This bill abolishes the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and each Federal Reserve Bank and repeals the Federal Reserve Act. It sets a one-year wind-down window for those entities and requires federal agencies to liquidate assets and assume liabilities.
The statute rewrites where legal ownership and financial responsibility for the Fed’s balance sheet and employee benefits will sit, but it does not create a successor institution for conducting monetary policy, supervising banks, operating payment systems, or acting as lender of last resort — leaving major operational and legal gaps that would arise on repeal.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill abolishes the Federal Reserve’s Board and regional Reserve Banks effective one year after enactment and repeals the Federal Reserve Act on the same schedule. During that year the Chair manages a limited wind-down, OMB is directed to liquidate assets, and the Treasury assumes outstanding liabilities and receives net proceeds.
Who It Affects
The measures directly affect the Federal Reserve System’s employees and pension/benefit programs, the Treasury and OMB (which absorb assets and liabilities), federally supervised banks that interact with the Fed, and market infrastructure that depends on Fed services (payments, discount window, open market operations).
Why It Matters
Eliminating the statutory central bank changes legal custody of reserves and public-sector backstops, shifts fiscal‑monetary boundaries to the Treasury, and creates immediate operational questions about money supply management, emergency liquidity, and bank supervision.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill is narrowly drafted to abolish the institutional actors created by the Federal Reserve Act rather than to replace them. It sets a one‑year period after enactment during which the Board’s Chair is charged with winding up operations and managing employees until positions are terminated.
That wind‑down role is limited to administrative tasks: paying accrued compensation and benefits and overseeing asset and liability handling until liquidation or transfer.
For the financial side, the Office of Management and Budget must liquidate all assets of the Board and the Reserve Banks "in an orderly manner," prioritizing speed and maximizing returns to the Treasury. After satisfying accepted claims and redeeming Reserve Bank stock, the net proceeds are deposited into the Treasury’s General Fund.
Separately, the Secretary of the Treasury becomes legally responsible for all outstanding liabilities, including retirement and benefit obligations, with appropriations authorized from the transferred proceeds to satisfy them.The text does not assign the Fed’s functional authorities — such as setting interest rates, running open market operations, operating discount windows, maintaining reserve accounts, supervising and regulating banks, or conducting emergency liquidity programs — to any agency or office. It also contains a procedural reporting requirement: 18 months after enactment the Treasury and OMB must jointly report to Congress on implementation actions and unresolved matters, which creates a post‑repeal accountability point but not an operational successor plan.Practically, the statute converts a public central‑bank balance sheet into an asset‑liquidation exercise and places the fiscal authority (Treasury/OMB) in the center of execution.
That conversion promises to settle legal ownership quickly but raises immediate questions about continuity of payment systems, federal lending facilities, statutory supervision, and the constitutional separation between fiscal and monetary functions.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill abolishes the Board of Governors and each Federal Reserve Bank effective one year after enactment.
The Office of Management and Budget must liquidate all assets of the Board and Reserve Banks and transfer net proceeds to the Treasury’s General Fund after satisfying accepted claims and redeeming Reserve Bank stock.
The Secretary of the Treasury becomes legally liable for all outstanding liabilities of the Board and Reserve Banks, including retirement and employee benefits, with transferred proceeds appropriated to satisfy them.
During the one‑year wind‑down the Chair of the Board is authorized to manage employees, pay accrued compensation and benefits, and oversee asset and liability disposition subject to Treasury approval.
The Treasury and OMB must submit a joint report to Congress 18 months after enactment describing implementation actions taken and any unresolved issues.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
This single provision names the statute the "Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act." It has no operational effect but sets the scope for the following sections and signals the measure’s direct intent to dissolve the existing Federal Reserve framework.
Abolition of the Board and Reserve Banks
This subsection declares that, at the end of the one‑year window, the Board of Governors and each Federal Reserve Bank are abolished and that the Federal Reserve Act is repealed. The immediate legal effect is elimination of the statutory entities and repeal of the statutory authority that created the modern U.S. central bank — a change that severs the statutory basis for Fed functions unless other law preserves them.
