Federal Executive Branch
Here's a look at documents from the U.S. Executive Branch
Federal Agencies
Featured Stories
State Department Issues Public Schedule for July 17, 2026
WASHINGTON, July 17 -- The U.S. Department of State issued the daily public schedule for June 17, 2026:
* * *
SECRETARY MARCO RUBIO
9:00 a.m. Secretary Rubio delivers remarks at the U.S.-Serbia Strategic Dialogue at the Department of State.
(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)
DEPUTY SECRETARY OF STATE CHRISTOPHER LANDAU
2:00 p.m. Deputy Secretary Landau meets with Serbian Foreign Minister Marko Djuric on the margins of the U.S.-Serbia Strategic Dialogue at the Department of State.
(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)
3:30 p.m. Deputy Secretary Landau meets with North Macedonia Foreign Minister Timco Mucunski at ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 17 -- The U.S. Department of State issued the daily public schedule for June 17, 2026: * * * SECRETARY MARCO RUBIO 9:00 a.m. Secretary Rubio delivers remarks at the U.S.-Serbia Strategic Dialogue at the Department of State. (CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE) DEPUTY SECRETARY OF STATE CHRISTOPHER LANDAU 2:00 p.m. Deputy Secretary Landau meets with Serbian Foreign Minister Marko Djuric on the margins of the U.S.-Serbia Strategic Dialogue at the Department of State. (CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE) 3:30 p.m. Deputy Secretary Landau meets with North Macedonia Foreign Minister Timco Mucunski atthe Department of State.
(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)
DEPUTY SECRETARY OF STATE FOR MANAGEMENT AND RESOURCES MICHAEL J. RIGAS
Deputy Secretary Rigas attends meetings and briefings at the Department of State.
UNDER SECRETARY FOR POLITICAL AFFAIRS ALLISON M. HOOKER
11:00 a.m. Under Secretary Hooker meets with Albanian Foreign Minister Ferit Hoxha at the Department of State.
(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)
12:45 p.m. Under Secretary Hooker meets with Vietnamese Vice Foreign Minister Nguyen Minh Hang at the Department of State.
(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)
2:00 p.m. Under Secretary Hooker meets with Democratic Republic of the Congo Foreign Minister Therese Kayikwamba Wagner at the Department of State.
(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)
UNDER SECRETARY FOR ARMS CONTROL AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY THOMAS G. DINANNO
9:00 a.m. Under Secretary DiNanno meets with Colombian Foreign Minister-designate Omar Bula Escobar and Colombian Minister of Defense-designate Major General (ret.) Jorge Eduardo Mora at the Department of State.
(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)
11:15 a.m. Under Secretary DiNanno meets with Bulgarian Minister of Interior Ivan Demerdzhiev at the Department of State.
(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)
1:00 p.m. Under Secretary DiNanno meets with Hungarian State Secretary for Multilateral Affairs Krisztan Meszaros at the Department of State.
(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)
ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR AFRICAN AFFAIRS FRANK GARCIA
Assistant Secretary Garcia is on travel to Nigeria, Cote d'Ivoire, and Mali from July 11-18, 2026.
BRIEFING SCHEDULE
No Department Press Briefing.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.state.gov/releases/office-of-the-spokesperson/2026/07/public-schedule-july-17-2026/
* * *
SECRETARY MARCO RUBIO
9:00 a.m. Secretary Rubio delivers remarks at the U.S.-Serbia Strategic Dialogue at the Department of State.
(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)
DEPUTY SECRETARY OF STATE CHRISTOPHER LANDAU
2:00 p.m. Deputy Secretary Landau meets with Serbian Foreign Minister Marko Djuric on the margins of the U.S.-Serbia Strategic Dialogue at the Department of State.
(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)
3:30 p.m. Deputy Secretary Landau meets with North Macedonia Foreign Minister Timco Mucunski at ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 17 -- The U.S. Department of State issued the daily public schedule for June 17, 2026: * * * SECRETARY MARCO RUBIO 9:00 a.m. Secretary Rubio delivers remarks at the U.S.-Serbia Strategic Dialogue at the Department of State. (CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE) DEPUTY SECRETARY OF STATE CHRISTOPHER LANDAU 2:00 p.m. Deputy Secretary Landau meets with Serbian Foreign Minister Marko Djuric on the margins of the U.S.-Serbia Strategic Dialogue at the Department of State. (CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE) 3:30 p.m. Deputy Secretary Landau meets with North Macedonia Foreign Minister Timco Mucunski atthe Department of State.
(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)
DEPUTY SECRETARY OF STATE FOR MANAGEMENT AND RESOURCES MICHAEL J. RIGAS
Deputy Secretary Rigas attends meetings and briefings at the Department of State.
UNDER SECRETARY FOR POLITICAL AFFAIRS ALLISON M. HOOKER
11:00 a.m. Under Secretary Hooker meets with Albanian Foreign Minister Ferit Hoxha at the Department of State.
(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)
12:45 p.m. Under Secretary Hooker meets with Vietnamese Vice Foreign Minister Nguyen Minh Hang at the Department of State.
(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)
2:00 p.m. Under Secretary Hooker meets with Democratic Republic of the Congo Foreign Minister Therese Kayikwamba Wagner at the Department of State.
(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)
UNDER SECRETARY FOR ARMS CONTROL AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY THOMAS G. DINANNO
9:00 a.m. Under Secretary DiNanno meets with Colombian Foreign Minister-designate Omar Bula Escobar and Colombian Minister of Defense-designate Major General (ret.) Jorge Eduardo Mora at the Department of State.
(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)
11:15 a.m. Under Secretary DiNanno meets with Bulgarian Minister of Interior Ivan Demerdzhiev at the Department of State.
(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)
1:00 p.m. Under Secretary DiNanno meets with Hungarian State Secretary for Multilateral Affairs Krisztan Meszaros at the Department of State.
(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)
ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR AFRICAN AFFAIRS FRANK GARCIA
Assistant Secretary Garcia is on travel to Nigeria, Cote d'Ivoire, and Mali from July 11-18, 2026.
BRIEFING SCHEDULE
No Department Press Briefing.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.state.gov/releases/office-of-the-spokesperson/2026/07/public-schedule-july-17-2026/
NNSS Emergency Management Personnel Participate in 2026 Emergency Management Symposium
LAS VEGAS, Nevada, July 17 -- The U.S. Department of Energy Nevada National Security Sites issued the following news:
* * *
NNSS Emergency Management personnel participate in 2026 Emergency Management Symposium
Members of the NNSS' Strategic Operations and Response Support (SOARS) Division and Technical Analysis and Planning Department attended the 2026 Emergency Management Symposium June 9-11 at Argonne National Laboratory.
The annual symposium brings together emergency management professionals from across the DOE and NNSA, including laboratories, plants, sites, federal program offices and ... Show Full Article LAS VEGAS, Nevada, July 17 -- The U.S. Department of Energy Nevada National Security Sites issued the following news: * * * NNSS Emergency Management personnel participate in 2026 Emergency Management Symposium Members of the NNSS' Strategic Operations and Response Support (SOARS) Division and Technical Analysis and Planning Department attended the 2026 Emergency Management Symposium June 9-11 at Argonne National Laboratory. The annual symposium brings together emergency management professionals from across the DOE and NNSA, including laboratories, plants, sites, federal program offices andpartner agencies. This year's theme, "Emergency Management in a Changing World," focused on innovation, readiness, operational security, emerging technologies, preparedness for evolving threats and hazards, and lessons learned from exercises and real-world events.
During the symposium, SOARS Manager Lucas Basham Murphy delivered a presentation titled "Beyond Today's Tech: Preparing Emergency Operations Centers for the AI-Quantum Computing Era." The presentation explored how artificial intelligence and quantum computing may affect the future of emergency management and emergency operations centers. Topics included situational awareness, decision support, cybersecurity, information integrity, AI-enhanced hazards, and the importance of maintaining human judgment and accountability as new technologies continue to evolve.
"Emergency management is changing quickly, and the tools available to support our work are changing with it," said Lucas. "The goal is not to replace human judgment with technology, but to better understand how emerging technologies can strengthen situational awareness, improve decision support and help us prepare for new risks in a responsible way."
The symposium provided attendees with opportunities to engage with other DOE/NNSA emergency management professionals and attend presentations on topics like emergency communications, WebEOC, continuity of operations, unmanned aircraft systems, hazardous materials planning, emergency public information, artificial intelligence integration and emerging emergency management technologies.
NNSS was recognized during the symposium with two individual awards. Lucas received the 2026 Outstanding Innovator Award for his forward-thinking contributions to emergency management and his work to advance new ideas, tools and approaches in support of emergency operations. NNSS Fire and Rescue's Dakota Vaughn-O'Brien received the Outstanding Collaborator Award, recognizing his commitment to partnership, coordination and teamwork across emergency management and response activities.
