Tension in the fisc

The unsettling friction between US monetary and fiscal policies

A simmering tension between monetary and fiscal policy is emerging as a key issue to watch for financial investors.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent made waves with his recent announcement that the Treasury would at least double the size of its buybacks of long-term debt in the coming months. He argues that long-term yields do not reflect fundamentals, suggesting that the Treasury's intervention is aimed to restore proper market functioning. This generated a lot of commentary, most of which missed the mark, in my view. Some have compared it to past Federal Reserve (Fed) interventions, debating whether it was more similar to quantitative easing or to “Operation Twist,” and suggesting that the Treasury is effectively taking over some of the Fed’s functions.

This, as I said, misses the basic point: This kind of Treasury intervention is irrelevant unless the fiscal deficit is reduced. As long as the government continues to run a deficit, which is exceptionally large by peacetime standards, the Treasury needs to issue more and more debt. These kinds of interventions are less like quantitative easing than like rearranging the chairs on the deck of…well, no, let’s not go that far. But markets can see that the government shows no inclination to reduce expenditures, and when you add the cost of the conflict with Iran and the tariffs refunds, we’re on track for another large deficit this year and an even larger one next year.

The situation is made even more vulnerable by the remarkably poor debt management of past years. The extended period of historically low interest rates after the global financial crisis and through the Covid-19 pandemic provided a golden opportunity to extend the maturity of outstanding debt, an opportunity that previous Treasury Secretaries inexplicably missed. We are now paying the consequences, with 67% of outstanding debt at a maturity of less than five years and 54% under three years.

The underlying reason is that, for the past 15 years or so, monetary policy has too often carried water for fiscal policy. Judging from the speech that Fed Chair Kevin Warsh delivered at Jackson Hole, this will no longer be the case.

Warsh was under pressure to provide greater clarity on the Fed's future conduct of monetary policy. Many analysts, commentators, and market participants argued that as Warsh steers the Fed away from forward guidance, he needs to at least clarify the central bank's reaction function.

He deflected this request in an elegant and convincing way, arguing that the Fed’s understanding of the economy is nowhere near precise enough to allow monetary policy to be boiled down to a simple mechanical rule. “The factors most relevant to the proper conduct of monetary policy change over time,” he noted, and therefore cannot all be summarized in a mathematical rule determined ahead of time. And he reiterated that forward guidance outside of a crisis situation ties the central bank’s hands and results in inferior policy outcomes – like in the delayed reaction to the 2021 inflation surge.

Warsh clarifies things

His speech, however, provided forceful clarity on a number of important points.

AI has no bearing on Fed near-term policy. First, he noted that while the artificial intelligence (AI) revolution might have portentous consequences for future productivity, growth, and inflation pressures, it will have no bearing on the Fed’s near-term policy decisions. This should dispel fears that innovation optimism could be used as cover for a dovish policy stance.

Firm, fixed target on inflation. Second, he stressed that 2% on the personal consumption expenditure (PCE) deflator is “a firm fixed target” on which the Fed must deliver. The central bank will endeavor to develop more reliable and timely measures of inflation, but this will not be used to explain away the inflation problem.

Focus on price levels. Third, he stated that the Fed’s predominant focus right now must be on prices, as inflation remains stubbornly above target, whereas the labor market appears to be at full employment against the background of a very resilient economy. Moreover, he argued that financial markets, including credit, loans and equities, paint a picture of still relatively easy financial conditions.

He boiled it all down to an equally clear conclusion: Unless the Fed can be “confident that underlying inflation is moving to our objective, clearly and at sufficient speed,” it needs to act.

Fed focuses on inflation

In a nutshell: The Fed’s predominant concern right now should be inflation, and at the moment there is no convincing evidence that underlying inflation is converging back to target fast enough. Unless that changes, the Fed’s responsibility is to act, and its primary instrument should be the policy interest rate.

