The Trillion Dollar Coin proposal for solving the debt ceiling problem is again experiencing a blogosphere explosion this past week. The precipitating factor may be that people are starting to believe that the Republicans will come to a “fiscal cliff” settlement with the Democrats including very little in entitlement spending; but will then come back, in 2013 with a very tough position on the price they want to agree to raise the debt ceiling to give the Executive operating room for any length of time. Bruce Bartlett had this to say on the issue:
In my opinion, the fiscal cliff is akin to the so-called Y2K problem in late 1999, when many people worried that computers would freeze, elevators would stop running and planes would fall from the sky. Of course, nothing of the kind happened.
So if the fiscal cliff is a faux problem, why do we hear that industry and financial markets are deeply fearful of it? The answer is that there is a very real fiscal problem that will occur almost simultaneously – expiration of the debt limit. Much of what passes for fiscal-cliff concern is actually anxiety about whether Republicans in Congress will force a default on the nation’s debt in pursuit of their radical agenda.
I think Bartlett is right about attention shifting to the debt ceiling now, and that’s why we have a sudden explosion interest in high value platinum coin seigniorage having face values mostly in the low trillions, once again. Since the Trillion Dollar Coin (#TDC) is being vetted again, I wanted to make a brief point about it that is not well understood by the mainstream bloggers who have been stampeding to blog about the PPCS solution this week. Let’s lay out the context.
Most people who’ve thought about how the Government creates money know that Congress delegated the primary power to create currency to The Federal Reserve Banks, the system of which combined with the Board of Governors and the Federal Open Market Committee, form the central bank of the United States. In modern times, currency means not only printed money, but also electronically created credits, reserves held in Federal Reserve accounts.
The reserves that have been created by the Fed at any point, are many multiples of the amount of paper currency in existence produced by the Mint on orders from the Fed. So, most of the currency created by the Fed is in the form of reserves rather than paper currency. Also it’s well-known that when the Fed creates reserves, it does so “out of thin air.”
In our fiat currency system there is no “backing” for either the reserves or the paper currency. In exactly that sense, all of our currency is now “printed,” and has been since we went off the gold standard in 1971. There is no distinction between existing currency, whether paper, or reserves, and newly created currency in that respect.
The Fed however, doesn’t make all our money. The Treasury too, has its role. Congress delegated the US Mint the authority to coin fiat money, the value of whose metal content, with respect to certain types of coins, need have no relation to its face value, which can be as high or low as the Mint wants to make it. However, this has created a problem.
If the Mint coins money in denominations appropriate for commonplace retail transactions than the coins involved can be exchanged among parties as needed. But what happens if the Mint coins platinum money with face values in the trillions of dollars? Then that money can’t be used for exchange as a practical matter, because there are no buyers who will accept the trillion dollar coins in exchange. So, if the Treasury wants to use such coins to fill the public purse with money it can later spend on debt repayment or Congressional deficit appropriations, it must transform high face value coins into divisible money; i.e. reserves in its Fed spending account.
Fortunately, since high value coins are legal tender, the Mint, and the Treasury, can force the Federal Reserve to transform high value coins into reserves, by just depositing them into the US Mint’s Public Enterprise Fund (PEF) account, which the Fed must credit with reserves in return for the high value coins.
For example, if the Mint deposits a $One Trillion coin in the PEF, then the Fed must accept the coin and credit the PEF with an equivalent value of electronic credits in reserves. Then, the Treasury has the authority to “sweep” the PEF of all seigniorage, i.e. profits resulting from the Mint/Fed transaction.
In the case of $One Trillion proof platinum coin, the profits are its face value minus a few thousand dollars. So that amount would be “swept” into the Treasury General Account (TGA), which is the account used by Treasury to perform Government spending.
A very good way to look at high value platinum coins is that they are legal instruments for the Treasury to use the unlimited “out of thin air” reserve creation authority of the Fed to fill the public spending purse, the TGA, for public purposes. In effect, platinum coin seigniorage involves the Treasury commandeering the power of the Fed to create reserves and place them in the TGA, perhaps, depending on what the Treasury chooses to do, in the many Trillions of dollars. Functionally, it produces the same result as if the Fed were subordinate to the Treasury within the Executive Branch, and the Treasury had unlimited authority to create both currency and coins by fiat. Is this good?
