not beyond that. And he's been critical of the Fed for other things, but I think the balance sheet is the thing he's best known for. He's also in some of these hearings and some of the statements and information we've gotten from him, has communicated a different approach on inflation metrics, on communication itself. How meaningful would any of those shifts be in practice?

They'll be meaningful. So let's go in order what I think he'll do that's a little different than J Powell. Kevin Warsh will be of the view that Fed presidents should talk less. He believes, and I agree with part of what he's saying, that the Fed has used forward guidance too much. I.e. it has said

Here's what we're gonna do. The dot plot is a good example of giving people more forward visibility. And I think his worry is the dot plot boxes the Fed members in to a position and I think you may see him either get rid of the dot plot or downgrade it and encourage Fed presidents to talk less. We already talked about his views on the balance sheet. He's going to work much more closely with Secretary Besson to try to manage the balance sheet. And I think he'll have some opportunities to do that.

And then the last comment is he's been a big advocate, and I agree with this argument, just I disagree on the timing, that AI adoption will be disinflationary over the horizon.

Chinese over capacity manufacturing will be disinflationary. And I think he's right. The issue he'll have at the FOMC table is at the moment, particularly because of the war in Iran, Inflation readings are going north, not south, and they're going to want to be more receptive to his arguments when they see evidence of greater improvement in headline inflation.

Well, let's talk a little bit about the current policy stance and where we are. If he is confirmed, there's been a lot of discussion that it's not an easy task. facing the Fed today. We have, as you referred to, rising energy prices pushing up inflation. We also have some signs that the labor market is cooling. So how would you expect him to balance that dual mandate as he takes over this new position?

So there's what he's gonna do and then there's what would my advice be. My advice would be come into the job with a clean sheet of paper, without any preconceived notions, don't be rigid or predetermined. He argued in his confirmation, and he mentioned the Dallas Trim Mean. You may have noticed that, and I think you talked about other measures.

He mentioned that the Dallas Trimine, just to explain, and I used to run the Dallas Fed, so we manage this indice, it Xs out extreme moves to the upside or the downside. So right now we've got an oil price shock. And the Dallas Trim Mean says we're going to exit out. So he noted in his testimony that the Dallas Trim Mean is running more like I think two three or two four, not two and three quarters.

The danger with the Dallas Trimine is when you have an individual spike in one or two items, the Dallas Trim Mean will carve it out. What tends to happen with an oil spike is over the months it bleeds out. into other items. So what starts as an unusual item up starts affecting twenty or thirty items, sometimes a trim mean measure lags.

And so I'd be careful again. Uh I think you should look at the Dollars Trim mean and other indices, but you have to look at the whole dashboard and you have to look at the trend. And so I I don't know whether when it's all said and done he will look at other indices. or overweight some versus others. I think you gotta be careful about that. And I think this committee's pretty actually sophisticated about that.

Well the market seems to have a perception that Kevin Walsh is going to lean dovet. Uh so what do you make of that? I mean how do you think rates could evolve over the next twelve to twenty four months under him and how much will the market prove to be right? I agree with the market that and I do believe he will argue aggressively that the Fed should anticipate.

Not what's going to go on the next three to six months, what's going to go on over the horizon. Again, AI, disinflation, he uses the nineties as a good example of productivity improvements and Greenspan looking through them. He'll argue that.

However, the market is also saying the odds of a Fed rate cut in 2026 are basically now near zero, and the first rate cut won't be till 27. And the reason they're saying that is even though he'll argue that, this committee is gonna wanna make sure they see visible evidence. that inflation is moving back, not at target, but near target. And remember this committee is scarred.

by transitory and other things where they predicted what inflation would do and they were wrong and it scarred them. They want to be risk managers, not prognosticators. So there's going to be a debate and he's going to have to contend with that.

And what do you think, Rob? Do you think that the market's right, that we're gonna be on hold? Yeah, I do believe that the Fed right now, you've heard me say before, pre war was at neutral. The real Fed funds rate is three quarters to one percent add the inflation rate. That gets you to three and a half, three and three quarters pre war. If anything, the war is gonna push rates up.

I learned from my eleven years being at the Fed or associated with the Fed that it's a lot easier to forecast labor market developments than it is inflation. And so I have a healthy respect for how hard it is to forecast. I would be reluctant to move. until I saw demonstrable improvement in headline inflation, only then would I be receptive to the argument about anticipating. I don't disagree with the argument, but I disagree with the timing.

I mean leading up to all of this though was a general feeling, if we just take a step back for a moment, that the Fed was in danger of becoming less independent. Because President Trump clearly picked Kevin Walsh in part because he did have devish views in some areas. Is that a valid concern as we stand here today with him poised to take over the fitted chair role?