Participation in the symposium provided valuable takeaways for the NNSS, including practical ideas for strengthening EOC operations, improving technology readiness, preparing for AI-enhanced threats, enhancing emergency communications, and continuing to modernize emergency management tools, training and coordination processes. The event also reinforced the importance of collaboration across the DOE/NNSA complex as emergency management programs prepare for a rapidly changing operational environment.
The knowledge, relationships and recognition gained through the 2026 Emergency Management Symposium reflect NNSS's continued commitment to readiness, innovation, collaboration and excellence in emergency management.
* * *
Original text here: https://nnss.gov/news/article/nnss-emergency-management-personnel-participate-in-2026-emergency-management-symposium/
* * *
NNSS Emergency Management personnel participate in 2026 Emergency Management Symposium
Members of the NNSS' Strategic Operations and Response Support (SOARS) Division and Technical Analysis and Planning Department attended the 2026 Emergency Management Symposium June 9-11 at Argonne National Laboratory.
The annual symposium brings together emergency management professionals from across the DOE and NNSA, including laboratories, plants, sites, federal program offices and ... Show Full Article LAS VEGAS, Nevada, July 17 -- The U.S. Department of Energy Nevada National Security Sites issued the following news: * * * NNSS Emergency Management personnel participate in 2026 Emergency Management Symposium Members of the NNSS' Strategic Operations and Response Support (SOARS) Division and Technical Analysis and Planning Department attended the 2026 Emergency Management Symposium June 9-11 at Argonne National Laboratory. The annual symposium brings together emergency management professionals from across the DOE and NNSA, including laboratories, plants, sites, federal program offices andpartner agencies. This year's theme, "Emergency Management in a Changing World," focused on innovation, readiness, operational security, emerging technologies, preparedness for evolving threats and hazards, and lessons learned from exercises and real-world events.
During the symposium, SOARS Manager Lucas Basham Murphy delivered a presentation titled "Beyond Today's Tech: Preparing Emergency Operations Centers for the AI-Quantum Computing Era." The presentation explored how artificial intelligence and quantum computing may affect the future of emergency management and emergency operations centers. Topics included situational awareness, decision support, cybersecurity, information integrity, AI-enhanced hazards, and the importance of maintaining human judgment and accountability as new technologies continue to evolve.
"Emergency management is changing quickly, and the tools available to support our work are changing with it," said Lucas. "The goal is not to replace human judgment with technology, but to better understand how emerging technologies can strengthen situational awareness, improve decision support and help us prepare for new risks in a responsible way."
The symposium provided attendees with opportunities to engage with other DOE/NNSA emergency management professionals and attend presentations on topics like emergency communications, WebEOC, continuity of operations, unmanned aircraft systems, hazardous materials planning, emergency public information, artificial intelligence integration and emerging emergency management technologies.
NNSS was recognized during the symposium with two individual awards. Lucas received the 2026 Outstanding Innovator Award for his forward-thinking contributions to emergency management and his work to advance new ideas, tools and approaches in support of emergency operations. NNSS Fire and Rescue's Dakota Vaughn-O'Brien received the Outstanding Collaborator Award, recognizing his commitment to partnership, coordination and teamwork across emergency management and response activities.
Participation in the symposium provided valuable takeaways for the NNSS, including practical ideas for strengthening EOC operations, improving technology readiness, preparing for AI-enhanced threats, enhancing emergency communications, and continuing to modernize emergency management tools, training and coordination processes. The event also reinforced the importance of collaboration across the DOE/NNSA complex as emergency management programs prepare for a rapidly changing operational environment.
The knowledge, relationships and recognition gained through the 2026 Emergency Management Symposium reflect NNSS's continued commitment to readiness, innovation, collaboration and excellence in emergency management.
* * *
Original text here: https://nnss.gov/news/article/nnss-emergency-management-personnel-participate-in-2026-emergency-management-symposium/
Fed: Fifth Conference on the International Roles of the U.S. Dollar - Stablecoins, Digital Payments, and the International Role of the U.S. Dollar
WASHINGTON, July 17 -- The Federal Reserve issued the following Fed Notes article:
* * *
Fifth Conference on the International Roles of the U.S. Dollar: Stablecoins, Digital Payments, and the International Role of the U.S. Dollar
By Ricardo Correa, Linda Goldberg, Ritt Keerati, Juan M. Londono, and Fabiola Ravazzolo/1
The U.S. dollar continues to occupy a central role in the global economy. It remains the most widely used currency in foreign exchange transactions and cross-border payments, the leading currency in official reserve holdings, and the dominant currency of denomination for international ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 17 -- The Federal Reserve issued the following Fed Notes article: * * * Fifth Conference on the International Roles of the U.S. Dollar: Stablecoins, Digital Payments, and the International Role of the U.S. Dollar By Ricardo Correa, Linda Goldberg, Ritt Keerati, Juan M. Londono, and Fabiola Ravazzolo/1 The U.S. dollar continues to occupy a central role in the global economy. It remains the most widely used currency in foreign exchange transactions and cross-border payments, the leading currency in official reserve holdings, and the dominant currency of denomination for internationaldebt securities and loans. This dominant position reflects several enduring features of the U.S. economy and financial system, including the size and strength of U.S. economy, the depth and liquidity of U.S. financial markets, and enduring confidence in U.S. institutions.
On June 22 and 23, 2026, the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York jointly hosted the fifth installment of the International Roles of the U.S. Dollar Conference./2 Building on previous conferences that examined the dollar's resilience amid geopolitical change, safe-asset demand, and evolving payment systems, this year's event centered on the implications of financial innovation, especially digital assets and stablecoins, for the ways in which households, businesses, and financial intermediaries access, transfer, and hold dollar-denominated assets./3
In opening remarks, Federal Reserve Governor Christopher Waller argued that the dollar's international role continues to rest on the fundamental strengths of the U.S. economy and financial system./4 At the same time, he noted that technological innovation, including distributed ledger technology and tokenized assets such as stablecoins, is creating new channels for global dollar intermediation. Governor Waller noted that new entrants associated with these technologies should largely complement the traditional financial sector and lead to more competition, which generally leads to better outcomes for both consumers and society as a whole.
Cornell University Professor Eswar Prasad placed these themes in a broader historical context in his keynote address. He argued that the global monetary system is entering a period of renewed competition between public and private forms of money, with digital currencies increasingly serving as mediums of exchange while central bank money remains the primary settlement asset and store of value. Professor Prasad highlighted growing concerns about monetary sovereignty, as digital currencies expand across borders, but expressed skepticism that these developments will substantially diminish the dollar's international role, given the absence of credible alternatives and the continued importance of network effects. He closed by emphasizing the need for public-sector infrastructure to evolve alongside private innovation to preserve monetary and financial stability.
A panel on financial innovation and the future of the dollar's international role brought together views from academia, multilateral organizations, central banks, and the private sector, featuring Fabio Natalucci, Gordon Liao, Jose Manuel Marques, Neha Narula, and Athanasios Vamvakidis. Panelists identified stablecoins and advances in cross-border payment systems as among the innovations most likely to shape the future international monetary system, and several argued that this growth is likely to reinforce, rather than erode, the international use of the dollar, since the dominant stablecoins are overwhelmingly dollar-denominated and are increasingly used for international payments, trade, and settlement.
The conference also featured a presentation of the recent Committee on the Global Financial System (CGFS) report, Foreign Currency Funding Risk and Cross-border Liquidity, by Stephanie Curcuru (Federal Reserve Board) and Bryan Hardy (Bank for International Settlements)./5 The report highlighted the central role of U.S. dollar funding in the international banking system and the importance of resilient cross-border dollar funding markets for global financial stability. Even as new technologies reshape how dollars are transferred and intermediated, the dollar remains the dominant funding currency underpinning international financial activity.
Three broad themes emerged from the paper presentations and discussions that followed.
Stablecoins are expanding access to dollar-based finance
First, stablecoins are rapidly becoming integrated into the infrastructure of international finance, broadening access to dollar-denominated financial services rather than operating as a separate, self-contained crypto ecosystem. Tony Zhang (Arizona State University) presented a clear illustration of this shift, showing that dollar-denominated stablecoins are increasingly functioning as tokenized money, with transaction volumes now exceeding those of Bitcoin and growing use in payments, savings, and programmable transactions. Other papers reinforced this finding from different angles: Wenxin Du (Harvard Business School) showed that stablecoin-based payment rails can lower the cost of certain crossborder transactions, complementing rather than replacing correspondent banking; Ganesh Viswanath-Natraj (University of Warwick) documented the emergence of blockchain-based foreign exchange markets, in which stablecoins linked to different fiat currencies increasingly exhibit the price discovery and arbitrage mechanisms found in traditional foreign exchange markets; and Daniele Siena (Politecnico di Milano) argued that stablecoins are becoming an important intermediary linking global payment demand to U.S. Treasury markets through their reserve holdings. Taken together, these papers point to stablecoins increasingly performing functions traditionally associated with payment systems, foreign exchange markets, and financial intermediaries.
