NNuggets
BookmarksCollections
  • About Us
  • Terms of use
  • Privacy policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Copyright & Takedown Policy
  • Community Guidelines
  • Cookie Policy
  • Contact

© 2026 Nuggets

NuggetsMarket PulseCollections

On this page

The Core Objective: "Putting Toothpaste Back in the Tube"

  • The Core Objective: "Putting Toothpaste Back in the Tube"
  • Historical Context: Scarcity vs. Excess
  • Technical Challenges and Risks
  • The Path Forward: The "Separation Principle"
  • Conclusion

On this page

  • The Core Objective: "Putting Toothpaste Back in the Tube"
  • Historical Context: Scarcity vs. Excess
  • Technical Challenges and Risks
  • The Path Forward: The "Separation Principle"
  • Conclusion
Report/February 21, 2026/3 min read/think.ing.com

How Kevin Warsh could put the toothpaste back into the tube at the US Fed | 20 Feb 2026 | ING

Source

This report from ING, dated February 20, 2026, analyzes Federal Reserve Chair-elect Kevin Warsh's ambition to significantly shrink the Fed's balance sheet. The author, Padhraic Garvey, explores the historical context of the Fed's "bloated" balance sheet and the technical challenges of returning to a "scarce reserves" environment.


The Core Objective: "Putting Toothpaste Back in the Tube"

Chair-elect Kevin Warsh intends to reverse years of aggressive bond-buying (Quantitative Easing) to return the Fed to a pre-2008 operational style. This is described as a "damage limitation exercise" because the current "excess reserves" system acts as a comfort blanket for the financial system.

Key Figures & Scale of the Task

  • Current Fed Bond Holdings: Approximately US$6 trillion, or 20% of GDP.

References

  1. Original source (think.ing.com)

Disclaimer: Orignal content owned by or sourced from third parties. It does not represent the views of 'Nuggets' platform or it's team. AI is used extensively across this platform including for summaries. Accuracy is not guaranteed, there can be mistakes. Any info or content on this platform is not a financial, legal, or investment advice. Do your own research. Refer for complete disclosures:- Terms of Use · Full Disclaimer

Related nuggets

Jun 2, 2026

AI Is Escaping the Screen | 01 Jun 2026 | Coatue

Coatue : AI is entering a new phase: moving beyond digital tools and into fully autonomous systems operating in the physical world. From advanced manufacturing and surgical robotics to robots in the home, the next wave of innovation will b…

Jun 1, 2026

Brendan Greeley on the 500 Year History of the Dollar | 1 Jun 2026 | Macro Musings

"Alexander Hamilton called it the ancient dollar it was already an established uh uh unit of measure it was already an established currency well before the United States" Brendan Greeley 00:06:55 https://youtu.be/QiX7KmApTtI?si=cdzwMESLY6t…

Jun 1, 2026

Sarah Paine: “Russia and China Aren’t Allies” — America, Empires and the Future of War [INTERVIEW] | 1 Jun 2026 | This Is World

"Russia and China are eternal neighbors, they're not eternal friends. They have been their worst enemies over the years." Sarah Paine 00:00:18 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyIIa8bUZbQ&t=00h00m18s "I can picture one ending to the Ukraine…

Actions

Reading

Published
February 21, 2026
Read time
3 min read
Progress0%
  • Historical Benchmark (2005): The balance sheet was only 5.5% of GDP.
  • The "Warsh Plan" Requirement: To return to pre-GFC proportions, the Fed would need to sell:
    • US$2 trillion in mortgage-backed bonds (the entire holding).
    • ~US$2.5 trillion in Treasury bonds (roughly half of current holdings).
  • Total Reduction: US$4.5 trillion, likely executed over several years.

  • Historical Context: Scarcity vs. Excess

    The report compares two distinct eras of Fed monetary policy:

    1. Pre-GFC: Scarce Reserves (circa 2005)

    • Bond Holdings: ~5.5% of GDP.
    • Bank Reserves: Puny, at roughly 0.1% of GDP 20 years ago.
    • Mechanism: Reserves were purely regulatory. Since they earned 0% interest, banks held only the bare minimum.
    • Rate Setting: The Fed set a single funds rate and adjusted the supply of reserves daily to clear at that rate.

    2. Post-GFC/Pandemic: Excess Reserves (Present Day)

    • Bond Holdings: ~20% of GDP.
    • Bank Reserves: ~10% of GDP (a 100-fold increase from 20 years ago).
    • Mechanism: To incentivize banks to hold these massive proceeds from bond-buying, the Fed began remunerating reserves.
    • Rate Setting: The Fed now manages the Effective Fed Funds Rate within a 25bp band.
      • Ceiling: Interest on Excess Reserves (IOER), currently 3.65%.
      • Floor: Reverse Repo Rate, currently 3.50%.
      • Current Effective Rate: 3.64%.

    Technical Challenges and Risks

    The primary risk of shrinking the balance sheet is a "repo tantrum," where a lack of liquidity causes short-term lending rates to spike.

    • Historical Examples:
      • 2019: The first Quantitative Tightening (QT) attempt led to a severe, though brief, repo tantrum that forced the Fed to buy bills to add reserves back into the system.
      • 2025: The Fed again resumed bill buying due to repo market tightness.
    • The Plumbing Complication: While selling bonds is "straightforward," transitioning back to the old reserves management regime is not, as many modern contracts and players (like Federal Home Loan Banks) are now deeply integrated into the current complex web.

    The Path Forward: The "Separation Principle"

    Garvey suggests that Warsh could pull off this "toothpaste trick" by breaking the link between repo market volatility and the volume of bank reserves.

    • Key Enabler (April 1, 2026): Revisions to leverage ratio requirements will give large banks more capacity to buy Treasuries and engage in repo, potentially taming market tightness.
    • The Strategy:
      • Establish liquidity safety nets and clear rules that ensure repo rates aren't impacted by falling reserve levels.
      • Allow reserves to "dissipate over time" while maintaining the current rate-range management until the system stabilizes.
    • The Requirement: A transparent, clearly laid out plan of action rather than "balance sheet reduction by stealth."

    Conclusion

    If successful, this transition would result in more Treasuries in the marketplace, improved repo market functioning, and the end of the "bloated" Fed balance sheet. However, the report warns this is "easy on paper" but "tougher to pull off" in practice.

    Jun 1, 2026

    Peter Schiff vs Jim Rickards: Monetary Endgame Debate | 10 May 2026 | GoldRepublic Global

    Note: Recorded December 7, 2025 at GoldRepublic's headquarters as part of our 15 year anniversary series "The Future of Gold." "Blockchain doesn't replace gold. It actually improves gold. It makes gold more useful as money than it was in t…