Chair’s limited wind‑down role
This paragraph confines the Chair’s authority during the wind‑down to administrative closure: managing employees, paying accrued compensation and benefits, and overseeing assets and liabilities until liquidation or assumption. All substantive decisions about disposition are subject to Treasury approval, which centralizes control over the process and limits independent Federal Reserve discretion during the transition.
Asset liquidation by OMB and transfer to Treasury
OMB is directed to liquidate all Board and Reserve Bank assets "in an orderly manner" to maximize returns, then transfer net proceeds to the General Fund after satisfying accepted claims and redeeming Reserve Bank stock. This provision moves the Fed’s financial resources into the federal fiscal account rather than preserving a public‑sector balance sheet for monetary operations; it also creates sequencing and valuation questions about how and when assets (including Treasury securities, foreign currency holdings, and emergency facilities) are sold.
Treasury assumption of liabilities
This clause makes the Secretary of the Treasury responsible for all outstanding liabilities of the abolished entities, expressly including retirement and benefit obligations, and authorizes using the deposited proceeds to pay those liabilities. That creates an appropriation pathway but also puts future benefit payments on Treasury’s balance sheet and raises actuarial and budgetary implications for federal accounting.
Implementation report to Congress
Eighteen months after enactment, Treasury and OMB must jointly report to Congress on implementation steps and unresolved issues. The report is the statute’s built‑in transparency point but does not substitute for advance delegation of central bank functions; it provides a post‑action audit rather than an operational continuity plan.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Finance across all five countries.
Explore Finance in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- U.S. Treasury — Gains legal title to net proceeds from liquidation and becomes responsible for, and in control of, the Fed’s financial legacy, which can simplify federal accounting and provide short‑term fiscal receipts.
- Creditors and claimants with accepted claims against the Fed — The liquidation and transfer process creates a statutory route for claims to be satisfied from net proceeds.
- Policymakers seeking fiscal control — Centralizing assets and liabilities in Treasury gives elected fiscal authorities direct legal control of former Fed resources and obligations.
Who Bears the Cost
- Commercial banks and payment-system operators — They lose statutory access to central banking services (reserve accounts, payment settlement, discount window) unless alternative arrangements are created, imposing operational and liquidity risk.
- Treasury and OMB — They inherit complex asset‑management, valuation, and long‑term liability obligations (including pensions) that require budgetary resources and new administrative capacity.
- Financial markets and counterparties to Fed facilities — The statutory elimination of the Fed creates uncertainty about continuation of emergency facilities and open market operations; counterparties may face counterparty risk and legal uncertainty until replacement mechanisms exist.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill resolves one problem — the legal existence and ownership of Fed assets and liabilities — by converting central‑bank capital into fiscal assets, but in doing so it sacrifices the independent, statutory framework for conducting monetary policy and financial‑stability operations, forcing a choice between preserving operational continuity (and independence) through new legal structures or consolidating control and accepting substantial operational and market risk.
The bill is mechanically tidy about abolishing entities and moving balance‑sheet items, but it is substantively thin about functions. It does not reassign statutory authorities or operational responsibilities that underpin monetary policy, lender‑of‑last‑resort actions, bank supervision, or payment‑system settlement.
That silence forces two practical choices at implementation: either Congress (or the executive) must rapidly pass separate legislation or issue authority to create replacement structures, or those functions will lapse and be carried out on an ad hoc basis — each option carries legal and market risk.
The liquidation mandate also contains embedded trade‑offs. Speed and maximization of return are competing objectives for asset sales, especially for large holdings in Treasury securities and mortgage‑backed securities; rapid sales could disrupt markets and crystallize losses, while slow sales prolong uncertainty.
Assigning liability for employee benefits to Treasury resolves who pays but shifts long‑term budgetary exposure to taxpayers and requires actuarial reconciliation. Finally, centralizing control in Treasury raises separation‑of‑powers and independence questions: monetary discretion historically separated from fiscal politics would be legally removed absent a clear statutory replacement, which has constitutional and governance implications.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.