New technologies bring new channels of transmission
A second theme was that as digital financial markets become more integrated with traditional financial markets, they create new channels through which shocks can propagate. Eugenio Cerutti (IMF) offered evidence of this channel, finding that stablecoin demand shocks affect Treasury yields, exchange rates, and equity prices. Similarly, Federico Grinberg (IMF) showed that stablecoin flows can affect exchange rates, covered interest parity deviations, and dollar funding conditions, particularly when arbitrage is constrained. Lastly, Julia Schmidt (Banque de France) showed that stablecoins may expand the global investor base for dollar safe assets and alter the incentives surrounding sovereign debt issuance.
Traditional drivers of dollar demand remain powerful
The third theme was the continued importance of longer-standing drivers of dollar demand. Torsten Ehlers (Bank for International Settlements) provided evidence showing that portfolio rebalancing by global investors remains a major determinant of exchange-rate movements and international capital flows. Benedikt Ballensiefen (University of Cologne) reached a complementary conclusion, showing that expectations about future dollar appreciation shape dollar demand across spot, swap, and forward markets. Several of the stablecoin papers described above similarly traced their findings back to underlying demand for dollar liquidity, safe assets, and funding markets, suggesting that new technologies are, so far, channeling rather than replacing established sources of dollar demand.
Conclusion
Taken together, the discussions at this year's conference suggest that the international role of the dollar is entering a new phase. Stablecoins, tokenized assets, and new payment technologies are expanding the ways in which dollars can be accessed, transferred, and held across borders, while forging closer links between digital markets and traditional financial markets. Yet these innovations do not appear to be fundamentally altering the factors that underpin global demand for dollars. Instead, they are largely building on an international monetary system that continues to rely on the depth of U.S. financial markets, the availability of dollar-denominated safe assets, and confidence in U.S. institutions. At the same time, supporting this evolution will require policy frameworks to adapt to a financial system in which liquidity is increasingly distributed across multiple digital platforms and financial activity is occurring at ever greater speed. Looking ahead, the key questions may be less about whether financial innovation will replace the dollar, and more about how these new technologies will reshape the channels through which the dollar's international role occurs, the considerations that accompany that evolution, and the policy frameworks needed to support a more digitalized global financial system.
* * *
1. Correa, Londono, and Keerati are at the Federal Reserve Board. Goldberg and Ravazzolo are at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. The views expressed in this note are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the positions or policies of the Federal Reserve System. Return to text
2. More information about the conference, including the agenda, can be found at the Federal Reserve Board's website. Return to text
3. Summaries of the previous four installments of this conference can be found in the following notes: inaugural conference, second, third, and fourth conferences. Return to text
4. Governor Waller's remarks can be found at the Federal Reserve Board's website. Return to text
5. The report can be found at the BIS' website (PDF). Return to text
* * *
Please cite this note as:
Correa, Ricardo, Linda Goldberg, Ritt Keerati, Juan M. Londono, and Fabiola Ravazzolo (2026). "Fifth Conference on the International Roles of the U.S. Dollar: Stablecoins, Digital Payments, and the International Role of the U.S. Dollar," FEDS Notes. Washington: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, July 16, 2024, https://doi.org/10.17016/2380-7172.4140.
Disclaimer: FEDS Notes are articles in which Board staff offer their own views and present analysis on a range of topics in economics and finance. These articles are shorter and less technically oriented than FEDS Working Papers and IFDP papers.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/notes/feds-notes/fifth-conference-on-the-international-roles-of-the-u-s-dollar-stablecoins-digital-payments-and-the-ir-of-the-usd-20260716.html
* * *
Fifth Conference on the International Roles of the U.S. Dollar: Stablecoins, Digital Payments, and the International Role of the U.S. Dollar
By Ricardo Correa, Linda Goldberg, Ritt Keerati, Juan M. Londono, and Fabiola Ravazzolo/1
The U.S. dollar continues to occupy a central role in the global economy. It remains the most widely used currency in foreign exchange transactions and cross-border payments, the leading currency in official reserve holdings, and the dominant currency of denomination for international ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 17 -- The Federal Reserve issued the following Fed Notes article: * * * Fifth Conference on the International Roles of the U.S. Dollar: Stablecoins, Digital Payments, and the International Role of the U.S. Dollar By Ricardo Correa, Linda Goldberg, Ritt Keerati, Juan M. Londono, and Fabiola Ravazzolo/1 The U.S. dollar continues to occupy a central role in the global economy. It remains the most widely used currency in foreign exchange transactions and cross-border payments, the leading currency in official reserve holdings, and the dominant currency of denomination for internationaldebt securities and loans. This dominant position reflects several enduring features of the U.S. economy and financial system, including the size and strength of U.S. economy, the depth and liquidity of U.S. financial markets, and enduring confidence in U.S. institutions.
On June 22 and 23, 2026, the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York jointly hosted the fifth installment of the International Roles of the U.S. Dollar Conference./2 Building on previous conferences that examined the dollar's resilience amid geopolitical change, safe-asset demand, and evolving payment systems, this year's event centered on the implications of financial innovation, especially digital assets and stablecoins, for the ways in which households, businesses, and financial intermediaries access, transfer, and hold dollar-denominated assets./3
In opening remarks, Federal Reserve Governor Christopher Waller argued that the dollar's international role continues to rest on the fundamental strengths of the U.S. economy and financial system./4 At the same time, he noted that technological innovation, including distributed ledger technology and tokenized assets such as stablecoins, is creating new channels for global dollar intermediation. Governor Waller noted that new entrants associated with these technologies should largely complement the traditional financial sector and lead to more competition, which generally leads to better outcomes for both consumers and society as a whole.
Cornell University Professor Eswar Prasad placed these themes in a broader historical context in his keynote address. He argued that the global monetary system is entering a period of renewed competition between public and private forms of money, with digital currencies increasingly serving as mediums of exchange while central bank money remains the primary settlement asset and store of value. Professor Prasad highlighted growing concerns about monetary sovereignty, as digital currencies expand across borders, but expressed skepticism that these developments will substantially diminish the dollar's international role, given the absence of credible alternatives and the continued importance of network effects. He closed by emphasizing the need for public-sector infrastructure to evolve alongside private innovation to preserve monetary and financial stability.
A panel on financial innovation and the future of the dollar's international role brought together views from academia, multilateral organizations, central banks, and the private sector, featuring Fabio Natalucci, Gordon Liao, Jose Manuel Marques, Neha Narula, and Athanasios Vamvakidis. Panelists identified stablecoins and advances in cross-border payment systems as among the innovations most likely to shape the future international monetary system, and several argued that this growth is likely to reinforce, rather than erode, the international use of the dollar, since the dominant stablecoins are overwhelmingly dollar-denominated and are increasingly used for international payments, trade, and settlement.
The conference also featured a presentation of the recent Committee on the Global Financial System (CGFS) report, Foreign Currency Funding Risk and Cross-border Liquidity, by Stephanie Curcuru (Federal Reserve Board) and Bryan Hardy (Bank for International Settlements)./5 The report highlighted the central role of U.S. dollar funding in the international banking system and the importance of resilient cross-border dollar funding markets for global financial stability. Even as new technologies reshape how dollars are transferred and intermediated, the dollar remains the dominant funding currency underpinning international financial activity.
Three broad themes emerged from the paper presentations and discussions that followed.
Stablecoins are expanding access to dollar-based finance
First, stablecoins are rapidly becoming integrated into the infrastructure of international finance, broadening access to dollar-denominated financial services rather than operating as a separate, self-contained crypto ecosystem. Tony Zhang (Arizona State University) presented a clear illustration of this shift, showing that dollar-denominated stablecoins are increasingly functioning as tokenized money, with transaction volumes now exceeding those of Bitcoin and growing use in payments, savings, and programmable transactions. Other papers reinforced this finding from different angles: Wenxin Du (Harvard Business School) showed that stablecoin-based payment rails can lower the cost of certain crossborder transactions, complementing rather than replacing correspondent banking; Ganesh Viswanath-Natraj (University of Warwick) documented the emergence of blockchain-based foreign exchange markets, in which stablecoins linked to different fiat currencies increasingly exhibit the price discovery and arbitrage mechanisms found in traditional foreign exchange markets; and Daniele Siena (Politecnico di Milano) argued that stablecoins are becoming an important intermediary linking global payment demand to U.S. Treasury markets through their reserve holdings. Taken together, these papers point to stablecoins increasingly performing functions traditionally associated with payment systems, foreign exchange markets, and financial intermediaries.
New technologies bring new channels of transmission
A second theme was that as digital financial markets become more integrated with traditional financial markets, they create new channels through which shocks can propagate. Eugenio Cerutti (IMF) offered evidence of this channel, finding that stablecoin demand shocks affect Treasury yields, exchange rates, and equity prices. Similarly, Federico Grinberg (IMF) showed that stablecoin flows can affect exchange rates, covered interest parity deviations, and dollar funding conditions, particularly when arbitrage is constrained. Lastly, Julia Schmidt (Banque de France) showed that stablecoins may expand the global investor base for dollar safe assets and alter the incentives surrounding sovereign debt issuance.