It’s not forward guidance, but it does raise the stakes for the next Fed policy meetings. Unless the inflation picture improves significantly, it will be hard for the Fed to justify not raising rates. [The Fed raised its target federal funds rate by 25 basis points, to 3.75%-4.0%, on Sept. 16. – Ed.]

Financial markets have taken this hawkish stance at face value. The immediate reaction was a flattening of the Treasury yield curve, with a meaningful tick up in short-term yields.

The bearish flattening suggests that investors are keeping a keen eye on fiscal policy. Warsh noted that among the unfiltered signals the Fed would like to get from financial markets are “the prices and trading volumes of Treasury securities.” This statement stands in sharp contrast to Bessent’s claim that yields on long-term US Treasuries do not reflect fundamentals. Warsh also asserted that “money matters,” a pointed reminder of his position that the Fed’s balance sheet should be reduced, curtailing the Fed’s position as a holder of government debt.

If the government wants to reduce the cost of its debt, it will have to take a hard look at its own fundamentals and bring the fiscal deficit down to more sustainable levels. Until then, elevated government borrowing requirements combined with growing debt issuance to finance AI investment are likely to maintain persistent upward pressure on yields.

Sonal Desai, Ph.D. is the executive vice president and Chief Investment Officer for Franklin Templeton Fixed Income at Franklin Templeton. Originally published in the Franklin Templeton Insights page.

Disclaimer

Content copyright © 2026 by Franklin Templeton Canada. All rights reserved. Used with permission

What are the risks? All investments involve risks, including the possible loss of principal. The value of investments can go down as well as up, and investors may not get back the full amount invested. Investing in the natural resources sector involves special risks, including increased susceptibility to adverse economic and regulatory developments affecting the sector. Special risks are associated with investing in foreign securities, including risks associated with political and economic developments, trading practices, availability of information, limited markets and currency exchange rate fluctuations and policies. Investments in foreign securities involve special risks including currency fluctuations, economic instability and political developments. Investments in emerging markets, of which frontier markets are a subset, involve heightened risks related to the same factors, in addition to those associated with these markets’ smaller size, lesser liquidity and lack of established legal, political, business and social frameworks to support securities markets. Because these frameworks are typically even less developed in frontier markets, as well as various factors including the increased potential for extreme price volatility, illiquidity, trade barriers and exchange controls, the risks associated with emerging markets are magnified in frontier markets. To the extent a strategy focuses on particular countries, regions, industries, sectors or types of investment from time to time, it may be subject to greater risks of adverse developments in such areas of focus than a strategy that invests in a wider variety of countries, regions, industries, sectors or investments.

Important legal information. This material is intended to be of general interest only and should not be construed as individual investment advice or a recommendation or solicitation to buy, sell or hold any security or to adopt any investment strategy. It does not constitute legal or tax advice.

The views expressed are those of the investment manager and the comments, opinions and analyses are rendered as at publication date and may change without notice. The information provided in this material is not intended as a complete analysis of every material fact regarding any country, region or market.

Data from third party sources may have been used in the preparation of this material and Franklin Templeton Investments (“FTI”) has not independently verified, validated or audited such data. FTI accepts no liability whatsoever for any loss arising from use of this information and reliance upon the comments opinions and analyses in the material is at the sole discretion of the user.

Products, services and information may not be available in all jurisdictions and are offered outside the U.S. by other FTI affiliates and/or their distributors as local laws and regulation permits. Please consult your own professional adviser or Franklin Templeton institutional contact for further information on availability of products and services in your jurisdiction.

Issued in the U.S. by Franklin Templeton Distributors, Inc., One Franklin Parkway, San Mateo, California 94403-1906, (800) DIAL BEN/342-5236, franklintempleton.com - Franklin Templeton Distributors, Inc. is the principal distributor of Franklin Templeton Investments’ U.S. registered products, which are not FDIC insured; may lose value; and are not bank guaranteed and are available only in jurisdictions where an offer or solicitation of such products is permitted under applicable laws and regulation.

Image: iStock.com/snorkulencija