I think it is. The vaunted independence of the Fed has not served us well over the years. What it has amounted to is that the Fed has not been accountable to the public. Its independence has meant independence from the Treasury and, largely, from Congress. But it has not meant independence from the big banks and Wall Street, which the Fed fails to regulate to any visible extent to protect the economy and the public, and whose interests the Fed has served ahead of the interests of the public at large.
In short, I am all for the President ordering high value platinum coin seigniorage, because I think the constraints imposed by that upon the Fed, and also the filling of the public purse to such an extent that it will be clear to people that the US can never run out of the currency it alone can issue, will make the Congress, the Fed, and the Executive Branch all much more accountable to the wishes of the American people.
The Congress and the Executive won’t be able to hide behind “we’re running out of money” anymore, when they refuse to enact that majority support among the people. And the Fed won’t be able to hide behind its “independence” to justify its doing the bidding the big private banks. Using proof platinum coin seigniorage, will be better for supporting a progressive democracy; and ultimately, that is why I favor it!
Photo in the public domain.




34 Comments

Slighty OT: Armando at DailyKos has an excellent overview of the 14th Amendment issue and an analysis of the political implications involved in dealing with the conflict between debt limits and the Congressionally created deficit. He also links to something about the trillion-dollar coin.
Public Debt of the United States Shall Not be Questioned: the 14th Amendment and the Debt Ceiling
Thanks. Rec’d.
Per the New York Fed:
… which is exactly what you said. And, the Fed pays for these coins in the same way that banks pay for almost everything: they simply credit the seller’s account, i.e., they simply change some numbers in computers somewhere, creating money “out of thin air.”
In the words of John Kenneth Galbraith: “The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled.”
Exactly. If the Fed reported to the Treasury, the Sec. of Tsy. could issue an executive order directing the Fed to credit the Treasury’s account for a certain amount. That order would normally be issued on a signed sheet of paper. Why should it make so damn much difference if the order is stamped onto a piece of metal? Why do grown men break into giggles at the mere mention of a trillion-dollar coin, and refuse to take seriously the authority of the government to issue fiat money.
Every respected economist that I’ve read (Greenspan, Galbraith, Krugman, Stieglitz, etc.) insist that the government has a printing press from which it can issue money to pay its bills. That is figuratively, but not actually, true. The Fed controls the issuance of printed money and is prohibited by law from directly paying the government’s bills. What the government has, however, is the mint, which is capable of exactly doing what its mythical printing press is supposed to be able to do. Nobody giggles at the prospect of printing fiat. Some react in horror. Some, e.g., Rick Perry, issued implicit threats of violence against the chairman of the Fed. But they don’t giggle like they do at the though of using the mint for that same purpose. Sigh!
We are in for a spectacle that’s for sure. This could be a battle of wills. I still wonder if the supremes will get involved. They would want to help the Rs but then they would be the ones responsible for default. Imagine that: the Supreme Court rules for default. And I never had a chance to vote for them.
That cliff now in the vernacular; Is the bottom a repeat of Weimar or John Law’s France? If this is possible, what advantage do we gain on the precipice? Debasement of every currency and subsequent inflation, declining jobs/wages, faster wealth transfer, household credit at all time high? Foreclosure fraud as an industry practice?
The only people winning are rich beyond avarice. Wealth transfer is running along fine, soon they will have it all. Our stability is an act of balancing on a grain of sand, on the edge of a “cliff”, and more weight is added every day.
What are we wishing for?
POTUS assuredly does not have the cojones to attempt anything like this.
Book Salon up with Steven Johnson’s Future Perfect: The Case For Progress In A Networked Age hosted by Nicco Mele
Thanks so much for the clear explanation.