Traditional drivers of dollar demand remain powerful
The third theme was the continued importance of longer-standing drivers of dollar demand. Torsten Ehlers (Bank for International Settlements) provided evidence showing that portfolio rebalancing by global investors remains a major determinant of exchange-rate movements and international capital flows. Benedikt Ballensiefen (University of Cologne) reached a complementary conclusion, showing that expectations about future dollar appreciation shape dollar demand across spot, swap, and forward markets. Several of the stablecoin papers described above similarly traced their findings back to underlying demand for dollar liquidity, safe assets, and funding markets, suggesting that new technologies are, so far, channeling rather than replacing established sources of dollar demand.
Conclusion
Taken together, the discussions at this year's conference suggest that the international role of the dollar is entering a new phase. Stablecoins, tokenized assets, and new payment technologies are expanding the ways in which dollars can be accessed, transferred, and held across borders, while forging closer links between digital markets and traditional financial markets. Yet these innovations do not appear to be fundamentally altering the factors that underpin global demand for dollars. Instead, they are largely building on an international monetary system that continues to rely on the depth of U.S. financial markets, the availability of dollar-denominated safe assets, and confidence in U.S. institutions. At the same time, supporting this evolution will require policy frameworks to adapt to a financial system in which liquidity is increasingly distributed across multiple digital platforms and financial activity is occurring at ever greater speed. Looking ahead, the key questions may be less about whether financial innovation will replace the dollar, and more about how these new technologies will reshape the channels through which the dollar's international role occurs, the considerations that accompany that evolution, and the policy frameworks needed to support a more digitalized global financial system.
* * *
1. Correa, Londono, and Keerati are at the Federal Reserve Board. Goldberg and Ravazzolo are at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. The views expressed in this note are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the positions or policies of the Federal Reserve System. Return to text
2. More information about the conference, including the agenda, can be found at the Federal Reserve Board's website. Return to text
3. Summaries of the previous four installments of this conference can be found in the following notes: inaugural conference, second, third, and fourth conferences. Return to text
4. Governor Waller's remarks can be found at the Federal Reserve Board's website. Return to text
5. The report can be found at the BIS' website (PDF). Return to text
* * *
Please cite this note as:
Correa, Ricardo, Linda Goldberg, Ritt Keerati, Juan M. Londono, and Fabiola Ravazzolo (2026). "Fifth Conference on the International Roles of the U.S. Dollar: Stablecoins, Digital Payments, and the International Role of the U.S. Dollar," FEDS Notes. Washington: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, July 16, 2024, https://doi.org/10.17016/2380-7172.4140.
Disclaimer: FEDS Notes are articles in which Board staff offer their own views and present analysis on a range of topics in economics and finance. These articles are shorter and less technically oriented than FEDS Working Papers and IFDP papers.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/notes/feds-notes/fifth-conference-on-the-international-roles-of-the-u-s-dollar-stablecoins-digital-payments-and-the-ir-of-the-usd-20260716.html
Fed Vice Chair Jefferson Issues Remarks at Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research at Stanford University
STANFORD, California, July 17 -- The Federal Reserve issued the following remarks on July 16, 2026, by Vice Chair Philip N. Jefferson at the Stanford University Institute for Economic Policy Research:
* * *
Navigating Economic Shocks: A Monetary Policymaker's Perspective
Thank you for the kind introduction. I am delighted to be here at Stanford University today to discuss a topic that is central to the Federal Reserve's work: how policymakers analyze and respond to economic shocks in real time./1
The economy is constantly experiencing shocks that change economic conditions and that policymakers ... Show Full Article STANFORD, California, July 17 -- The Federal Reserve issued the following remarks on July 16, 2026, by Vice Chair Philip N. Jefferson at the Stanford University Institute for Economic Policy Research: * * * Navigating Economic Shocks: A Monetary Policymaker's Perspective Thank you for the kind introduction. I am delighted to be here at Stanford University today to discuss a topic that is central to the Federal Reserve's work: how policymakers analyze and respond to economic shocks in real time./1 The economy is constantly experiencing shocks that change economic conditions and that policymakersmust consider. Today, I will focus on shocks that are extremely difficult--if not impossible--to predict, such as the emergence of a pandemic, the start of a war, or a sudden breakthrough in technological advancement. When such shocks occur, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) evaluates them and sets monetary policy consistent with its dual mandate of maximum employment and price stability.
This responsibility is both crucial and complex. Since the effects of shocks are uncertain in real time, policymakers must draw conclusions about their nature based on analysis of data, rigorous economic modeling, and careful judgment. Economic conditions also often reflect the effects of overlapping shocks, whose relative importance and interactions must be assessed.
Today, I will start by classifying economic shocks and then discuss how monetary policymakers might respond to different types of shocks. Then I will discuss how I am approaching the two significant developments affecting the current juncture: the energy price shock and the macroeconomic effects of artificial intelligence (AI). I will talk about how both might affect monetary policy going forward before taking your questions.
Classifying Shocks
One simple, yet effective conceptual framework policymakers can use to classify shocks is to determine whether their initial effect is on the demand side or the supply side of the economy.
The demand side of the economy comprises household consumption, business investment, government expenditures, and net exports. Demand shocks initially change these expenditures without directly affecting the economy's underlying productive capacity.
The supply side of the economy encompasses the structure of its production processes and markets. Supply shocks tend to affect the economy's productive capacity, often referred to as "potential output." Productive capacity captures the available supply of labor and capital as well as the productivity of those inputs./2 Potential output is the hypothetical level of production that the economy can sustain over the long run while maintaining price stability and maximum employment./3
Both demand and supply shocks can vary in duration. They may be temporary, causing short-term fluctuations, or they may be persistent, leading to more enduring changes in the economy. The nature and duration of these shocks significantly influence the approach to monetary policymaking, a subject that I will return to shortly.
A key concept for analysis of an economic shock is the output gap--a valuable tool for monetary policymakers as we assess economic conditions because it summarizes the strength of demand relative to supply. The output gap represents the relationship between the economy's actual output--typically measured by gross domestic product (GDP)--and an estimate of its potential output. When GDP is higher than potential output, the output gap is positive, and the economy is in a state of excess demand. In this case, employment tends to be above its maximum sustainable level, with upward pressure on inflation. Conversely, when GDP falls below potential output, the output gap is negative, and the economy is in a state of excess supply. During periods of negative output gaps, employment levels typically are below their maximum sustainable point, accompanied by downward pressure on inflation.
Without shocks, monetary policy decisions would be consistent with GDP in line with its potential. This alignment would correspond to employment reaching its maximum sustainable level, with inflation stable at our 2 percent longer-run objective. In practice, such conditions rarely occur. Often, economic shocks push GDP away from its potential.
While conceptually distinct, supply and demand shocks are difficult to identify, especially in real time. Many economic events do not fall neatly into one category. They contain shocks that affect both demand and supply. Moreover, the persistence of shocks is highly uncertain, and even sophisticated forecasting techniques can struggle to resolve this uncertainty as an event unfolds.
With these classifications as a backdrop, let's consider the implications of economic shocks for monetary policy formulation.
Responding to Shocks in Real Time
Our monetary policy strategy is designed to promote maximum employment and stable prices across a broad range of economic conditions. How we respond to economic events depends on whether shocks create tension between the two sides of our mandate.
First, consider a shock that moves the output gap and inflation in the same direction. We may have a positive output gap, with employment above its maximum sustainable level and inflation above 2 percent. Conversely, we may have a negative output gap, with employment below its maximum sustainable level and inflation below target. In both cases, our inflation and employment objectives are aligned; therefore, policy actions taken to address one objective also support the other. With a positive output gap, where we observe both overheating in the labor market and inflation exceeding our target, our policy response would typically involve raising interest rates to cool excess demand. The intent is to bring employment closer to its maximum sustainable level while addressing inflationary pressures. With a negative output gap, lowering interest rates can stimulate the economy, which simultaneously should help increase employment and raise inflation toward its target.
Now consider a shock that pushes the output gap and inflation in opposite directions. Policy tightening addresses inflationary pressures but possibly at the expense of employment; easing does the reverse. Thus, we could face a tradeoff, where tightening helps price stability but hurts employment.
Given this possible tension, how should I react as a monetary policymaker? The answer depends on the relative size of the economic costs arising from deviations of inflation and employment from their respective longer-run goals and the balance of risks on both sides of our dual mandate./4 If inflation expectations risk becoming unanchored, then a stronger reaction to the inflation side of our mandate may be warranted. Conversely, if inflationary pressures do not intensify and inflation expectations remain well anchored, then it may be prudent to prioritize the downside risks to output and employment. This response may be especially necessary if weakness in the labor market risks becoming entrenched.