So I would remind people, uh as you as I've said, on regulatory reform, that's not politically pendant it hasn't been politically independent for the last twenty, twenty-five years. and on working more closely with the Treasury on the balance sheet, I think that'll be a little bit more gray. I think that's fine, actually. I think that's a good development.

But to your point on the Fed funds rate, I do believe that he may lean to try to argue for disinflation. They may lean dovish, but he's got to get seven votes. And I think he won't have seven votes wire. He'll have to persuade. And so I think very quickly the job of the Fed's here, the Fed's here I don't believe can credibly be a dissenter.

The Fed chair, his job is to he doesn't get to do that. He has to manage the group. And so he's gonna have to get himself in the middle of the debate. He's gonna have to control, he's gonna have to push. And so I think he will be politically independent. He'll have a leaning, but I think he'll be politically independent. And the fact that he's got a diversity of folks

first governors and then presidents who aren't going to be quickly replaced. They have longer terms at least for the next two or three years and longer. He'll have to persuade. And I think that'll be a good thing for him and it'll be a good thing for the Fed.

And do you think that'll also be the case when it comes to the balance sheet as we've t talked about, he has some clear views there, but you think changes would be gradual and he's gotta continue. Well, so on that he'll have more power. And so let's just explain the Fed the balance sheet ran as high as nine trillion, they've now run it to six and a fraction. I thought the last two trillion of QE they shouldn't have done. I argued at the time was overdone, but they've now walked it back.

Okay. So regulatory reform, liquidity ratio changing, supplementary leverage ratio changing will allow the banks, I think, to own fewer reserves. If the banks don't need to hold as much reserves, the Fed balance sheet can be smaller. And so I think there actually will be opportunities working with Bessent to run further down the balance sheet. But I don't think

Bessant or Warsh are gonna wanna run it off so quickly that they put more upward pressure on rates. Our problem right now is the curve has moved up. The tenure is over four thirty. And I think they're going to be reluctant to do anything abruptly that could cause rates to inch up. And so that will be the governor on how quickly they move. I I would guess when it's all said then they'll be more deliberate.

Okay, last question, Rob then. So as Warsh takes over, what are you most focused on? What are you watching? What are you most worried about? I hear some inflation worry in some of your answers already. So let's go back to where we are. Pre-war, we thought, as you know, Jan Hotsius believed in our team we were gonna have two and a half percent growth and inflation might start to cool in the last half.

Unfortunately, the oil price shock has put a dent in GDP forecast closer to two, one point seven percent for the second half of this year. That's a big step down. And prices are stickier. The probability of central banks cutting has been pushed out. That's why the curve has moved up. And so we still have to analyze the demand impact and the price impact of this war, but in order to do that, it's gotta stop.

and the straight has to get open and we need to begin the healing process. Until we do, we're very much in the fog. And the Fed will do, I think, nothing but keep analyzing, keep trying to understand. They're a spectator a little bit to events that are out of their control. And so we'll have to see how these events in the Middle East unfold. Thanks as always for joining us, Rob. Good to talk to you, Allison. Thank you all for listening to this episode of Goldman Sachs Exchanges.

which was recorded on April 27, 2026. I'm Alison Nathan. If you enjoyed this show, we hope you'll follow us on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, or wherever you listen to your podcasts and leave us a rating and a comment. The opinions and views expressed herein are as of the date of publication, subject to change without notice, and may not necessarily reflect the institutional views of Goldman Sachs or its affiliate.

The material provided is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice, a recommendation from any Goldman Sachs entity to take any particular action, or an offer or solicitation to purchase or sell any securities or financial products. This material may contain forward-looking statements. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Neither Goldman Sachs nor any of its affiliates make any representations or warranties expressed or implied as to the accuracy or completeness of the statements or information contained herein, and disclaim any liability whatsoever for reliance on such information for any purpose.

Each name of a third party organization mentioned is the property of the company to which it relates, is used here strictly for informational and identification purposes only, and is not used to imply any ownership or license rights between any such company and Goldman Sachs.

A transcript is provided for convenience and may differ from the original video or audio content. Goldman Sachs is not responsible for any errors in the transcript. This material should not be copied, distributed, published, or reproduced in whole or in part, or disclosed by any recipient to any other person without the express written consent of Goldman Sachs.

Disclosures applicable to research with respect to issuers, if any, mentioned herein are available through your Goldman Sachs representative or at www.gs.com/slash research. Goldman Sachs does not endorse any candidate or any political party. Copyright 2026. Goldman Sachs. All right.