For me, the question is, what can we expect should this momentous step occur, not because of a radical political decision to recover our social wealth from peonage to big finance and generally to disempower the plutocracy, but rather, as I think would be the case here, simply as a result of a meaningless squabble between the Dems and Repubs, who both basically remain the servants of big finance and the plutocracy?
So where does the money come from to buy $1B of platinum?
Just asking….
“In my opinion, the fiscal cliff is akin to the so-called Y2K problem in late 1999, when many people worried that computers would freeze, elevators would stop running and planes would fall from the sky. Of course, nothing of the kind happened.”
Is Bruce Bartlett always such an idiot? “Nothing of the kind happened” BECAUSE governments and corporations got off their asses and put in a million man-hours before the year 2000 to fix their computer systems ahead of time. No one sat around and did nothing about it. Bartlett sounds disappointed that the problem was fixed in time and he wishes it weren’t so society could have collapsed.
This time around we have the GOP threatening to collapse all of civilization just to retain political power for their party. 7B people are threatened with slow agonizing death just so a hundred million far-right extremists can force themselves to be relevant.
You don’t need more than an ounce or two, just enough to print the zeros on.
2 oz for 1 Bil?
Rrripoff!
http://www.apmex.com/Product/66137/default.aspx?utm_origin=pla&kwd=&utm_origin2=product-listing-ad&gclid=CKmAybayjrQCFWlxQgodmC0Ajw
We have it already…https://store.nwtmint.com/product_details/1350/Platinum_Eagle_1_Ounce/
Re Y2K: not really. Much of the world put in no such efforts, and recorded Y2K computer crashes around the world rounded off to zero. Though for a silver lining, I did read at some point that all the IT overhauling done in the name of Y2K precautions did have miscellaneous other benefits.
Platinum? Personally, I think they should print it on an old washer, or a lead slug.
Yes, he sent me a note, but I’ve not been able to get over there yet.
Well, people who would have bought bonds will have to put there money somewhere. Where will they put it? Two trillion dollars will go looking for a home. I hope you like speculation. Because gas prices will probably go up to 15 dollars a gallon. Food prices will triple or more. There is an old adage: “If something seems to good to be true, it probably is.”
And what about moral hazard? Do you really think politicians, especially a finance and economics ignoramous like Obama, could stop themselves after just two coins?
But given this is FDL where everybody takes their cues from Paul Krugman, perhaps people better wait a couple of days till he chimes in. Then you can all act like whatever he says is obviously true and you thought that all along. Since Krugman doesn’t give a shit about inflation or people on fixed incomes or any kind of savers, there is some hope he may actually like the idea. But don’t get your hopes up too high. Despite his proclivity for fantasy–e.g., space aliens attacking–even a twirp like Krugman probably realizes the coins are wacko.
You just watch the republicans radical agenda stirring up more dirt in Syria too. That’s another Iran Mossad/CIA project like 1953, so they can keep lining the Military Industrial Congressional Complex’s pockets with more of our blood and treasure. Putin won’t stand for it. The U.S. has to ‘fess up, and admit they’re the ones causing the dominos to start toppling world wide. Mr. Obama is still wet behind the ears, he cannot be Mr. placator to Israel. He should re-swear his secret service (Treasury Agents) to him.
I’m perfectly comfortable with some inflation as a modern monetary and/or fiscal mgmnt tool, but I don’t get why the enthusiasm for minting trillion dollar coins shouldn’t be constrained by what happened in Germany in 1923.
Conceptually, what’s different between us now, and Germany then, as sole proprietors of our/their own fiat currency?
Speaking as someone with a very minor role in making sure the Y2K rollover (which hit on a Saturday) didn’t cause massive havoc, I totally agree.
Exactly. I’m hoping for a sound and light show. The more outrage, feigned or not, the better.
If only FDR were around nowadays. Obama is usually too cautious. Still, FDR did overreach without success sometimes — I’m thinking of his trying to stack SCOTUS with additional justices of his own choosing. At least he pressed the limits to see, though.
If O did the coin trick it would twist LaGarde in knots, among others (not to mention the GOP).