Another consideration is whether the shock is expected to be short lived or persistent, keeping in mind that monetary policy actions tend to work with a lag. This consideration is important when deciding whether to respond to the shock or to allow it to pass without a policy response. If a shock is expected to reverse before monetary policy can take effect, looking through it may be the appropriate approach. It is challenging, however, to predict how long a shock may last. The appropriate monetary policy response, again, requires weighing the risks to both sides of our mandate from various actions.
When confronted with a single shock, policymakers must carefully identify and respond to the shock. Shocks, however, rarely happen in isolation, further complicating this task. Sometimes the economy faces multiple shocks simultaneously that may affect both supply and demand. Moreover, we face uncertainty about how shocks propagate through the economy. Such complications bring me to the challenges posed by the current juncture.
Challenges Posed by the Current Juncture
Currently, I am monitoring two significant developments: the conflict in the Middle East and the proliferation of AI.
The Middle East conflict is, in part, a supply shock. Global supply chains for oil and other energy-intensive goods have come under stress. The resulting spike in the price of oil, shown in figure 1, and related products has lowered real incomes and triggered a worsening of financial conditions more broadly. While oil prices have declined from the recent peak, considerable uncertainty remains in the region, which may still weigh on economic activity and inflation. This outcome has put modest downward pressure on aggregate demand. I expect the effects on demand to be muted, however, because the U.S. is now a net exporter of oil and U.S. production is less oil intensive than in the past, as is shown in figure 2.
As shown in the left panel of figure 3, this supply shock is occurring in an environment in which inflation has already been above the FOMC's target for some time , in part a result of post-pandemic imbalances. At the same time, the unemployment rate, illustrated in the right panel of figure 3, is near a level that most observers view as consistent with maximum employment./5
These factors confront the FOMC with a delicate balancing act. On the one hand, we face the imperative to address inflationary pressures. On the other hand, we must be mindful of employment potentially moving below its maximum sustainable level. This scenario exemplifies the type of policy dilemma where our dual-mandate objectives are not aligned but rather in tension with each other.
Of course, this energy shock also overlaps with the shock stemming from a significant change to trade policy. Recent trade policy changes have had at least near-term effects on output and prices. Those policy changes may alter the economy's productive capacity and have implications for the labor market. As a policymaker, I take all of these developments into account. We do not have the luxury of considering each shock in a vacuum. Instead, we must consider the whole of the economy when setting policy to achieve our dual-mandate objectives.
The quick succession of shocks raises the risk that inflation becomes entrenched and inflation expectations become unanchored. The question of whether the recent increase in energy prices will feed into longer-term inflation expectations and result in a persistent rise in inflation is a critical one.
The second development I am monitoring is AI. Surveys of businesses, like the one illustrated figure 4, suggest that the uptake of AI has risen considerably over the past two years. This technology presents a fascinating case study from a policymaker's perspective, as the economic shock from AI is likely to have persistent effects on both supply and demand.
On the supply side, AI will automate some workers' tasks and augment their ability to do others, which will likely lead to significant productivity gains. That development, in turn, would raise the growth rate of potential output over the coming years. On the demand side, optimism about AI may boost investment and consumption today, even before these productivity gains fully materialize. Firms expecting higher future profits are investing heavily in data centers, advanced computing equipment, and AI capabilities. Indeed, figure 5 shows that firms' capital expenditures likely related to AI have increased substantially recently.
The timing of the supply and demand effects is of critical importance for monetary policymakers. If, on the one hand, the demand effects from stronger investment and consumption are realized sooner than the supply effects from productivity growth, AI could exert upward pressure on inflation. If, on the other hand, increased productivity lowers production costs sooner, we may observe downward pressure on inflation.
A related consideration is the potential effect of AI on the longer-run neutral rate of interest. Often called r*, this is the real interest rate consistent with the economy operating at its full potential once all shocks have dissipated. If AI leads to permanently higher levels of productivity growth, it may increase firms' desire to invest and, hence, their demand for funding. Higher productivity growth may also discourage household savings by increasing expected future income. Under these circumstances, to reconcile the increase in investment with reduced savings, r* would likely rise. However, predicting changes in the neutral rate is challenging, given the historically noisy relationship between productivity growth and real interest rates. Furthermore, potential AI-induced increases in inequality could have mitigating effects on r*. High-income households tend to save at higher rates than low-income households. Thus, a rise in income inequality could lead to an increase in the supply of savings, putting downward pressure on the neutral rate./6
While r*, like potential output, is not directly observable, estimating it is of considerable importance for monetary policymakers, because these estimates are informative about the range of interest rates that we consider broadly neutral. If AI indeed raises the neutral rate, then for any given level of the federal funds rate, policy effectively becomes more accommodative. Conversely, if AI-related developments cause r* to decline, policy effectively becomes more restrictive.
Policymakers must remain attentive to developments to ensure that the stance of monetary policy remains appropriately calibrated and to help the economy smoothly transition to a new equilibrium.
On the Current Stance of Monetary Policy
Before closing, let me add a word about the current stance of monetary policy. I am firmly committed to returning inflation to our 2 percent target, consistent with our dual-mandate objectives of price stability and maximum employment given to us by Congress. At our last meeting, in June, the FOMC decided to maintain the target range for the federal funds rate at 3-1/2 to 3-3/4 percent. This policy stance should continue to support the labor market while allowing inflation to resume its decline toward our 2 percent target as the effects of past tariffs and energy prices pass through completely. That said, in a scenario where actual inflation does not start to cool down soon, I believe that it could be appropriate to reconsider our current policy stance to ensure we fulfill our commitment to deliver price stability. Fortunately, our current policy stance leaves us well positioned to respond to economic developments based on the incoming data, the evolving outlook, and the balance of risks.
Conclusion
As I have emphasized today, understanding and responding to economic shocks as events unfold is challenging. Correctly identifying shocks as they occur and setting policy appropriately helps maintain well-anchored inflation expectations, which is crucial for monetary policy. When the public trusts that the FOMC will return inflation to our 2 percent longer-run goal, policymakers have more flexibility to respond appropriately to the full range of shocks the economy might experience. The economy will continue to evolve, new shocks will occur, and policy responses will adapt accordingly. I think carefully about the shocks the economy faces, and their implications, because this puts me, as a policymaker, in the best position to fulfill our mandate and to serve the American people.
Thank you for inviting me to speak today. I look forward to our discussion.
* * *
1. The views expressed here are my own and are not necessarily those of my colleagues on the Federal Open Market Committee or the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Return to text
2. Supply shocks can also reflect changes in the structure of markets that do not necessarily change the economy-wide level of potential output, such as a markup shock. Markup shocks occur when the wedge between a firm's production costs and the prices it charges changes without a corresponding change in actual costs of production. Markup shocks are a supply-side phenomenon because they affect prices for a given level of economic activity. Return to text
3. Another common definition of potential output is the hypothetical level of output that would prevail in the absence of frictions like nominal rigidity. Further, the distinction between demand and supply shocks discussed here does not necessarily hold for benchmark levels of output other than potential output as defined above. For example, demand shocks in the form of changes in household preferences can affect the hypothetical level of output under flexible prices in standard dynamic general equilibrium models. Return to text
4. For more discussion on the FOMC's longer-run goals and monetary policy strategy, see the "2025 Statement on Longer-Run Goals and Monetary Policy Strategy" on the Board's website at https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/monetary-policy-strategy-tools-and-communications-statement-on-longer-run-goals-monetary-policy-strategy-2025.htm. Return to text
5. For example, the current unemployment rate of 4.2 percent is near the CBO's estimate of the noncyclical rate of unemployment, which is 4.4 percent. Return to text
6. The increase in income risk associated with higher income inequality may also increase savings for precautionary reasons. For evidence on the drivers of long-run real interest rates, see Kurt G. Lunsford and Kenneth D. West, "Some Evidence on Secular Drivers of US Safe Real Rates," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics 11, no. 4 (2019): 113-39. Return to text
* * *
Original text here: https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/jefferson20260716a.htm
* * *
Navigating Economic Shocks: A Monetary Policymaker's Perspective
Thank you for the kind introduction. I am delighted to be here at Stanford University today to discuss a topic that is central to the Federal Reserve's work: how policymakers analyze and respond to economic shocks in real time./1
The economy is constantly experiencing shocks that change economic conditions and that policymakers ... Show Full Article STANFORD, California, July 17 -- The Federal Reserve issued the following remarks on July 16, 2026, by Vice Chair Philip N. Jefferson at the Stanford University Institute for Economic Policy Research: * * * Navigating Economic Shocks: A Monetary Policymaker's Perspective Thank you for the kind introduction. I am delighted to be here at Stanford University today to discuss a topic that is central to the Federal Reserve's work: how policymakers analyze and respond to economic shocks in real time./1 The economy is constantly experiencing shocks that change economic conditions and that policymakersmust consider. Today, I will focus on shocks that are extremely difficult--if not impossible--to predict, such as the emergence of a pandemic, the start of a war, or a sudden breakthrough in technological advancement. When such shocks occur, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) evaluates them and sets monetary policy consistent with its dual mandate of maximum employment and price stability.
