How much impact on exchange rates do central banks have when they buy and sell currencies? According to many analysts, such intervention has no independent impact. This book challenges the conventional wisdom, demonstrating that such intervention can be an effective and extremely important tool for policymakers. Using previously unavailable daily intervention data from the US Federal Reserve and German Bundesbank, the authors show that even "sterilized" intervention -intervention that entails no corresponding changes in monetary policy- has a significant effect. A key element is whether the intervention is known to the public: widespread market awareness of the activity adds substantially to its payoff. Authors Dominguez and Frankel draw implications for intervention policy and its role in international economic policy coordination.

Foreign exchange intervention (FXI) is a highly debated topic. Yet, comprehensive and comparable data on FXI is hard to find. This paper provides a new dataset of FXI covering a large number of countries over the period 2000-20 at monthly and quarterly frequencies. It includes publicly available data for about 40 countries and carefully constructed proxies for 122 countries. Proxies are focused on both spot and derivative transactions that alter the central bank’s foreign currency position and account for a wide range of central bank operations, including vis-à-vis residents, the first proxy to do so to our knowledge. The paper discusses the merits of the new proxy relative to coarser measures traditionally used like the change in reserves, and potential definitional differences with published data. The paper also presents stylized facts using our newly constructed FXI proxies.

How much impact on exchange rates do central banks have when they buy and sell currencies? According to many analysts, such intervention has no independent impact. This book challenges the conventional wisdom, demonstrating that such intervention can be an effective and extremely important tool for policymakers. Using previously unavailable daily intervention data from the US Federal Reserve and German Bundesbank, the authors show that even "sterilized" intervention -intervention that entails no corresponding changes in monetary policy- has a significant effect. A key element is whether the intervention is known to the public: widespread market awareness of the activity adds substantially to its payoff. Authors Dominguez and Frankel draw implications for intervention policy and its role in international economic policy coordination.

The accumulation of large foreign asset positions by many central banks through sustained foreign exchange (FX) intervention has raised questions about its associated fiscal costs. This paper clarifies conceptual issues regarding how to measure these costs both from an ex-post and an ex-ante (relevant for decision making) perspective, and estimates both marginal and total costs for 73 countries over the period 2002-13. We find ex-ante marginal costs for the median emerging market economy (EME) in the inter-quartile range of 2-5.5 percent per year; while ex-ante total costs (of sustaining FX positions) in the range of 0.2-0.7 percent of GDP per year for light interveners and 0.3-1.2 percent of GDP per year for heavy interveners. These estimates indicate that fiscal costs of sustained FX intervention (via expanding central bank balance sheets) are not negligible.

Many emerging market economies have relied on foreign exchange intervention (FXI) in response to gross capital inflows. In this paper, we study whether FXI has been an effective tool to dampen the effects of these inflows on the exchange rate. To deal with endogeneity issues, we look at the response of different countries to plausibly exogenous gross inflows, and explore the cross country variation of FXI and exchange rate responses. Consistent with the portfolio balance channel, we find that larger FXI leads to less exchange rate appreciation in response to gross inflows.

We study the effect of foreign exchange intervention on the exchange rate relying on an instrumental-variables panel approach. We find robust evidence that intervention affects the level of the exchange rate in an economically meaningful way. A purchase of foreign currency of 1 percentage point of GDP causes a depreciation of the nominal and real exchange rates in the ranges of [1.7-2.0] percent and [1.4-1.7] percent respectively. The effects are found to be quite persistent. The paper also explores possible asymmetric effects, and whether effectiveness depends on the depth of domestic financial markets.

During the twentieth century, foreign-exchange intervention was sometimes used in an attempt to solve the fundamental trilemma of international finance, which holds that countries cannot simultaneously pursue independent monetary policies, stabilize their exchange rates, and benefit from free cross-border financial flows. Drawing on a trove of previously confidential data, Strained Relations reveals the evolution of US policy regarding currency market intervention, and its interaction with monetary policy. The authors consider how foreign-exchange intervention was affected by changing economic and institutional circumstances—most notably the abandonment of the international gold standard—and how political and bureaucratic factors affected this aspect of public policy.