See Mrs. Grundy at
http://www.france24.com/en/20121209-imfs-lagarde-warns-against-us-fudge-fiscal-cliff
It’s my understanding that even if a deal is struck on the fiscal cliff, and they “save” 5 trillion over the next 10 years, we still run budget deficits each and every one of those years. In 2022 the national debt will be 22 trillion, and the interest on the debt will consume more than half of all government tax revenue.
Debt that cannot be repaid, will not be repaid.
I like your old adage. This theory just sounds too perfect. Like noblesse oblige, libertarianism, or the dictatorship of the proletariat.
I just don’t trust it.
I think we’re closer to John Law’s France.
“History doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes.”
–Mark Twain
Germany printed too much money for their level of taxation. But, in 1933 they repeated the printing of money and did not run into inflation. They did run into some other non-monetary disasters — thank God. Similarly, we paid for our Civil War with greenbacks and did not cause inflation.
The value of the dollar is a matter of supply and demand. And the key is taxation, which causes the demand for and reduces the supply of dollars. Think of the dollar as a transferable tax credit. The best way to debase the dollar is by reducing taxes.
Obama would really need to be pressured to resort to this exquisite option ,since I sincerely believe he wants this issue for a pretext to cave on the safety net and social insurance ,but such pressure is vital if we are to get this asset-stripping austerity out of the public conversation so we can grow jobs and eliminate shortfalls by expanding the tax base .
I actually think it would be a win if we could pressure him to publicly refuse to use the coin option .If the option is that deep in the public consciousness ,a collective bubble of denial will burst and make O be seen as a fraud ,plus which ,it would be very much harder to slice and dice programs if it is being done as his prerogative .Keep firing up those blogosphere explosions .
Obama has already insisted publicly that “That won’t happen; we will not play this game.” referring to allowing the GOP to hold the debt limit hostage. And, White House spokesmen have insisted that he will not use the “Fourteenth-Amendment option.”
But, it’s not as though he has never reversed himself on such claims — think FISA Amendments Act. Or, that he has caved to accomplish things he visibly wanted to do and managed to dump the blame on the GOP.
The last time, the GOP refused to take the blame, so we got the fiscal cliff. This time, Obama’s not running for re-election and they are. So maybe he’ll simply take the blame and claim he did it for the long-term good of America and because they’d have destroyed the economy otherwise. Or something like that. ;-)
It’s fascinating how arcane technocratic details of monetary policy have magically become central to the political process. It’s like we’re not supposed to be discussing the real issues :)
I think it’s important to remember that what we spend money on, and the technical details of how we spend the money (debt, printing press, taxes), are two completely unrelated matters. Of course, politicians will claim all sorts of nonsensical things as long as Democrats accept the propositions…
So, what we’re trying to show Democrats is not only that the policy of covering 99% of the debt with borrowing, but also that it is not required by law. In other words, that the GOP has no debt-limit leverage except what Saint Obama gives them.
That would be a hilarious translation, the Gospel according to Deficit Disciple Obama. Or perhaps there is a missing letter on Saint Obama’s Harvascus conversion to the Serious Folk of Washingtonica.
Thanks wigwam for the update .When O says he won’t be held hostage does he mean he wants to bundle this issue into the present negotiations ? I f not ,I don’t understand the reasoning ,since coinage is to obviate this hostage taking scenario,or pretext to capitulate ,depending on one’s view .
The problem with this plan is that while US currency may not be backed by gold anymore, it is backed by the aggregate value of all goods and services sold in dollars, worldwide. In my mind, that’s a better thing to base a currency on than a particular metal, but it still has some of the same restraining effects.
Stamping One Trillion Dollars on a smallish chunk of platinum does not change that aggregate value by any detectable amount. It does, however, increase the supply of money by a large step. I don’t know exactly what that will do, but I have a healthy fear of deliberately introducing large perturbations in to complex and marginally stable systems (like the global economy). The fact that much of our political leadership would like to introduce other large perturbations (for example, forcing a default) does not mean this perturbation is a good idea.
And your evidence for this proposition is what? The rantings of Russia Times and Iranian state media? Do you completely discount the idea that the subjects of an authoritarian regime might decide to do away with that regime on their own?