This responsibility is both crucial and complex. Since the effects of shocks are uncertain in real time, policymakers must draw conclusions about their nature based on analysis of data, rigorous economic modeling, and careful judgment. Economic conditions also often reflect the effects of overlapping shocks, whose relative importance and interactions must be assessed.
Today, I will start by classifying economic shocks and then discuss how monetary policymakers might respond to different types of shocks. Then I will discuss how I am approaching the two significant developments affecting the current juncture: the energy price shock and the macroeconomic effects of artificial intelligence (AI). I will talk about how both might affect monetary policy going forward before taking your questions.
Classifying Shocks
One simple, yet effective conceptual framework policymakers can use to classify shocks is to determine whether their initial effect is on the demand side or the supply side of the economy.
The demand side of the economy comprises household consumption, business investment, government expenditures, and net exports. Demand shocks initially change these expenditures without directly affecting the economy's underlying productive capacity.
The supply side of the economy encompasses the structure of its production processes and markets. Supply shocks tend to affect the economy's productive capacity, often referred to as "potential output." Productive capacity captures the available supply of labor and capital as well as the productivity of those inputs./2 Potential output is the hypothetical level of production that the economy can sustain over the long run while maintaining price stability and maximum employment./3
Both demand and supply shocks can vary in duration. They may be temporary, causing short-term fluctuations, or they may be persistent, leading to more enduring changes in the economy. The nature and duration of these shocks significantly influence the approach to monetary policymaking, a subject that I will return to shortly.
A key concept for analysis of an economic shock is the output gap--a valuable tool for monetary policymakers as we assess economic conditions because it summarizes the strength of demand relative to supply. The output gap represents the relationship between the economy's actual output--typically measured by gross domestic product (GDP)--and an estimate of its potential output. When GDP is higher than potential output, the output gap is positive, and the economy is in a state of excess demand. In this case, employment tends to be above its maximum sustainable level, with upward pressure on inflation. Conversely, when GDP falls below potential output, the output gap is negative, and the economy is in a state of excess supply. During periods of negative output gaps, employment levels typically are below their maximum sustainable point, accompanied by downward pressure on inflation.
Without shocks, monetary policy decisions would be consistent with GDP in line with its potential. This alignment would correspond to employment reaching its maximum sustainable level, with inflation stable at our 2 percent longer-run objective. In practice, such conditions rarely occur. Often, economic shocks push GDP away from its potential.
While conceptually distinct, supply and demand shocks are difficult to identify, especially in real time. Many economic events do not fall neatly into one category. They contain shocks that affect both demand and supply. Moreover, the persistence of shocks is highly uncertain, and even sophisticated forecasting techniques can struggle to resolve this uncertainty as an event unfolds.
With these classifications as a backdrop, let's consider the implications of economic shocks for monetary policy formulation.
Responding to Shocks in Real Time
Our monetary policy strategy is designed to promote maximum employment and stable prices across a broad range of economic conditions. How we respond to economic events depends on whether shocks create tension between the two sides of our mandate.
First, consider a shock that moves the output gap and inflation in the same direction. We may have a positive output gap, with employment above its maximum sustainable level and inflation above 2 percent. Conversely, we may have a negative output gap, with employment below its maximum sustainable level and inflation below target. In both cases, our inflation and employment objectives are aligned; therefore, policy actions taken to address one objective also support the other. With a positive output gap, where we observe both overheating in the labor market and inflation exceeding our target, our policy response would typically involve raising interest rates to cool excess demand. The intent is to bring employment closer to its maximum sustainable level while addressing inflationary pressures. With a negative output gap, lowering interest rates can stimulate the economy, which simultaneously should help increase employment and raise inflation toward its target.
Now consider a shock that pushes the output gap and inflation in opposite directions. Policy tightening addresses inflationary pressures but possibly at the expense of employment; easing does the reverse. Thus, we could face a tradeoff, where tightening helps price stability but hurts employment.
Given this possible tension, how should I react as a monetary policymaker? The answer depends on the relative size of the economic costs arising from deviations of inflation and employment from their respective longer-run goals and the balance of risks on both sides of our dual mandate./4 If inflation expectations risk becoming unanchored, then a stronger reaction to the inflation side of our mandate may be warranted. Conversely, if inflationary pressures do not intensify and inflation expectations remain well anchored, then it may be prudent to prioritize the downside risks to output and employment. This response may be especially necessary if weakness in the labor market risks becoming entrenched.
Another consideration is whether the shock is expected to be short lived or persistent, keeping in mind that monetary policy actions tend to work with a lag. This consideration is important when deciding whether to respond to the shock or to allow it to pass without a policy response. If a shock is expected to reverse before monetary policy can take effect, looking through it may be the appropriate approach. It is challenging, however, to predict how long a shock may last. The appropriate monetary policy response, again, requires weighing the risks to both sides of our mandate from various actions.
When confronted with a single shock, policymakers must carefully identify and respond to the shock. Shocks, however, rarely happen in isolation, further complicating this task. Sometimes the economy faces multiple shocks simultaneously that may affect both supply and demand. Moreover, we face uncertainty about how shocks propagate through the economy. Such complications bring me to the challenges posed by the current juncture.
Challenges Posed by the Current Juncture
Currently, I am monitoring two significant developments: the conflict in the Middle East and the proliferation of AI.
The Middle East conflict is, in part, a supply shock. Global supply chains for oil and other energy-intensive goods have come under stress. The resulting spike in the price of oil, shown in figure 1, and related products has lowered real incomes and triggered a worsening of financial conditions more broadly. While oil prices have declined from the recent peak, considerable uncertainty remains in the region, which may still weigh on economic activity and inflation. This outcome has put modest downward pressure on aggregate demand. I expect the effects on demand to be muted, however, because the U.S. is now a net exporter of oil and U.S. production is less oil intensive than in the past, as is shown in figure 2.
As shown in the left panel of figure 3, this supply shock is occurring in an environment in which inflation has already been above the FOMC's target for some time , in part a result of post-pandemic imbalances. At the same time, the unemployment rate, illustrated in the right panel of figure 3, is near a level that most observers view as consistent with maximum employment./5
These factors confront the FOMC with a delicate balancing act. On the one hand, we face the imperative to address inflationary pressures. On the other hand, we must be mindful of employment potentially moving below its maximum sustainable level. This scenario exemplifies the type of policy dilemma where our dual-mandate objectives are not aligned but rather in tension with each other.
Of course, this energy shock also overlaps with the shock stemming from a significant change to trade policy. Recent trade policy changes have had at least near-term effects on output and prices. Those policy changes may alter the economy's productive capacity and have implications for the labor market. As a policymaker, I take all of these developments into account. We do not have the luxury of considering each shock in a vacuum. Instead, we must consider the whole of the economy when setting policy to achieve our dual-mandate objectives.
The quick succession of shocks raises the risk that inflation becomes entrenched and inflation expectations become unanchored. The question of whether the recent increase in energy prices will feed into longer-term inflation expectations and result in a persistent rise in inflation is a critical one.
The second development I am monitoring is AI. Surveys of businesses, like the one illustrated figure 4, suggest that the uptake of AI has risen considerably over the past two years. This technology presents a fascinating case study from a policymaker's perspective, as the economic shock from AI is likely to have persistent effects on both supply and demand.
On the supply side, AI will automate some workers' tasks and augment their ability to do others, which will likely lead to significant productivity gains. That development, in turn, would raise the growth rate of potential output over the coming years. On the demand side, optimism about AI may boost investment and consumption today, even before these productivity gains fully materialize. Firms expecting higher future profits are investing heavily in data centers, advanced computing equipment, and AI capabilities. Indeed, figure 5 shows that firms' capital expenditures likely related to AI have increased substantially recently.
The timing of the supply and demand effects is of critical importance for monetary policymakers. If, on the one hand, the demand effects from stronger investment and consumption are realized sooner than the supply effects from productivity growth, AI could exert upward pressure on inflation. If, on the other hand, increased productivity lowers production costs sooner, we may observe downward pressure on inflation.
A related consideration is the potential effect of AI on the longer-run neutral rate of interest. Often called r*, this is the real interest rate consistent with the economy operating at its full potential once all shocks have dissipated. If AI leads to permanently higher levels of productivity growth, it may increase firms' desire to invest and, hence, their demand for funding. Higher productivity growth may also discourage household savings by increasing expected future income. Under these circumstances, to reconcile the increase in investment with reduced savings, r* would likely rise. However, predicting changes in the neutral rate is challenging, given the historically noisy relationship between productivity growth and real interest rates. Furthermore, potential AI-induced increases in inequality could have mitigating effects on r*. High-income households tend to save at higher rates than low-income households. Thus, a rise in income inequality could lead to an increase in the supply of savings, putting downward pressure on the neutral rate./6
While r*, like potential output, is not directly observable, estimating it is of considerable importance for monetary policymakers, because these estimates are informative about the range of interest rates that we consider broadly neutral. If AI indeed raises the neutral rate, then for any given level of the federal funds rate, policy effectively becomes more accommodative. Conversely, if AI-related developments cause r* to decline, policy effectively becomes more restrictive.
Policymakers must remain attentive to developments to ensure that the stance of monetary policy remains appropriately calibrated and to help the economy smoothly transition to a new equilibrium.
On the Current Stance of Monetary Policy
Before closing, let me add a word about the current stance of monetary policy. I am firmly committed to returning inflation to our 2 percent target, consistent with our dual-mandate objectives of price stability and maximum employment given to us by Congress. At our last meeting, in June, the FOMC decided to maintain the target range for the federal funds rate at 3-1/2 to 3-3/4 percent. This policy stance should continue to support the labor market while allowing inflation to resume its decline toward our 2 percent target as the effects of past tariffs and energy prices pass through completely. That said, in a scenario where actual inflation does not start to cool down soon, I believe that it could be appropriate to reconsider our current policy stance to ensure we fulfill our commitment to deliver price stability. Fortunately, our current policy stance leaves us well positioned to respond to economic developments based on the incoming data, the evolving outlook, and the balance of risks.
Conclusion
As I have emphasized today, understanding and responding to economic shocks as events unfold is challenging. Correctly identifying shocks as they occur and setting policy appropriately helps maintain well-anchored inflation expectations, which is crucial for monetary policy. When the public trusts that the FOMC will return inflation to our 2 percent longer-run goal, policymakers have more flexibility to respond appropriately to the full range of shocks the economy might experience. The economy will continue to evolve, new shocks will occur, and policy responses will adapt accordingly. I think carefully about the shocks the economy faces, and their implications, because this puts me, as a policymaker, in the best position to fulfill our mandate and to serve the American people.
Thank you for inviting me to speak today. I look forward to our discussion.
* * *
1. The views expressed here are my own and are not necessarily those of my colleagues on the Federal Open Market Committee or the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Return to text
2. Supply shocks can also reflect changes in the structure of markets that do not necessarily change the economy-wide level of potential output, such as a markup shock. Markup shocks occur when the wedge between a firm's production costs and the prices it charges changes without a corresponding change in actual costs of production. Markup shocks are a supply-side phenomenon because they affect prices for a given level of economic activity. Return to text
3. Another common definition of potential output is the hypothetical level of output that would prevail in the absence of frictions like nominal rigidity. Further, the distinction between demand and supply shocks discussed here does not necessarily hold for benchmark levels of output other than potential output as defined above. For example, demand shocks in the form of changes in household preferences can affect the hypothetical level of output under flexible prices in standard dynamic general equilibrium models. Return to text
4. For more discussion on the FOMC's longer-run goals and monetary policy strategy, see the "2025 Statement on Longer-Run Goals and Monetary Policy Strategy" on the Board's website at https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/monetary-policy-strategy-tools-and-communications-statement-on-longer-run-goals-monetary-policy-strategy-2025.htm. Return to text
5. For example, the current unemployment rate of 4.2 percent is near the CBO's estimate of the noncyclical rate of unemployment, which is 4.4 percent. Return to text
6. The increase in income risk associated with higher income inequality may also increase savings for precautionary reasons. For evidence on the drivers of long-run real interest rates, see Kurt G. Lunsford and Kenneth D. West, "Some Evidence on Secular Drivers of US Safe Real Rates," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics 11, no. 4 (2019): 113-39. Return to text
* * *
Original text here: https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/jefferson20260716a.htm
FERC Fast-Tracks Reviews to Accelerate Actions at Hydropower Projects
WASHINGTON, July 17 -- The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission issued the following news release:
* * *
FERC Fast-Tracks Reviews to Accelerate Actions at Hydropower Projects
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) unanimously approved measures today to simplify its National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review procedures for hydropower-related actions with minimal environmental impact. These regulatory improvements are intended to increase efficiency and accelerate approvals while upholding environmental standards.
" We must move important approvals forward quickly while ensuring ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 17 -- The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission issued the following news release: * * * FERC Fast-Tracks Reviews to Accelerate Actions at Hydropower Projects The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) unanimously approved measures today to simplify its National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review procedures for hydropower-related actions with minimal environmental impact. These regulatory improvements are intended to increase efficiency and accelerate approvals while upholding environmental standards. " We must move important approvals forward quickly while ensuringwe fully meet our NEPA obligations. Today's actions are practical, common-sense solutions that streamline our hydropower environmental review processes and allow us to better focus our efforts on reviewing large-scale projects," Chairman Laura V. Swett said.
Congress has empowered federal agencies to create Categorical Exclusions, the use of which satisfies NEPA without the need to prepare an Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement, for certain types of actions that normally do not significantly affect the quality of the human environment.
In the first of two orders, FERC issued a Final Rule amending its NEPA regulations by expanding an existing Categorical Exclusion. The revised exclusion now covers terminations or revocations of hydropower licenses and exemptions that involve minor or no ground-disturbing activities and minor or no alterations to reservoir conditions and downstream flows. This change should streamline case processing and focus staff resources. A Notice of Proposed Rulemaking issued in February 2026 seeking public comment on these revisions.
In a second order, the Commission adopted two of the Tennessee Valley Authority's existing Categorical Exclusions. These exclusions apply to development of recreation sites near hydropower projects to support activities such as hunting, fishing, primitive camping, wildlife observation, hiking, and mountain biking, as well as development of public use areas that generally result in physical disturbance of no more than 10 acres. These activities may include construction of parking areas, campgrounds, stream access points, and day use areas.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.ferc.gov/news-events/news/ferc-fast-tracks-reviews-accelerate-actions-hydropower-projects
* * *
FERC Fast-Tracks Reviews to Accelerate Actions at Hydropower Projects
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) unanimously approved measures today to simplify its National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review procedures for hydropower-related actions with minimal environmental impact. These regulatory improvements are intended to increase efficiency and accelerate approvals while upholding environmental standards.
" We must move important approvals forward quickly while ensuring ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 17 -- The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission issued the following news release: * * * FERC Fast-Tracks Reviews to Accelerate Actions at Hydropower Projects The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) unanimously approved measures today to simplify its National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review procedures for hydropower-related actions with minimal environmental impact. These regulatory improvements are intended to increase efficiency and accelerate approvals while upholding environmental standards. " We must move important approvals forward quickly while ensuringwe fully meet our NEPA obligations. Today's actions are practical, common-sense solutions that streamline our hydropower environmental review processes and allow us to better focus our efforts on reviewing large-scale projects," Chairman Laura V. Swett said.
Congress has empowered federal agencies to create Categorical Exclusions, the use of which satisfies NEPA without the need to prepare an Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement, for certain types of actions that normally do not significantly affect the quality of the human environment.
In the first of two orders, FERC issued a Final Rule amending its NEPA regulations by expanding an existing Categorical Exclusion. The revised exclusion now covers terminations or revocations of hydropower licenses and exemptions that involve minor or no ground-disturbing activities and minor or no alterations to reservoir conditions and downstream flows. This change should streamline case processing and focus staff resources. A Notice of Proposed Rulemaking issued in February 2026 seeking public comment on these revisions.
In a second order, the Commission adopted two of the Tennessee Valley Authority's existing Categorical Exclusions. These exclusions apply to development of recreation sites near hydropower projects to support activities such as hunting, fishing, primitive camping, wildlife observation, hiking, and mountain biking, as well as development of public use areas that generally result in physical disturbance of no more than 10 acres. These activities may include construction of parking areas, campgrounds, stream access points, and day use areas.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.ferc.gov/news-events/news/ferc-fast-tracks-reviews-accelerate-actions-hydropower-projects
CPSC Issues Recall Alert Involving Noerishia Adult Portable Bed Rails
WASHINGTON, July 17 -- The Consumer Product Safety Commission issued the following recall alert:
* * *
Name of Product: Noerishia Adult Portable Bed Rails
Hazard: The recalled bed rails violate the mandatory standard for adult portable bed rails because users can become entrapped within the bed rail or between the bed rail and the side of the mattress, posing a serious entrapment hazard and risk of death by asphyxiation. In addition, the bed rails do not bear the required hazard warning labels.
Remedy: Refund
Recall Date: July 16, 2026
Units: About 504
Consumer Contact: Hurzein by email ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 17 -- The Consumer Product Safety Commission issued the following recall alert: * * * Name of Product: Noerishia Adult Portable Bed Rails Hazard: The recalled bed rails violate the mandatory standard for adult portable bed rails because users can become entrapped within the bed rail or between the bed rail and the side of the mattress, posing a serious entrapment hazard and risk of death by asphyxiation. In addition, the bed rails do not bear the required hazard warning labels. Remedy: Refund Recall Date: July 16, 2026 Units: About 504 Consumer Contact: Hurzein by emailat NoerishiaBedRailsRecall@outlook.com.
Recall Details
Description: This recall involves Noerishia adult portable bed rails. The bed rails come in black, measure 24 inches wide by 36 inches tall, are made of carbon steel, and weigh 8.4 pounds. "Model: KDB-504B" and "Batch: SO2025111104" are printed on the product packaging. The Noerishia branding "Noerishia" and "Model: KDB-504B" are printed on the instruction manual.
Remedy: Consumers should stop using the recalled adult portable bed rails immediately and contact Hurzein for a refund. Consumers will be asked to cut off the grey foam handgrip padding and cut the securing straps in half to render them unusable, then take a photo of the destroyed bed rail and send it to NoerishiaBedRailsRecall@outlook.com.
Incidents/Injuries: None reported
Sold Online At: Amazon.com from March 2026 through April 2026 for about $100.
Retailer: Dongguan Shinneng Huizheng Network Technology Co., Ltd., dba Hurzein
Manufactured In: China
Recall number: 26-627
* * *
Original text here: https://www.cpsc.gov/Recalls/2026/Noerishia-Adult-Portable-Bed-Rails-Recalled-Due-to-Risk-of-Serious-Injury-or-Death-from-Entrapment-and-Asphyxiation-Violates-Mandatory-Standard-for-Adult-Portable-Bed-Rails-Sold-on-Amazon-by-Hurzein
* * *
Name of Product: Noerishia Adult Portable Bed Rails
Hazard: The recalled bed rails violate the mandatory standard for adult portable bed rails because users can become entrapped within the bed rail or between the bed rail and the side of the mattress, posing a serious entrapment hazard and risk of death by asphyxiation. In addition, the bed rails do not bear the required hazard warning labels.
Remedy: Refund
Recall Date: July 16, 2026
Units: About 504
Consumer Contact: Hurzein by email ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 17 -- The Consumer Product Safety Commission issued the following recall alert: * * * Name of Product: Noerishia Adult Portable Bed Rails Hazard: The recalled bed rails violate the mandatory standard for adult portable bed rails because users can become entrapped within the bed rail or between the bed rail and the side of the mattress, posing a serious entrapment hazard and risk of death by asphyxiation. In addition, the bed rails do not bear the required hazard warning labels. Remedy: Refund Recall Date: July 16, 2026 Units: About 504 Consumer Contact: Hurzein by emailat NoerishiaBedRailsRecall@outlook.com.
Recall Details
Description: This recall involves Noerishia adult portable bed rails. The bed rails come in black, measure 24 inches wide by 36 inches tall, are made of carbon steel, and weigh 8.4 pounds. "Model: KDB-504B" and "Batch: SO2025111104" are printed on the product packaging. The Noerishia branding "Noerishia" and "Model: KDB-504B" are printed on the instruction manual.
Remedy: Consumers should stop using the recalled adult portable bed rails immediately and contact Hurzein for a refund. Consumers will be asked to cut off the grey foam handgrip padding and cut the securing straps in half to render them unusable, then take a photo of the destroyed bed rail and send it to NoerishiaBedRailsRecall@outlook.com.
Incidents/Injuries: None reported
Sold Online At: Amazon.com from March 2026 through April 2026 for about $100.
Retailer: Dongguan Shinneng Huizheng Network Technology Co., Ltd., dba Hurzein
Manufactured In: China
Recall number: 26-627
* * *
Original text here: https://www.cpsc.gov/Recalls/2026/Noerishia-Adult-Portable-Bed-Rails-Recalled-Due-to-Risk-of-Serious-Injury-or-Death-from-Entrapment-and-Asphyxiation-Violates-Mandatory-Standard-for-Adult-Portable-Bed-Rails-Sold-on-Amazon-by-Hurzein
CISA and Partners Publish Guidance to Help Software Manufacturers and Online Service Providers Work With Security Researchers
WASHINGTON, July 17 -- The U.S. Department of Homeland Security Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency issued the following news release on July 15, 2026:
* * *
CISA and Partners Publish Guidance to Help Software Manufacturers and Online Service Providers Work With Security Researchers
Guidance Provides Steps to Establish a Public Program to Receive and Respond to Software, Network and Hardware Vulnerability Reports
-
Today, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), in partnership with the National Security Agency (NSA), Japan Computer Emergency Response Team Coordination ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 17 -- The U.S. Department of Homeland Security Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency issued the following news release on July 15, 2026: * * * CISA and Partners Publish Guidance to Help Software Manufacturers and Online Service Providers Work With Security Researchers Guidance Provides Steps to Establish a Public Program to Receive and Respond to Software, Network and Hardware Vulnerability Reports - Today, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), in partnership with the National Security Agency (NSA), Japan Computer Emergency Response Team CoordinationCenter (JPCERT/CC), Netherlands' National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC-NL), and United Kingdom's National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC-UK), published Establishing a Coordinated Vulnerability Disclosure Program to Work With Security Researchers.
This guidance helps software manufacturers and online service providers collaborate effectively with security researchers who identify weaknesses in software, networks, and hardware in a structured, transparent framework. A well-defined coordinated vulnerability disclosure (CVD) program enables software manufacturers and online service providers to better assess potential risk, improve their vulnerability management processes, and make informed decisions that improve product security for their customers.
"Coordinated vulnerability disclosure is foundational to building a secure software ecosystem. The practices in this guide help protect customers, strengthen products and support CISA's Secure by Design initiative, which encourages companies to be transparent and responsible in how they build and maintain their technology," said Acting Executive Assistant Director for Cybersecurity Chris Butera. "CISA encourages suppliers to establish a coordinated vulnerability disclosure program and build constructive, collaborative relationships with security researchers to enhance product security."
Security researchers can help software manufacturers and online service providers stay ahead of security issues, but these researchers need a clear and safe way to report the potential vulnerabilities they discover. This guidance outlines best practices for establishing a CVD program that demonstrates commitment to building safe and trustworthy products. A critical element to establishing a beneficial disclosure program is a clear public policy that explains the process, such as how people can report issues, what is allowed during testing, and what both sides should expect during the assessment--including keeping researchers updated so the process is open and builds trust.
For more information, visit CISA.gov - Coordinated Vulnerability Disclosure Program (https://www.cisa.gov/resources-tools/programs/coordinated-vulnerability-disclosure-program).
* * *
About CISA
As the nation's cyber defense agency and national coordinator for critical infrastructure security, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency leads the national effort to manage, uncover, and reduce risk to our digital and physical infrastructure Americans rely on every hour of every day.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/news/cisa-and-partners-publish-guidance-help-software-manufacturers-and-online-service-providers-work
* * *
CISA and Partners Publish Guidance to Help Software Manufacturers and Online Service Providers Work With Security Researchers
Guidance Provides Steps to Establish a Public Program to Receive and Respond to Software, Network and Hardware Vulnerability Reports
-
Today, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), in partnership with the National Security Agency (NSA), Japan Computer Emergency Response Team Coordination ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 17 -- The U.S. Department of Homeland Security Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency issued the following news release on July 15, 2026: * * * CISA and Partners Publish Guidance to Help Software Manufacturers and Online Service Providers Work With Security Researchers Guidance Provides Steps to Establish a Public Program to Receive and Respond to Software, Network and Hardware Vulnerability Reports - Today, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), in partnership with the National Security Agency (NSA), Japan Computer Emergency Response Team CoordinationCenter (JPCERT/CC), Netherlands' National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC-NL), and United Kingdom's National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC-UK), published Establishing a Coordinated Vulnerability Disclosure Program to Work With Security Researchers.
This guidance helps software manufacturers and online service providers collaborate effectively with security researchers who identify weaknesses in software, networks, and hardware in a structured, transparent framework. A well-defined coordinated vulnerability disclosure (CVD) program enables software manufacturers and online service providers to better assess potential risk, improve their vulnerability management processes, and make informed decisions that improve product security for their customers.
"Coordinated vulnerability disclosure is foundational to building a secure software ecosystem. The practices in this guide help protect customers, strengthen products and support CISA's Secure by Design initiative, which encourages companies to be transparent and responsible in how they build and maintain their technology," said Acting Executive Assistant Director for Cybersecurity Chris Butera. "CISA encourages suppliers to establish a coordinated vulnerability disclosure program and build constructive, collaborative relationships with security researchers to enhance product security."
Security researchers can help software manufacturers and online service providers stay ahead of security issues, but these researchers need a clear and safe way to report the potential vulnerabilities they discover. This guidance outlines best practices for establishing a CVD program that demonstrates commitment to building safe and trustworthy products. A critical element to establishing a beneficial disclosure program is a clear public policy that explains the process, such as how people can report issues, what is allowed during testing, and what both sides should expect during the assessment--including keeping researchers updated so the process is open and builds trust.
For more information, visit CISA.gov - Coordinated Vulnerability Disclosure Program (https://www.cisa.gov/resources-tools/programs/coordinated-vulnerability-disclosure-program).
* * *
About CISA
As the nation's cyber defense agency and national coordinator for critical infrastructure security, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency leads the national effort to manage, uncover, and reduce risk to our digital and physical infrastructure Americans rely on every hour of every day.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/news/cisa-and-partners-publish-guidance-help-software-manufacturers-and-online-service-providers-work