The Federal Reserve is about to change leadership: Trump calls for "a good time to cut interest rates," what is the market waiting for?

The U.S. Senate Banking Committee approved Kevin Wirth’s nomination to become the Chair of the Federal Reserve in a local-time vote on April 29, with 13 in favor and 11 against, clearing the way for a full Senate floor vote in mid-May. This is the most critical procedural checkpoint since Trump nominated Wirth.

The vote results, drawn strictly along party lines—13 Republican lawmakers all voted in favor, while 11 Democratic lawmakers all voted against—reveal deep divisions between the two parties over the direction of monetary policy. Before the vote, Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren issued sharp criticism, saying that if Wirth were confirmed, he would “weaken the Fed’s independence from the executive branch,” and warning that Trump is trying to “artificially stimulate the economy” through personnel arrangements. This vote is not only a test of Wirth’s personal qualifications, but also a signal from Congress regarding the boundaries of political power over monetary policy independence.

What is driving Trump’s public call for rate cuts—what lies behind the “good timing”?

Around the time of the vote, Trump publicly said that this is a good time to cut interest rates, and admitted that he would be disappointed if Wirth does not cut rates immediately after taking office. This statement actually reflects the overlap of multiple economic and political demands.

From a macro perspective, the U.S. federal funds rate is currently maintained in the 3.50% to 3.75% range and has been held steady for three consecutive times since the start of the year. At the same time, the total amount of U.S. Treasuries surpassed $39 trillion for the first time this March. In a high interest-rate environment, debt interest expenses have risen sharply, significantly intensifying pressure from the fiscal deficit. Cutting rates can reduce the government’s borrowing costs and provide financing support for the executive branch’s fiscal agenda. From an election-politics perspective, rate cuts that release liquidity and stimulate consumption and investment are an effective tool for winning over core voters. However, once this combination becomes explicit, monetary policy will be hard to escape the shadow of administrative pressure, and market trust in the Fed’s independence could be eroded.

Is Wirth’s monetary policy framework hawkish or dovish? The paradox of pairing interest rates with the balance sheet

When distinguishing policy tools across different dimensions, Wirth’s positions show complex contradictions. At his Senate confirmation hearing, he stated clearly that he favors using interest-rate tools rather than balance-sheet tools to manage the economy. He said that interest-rate tools are “more precise and fair,” while balance-sheet tools “disproportionately benefit those who hold financial assets.”

The impact of this framework on crypto assets needs to be understood from two directions. First, reducing reliance on balance-sheet expansion—namely, quantitative easing—means that the macro support that has helped keep liquidity for risk assets such as Bitcoin loose over the past decade could be removed. Second, he also proposed the “AI productivity theory,” implying that technological progress might allow rate cuts while keeping inflation low, which is a dovish signal. In addition, Wirth characterized the current inflation predicament as a “fatal policy mistake” by the Fed. He pointed out that after the pandemic, prices rose broadly by 25% to 35%, and called for “institutional change,” including establishing a new inflation framework and reforming how the central bank communicates. Under this complex framework, the policy priorities and the way tools are combined after Wirth takes office will directly affect global liquidity expectations.

A smooth vote is expected in the full Senate—but why does the “dual-chair” setup become a variable?

For now, it is almost certain that the Senate will ultimately approve Wirth’s nomination. According to reports, the earliest the full Senate vote could be held is the week of May 11. If things go smoothly, Wirth could be sworn in on May 15—the day the current Chair, Powell, completes his term.

However, the real uncertainty lies in Powell’s decision to remain a Fed Governor until January 2028 after announcing his departure as Chair, continuing to serve until the investigation into him is clearly concluded before deciding whether to stay or leave. This would be the first time since 1948 that a Fed Chair continues to serve as a Governor after stepping down. This means Wirth could face a more divided committee: the ultra-dovish Governor Mylan would have to leave to make room for Wirth, while Powell’s decision to remain would prevent Trump from appointing another new Governor who leans dovish. In the short term, the Fed will enter a rare period of policy bargaining between “two chairs.”

FOMC internal disagreement hits the highest level in 34 years—when will the rate-cut window arrive?

The April 29 FOMC meeting resulted in an 8-4 vote to keep rates unchanged, but the four dissenting votes set the record for the most opposition since October 1992. Among them, Governor Mylan supported a 25-basis-point rate cut; Cleveland Fed President Harker, Minneapolis Fed President Kashkari, and Dallas Fed President Logan opposed writing a more accommodative bias into the statement. More notably, three dissenters objected to the wording of the policy statement—opposing keeping the phrase “consider further adjustments to the extent and timing of interest rate changes”—which is extremely rare in Fed history.

Behind the disagreement is persistent high pressure from the inflation environment. In the statement, the Fed described inflation as “at a high level” rather than the earlier phrasing “still somewhat elevated,” and added wording that “partly due to recent increases in global energy prices.” Elevated oil prices, an escalation of geopolitical tensions, and the impact of tariffs together create a real short-term pressure that argues for rate hikes rather than rate cuts. CICC research noted that, from a fundamental perspective, the Fed should cut rates 2 times, but the actual timing of the rate-cut window “depends on oil prices and whether Trump coordinates,” and if oil prices remain high, rate cuts could be delayed until the fourth quarter.

With rate-cut expectations pushed back, what macro pressure is the crypto market absorbing?

As of April 30, 2026, Bitcoin was trading on the Gate trading platform around $75,785, down 0.6% over the past 24 hours. After the April 29 FOMC announcement that rates would be kept unchanged, the market’s “risk appetite” was dampened. Bitcoin pulled back from an early-week attempt at $79,000 and consolidated in roughly the $76,000 to $77,000 range.

The macro transmission logic in today’s crypto market is clear. Wirth’s preference for interest-rate tools rather than balance-sheet tools suggests that the liquidity-loosening logic driven by quantitative easing may be changed. Disagreement within the FOMC weakens the certainty of expectations for rate cuts. High oil prices further suppress risk appetite. Several analysts noted that if the Fed releases clear forward guidance on rate cuts in June or in subsequent meetings, markets could test resistance above $80,000. Conversely, if hawkish expectations continue to strengthen, mid-term support in the $60,000 to $65,000 range could face challenges. In addition, crude oil prices rising to $116.85 per barrel further exacerbates inflation pressures and reduces the likelihood of rate cuts in the short term.

Summary

The Senate Banking Committee’s approval of the Fed Chair nomination (13-11) marks a key window for the transfer of power in U.S. monetary policy. Trump’s public call for rate cuts shows an ongoing intention for executive-branch intervention in interest rate decisions. However, the most severe internal FOMC dissent in 34 years, combined with high oil prices and structural constraints from a rebound in inflation, means there is a significant risk of delay in the rate-cut path. Under expectations of a potential “paradigm shift” in monetary policy, the crypto market faces challenges as liquidity logic is reshaped. There is downward pressure on the short-term volatility center of gravity, and the timing and magnitude of rate cuts will be the most important macro pricing variables in the second half of the year.

FAQ

Q: How many steps remain before Wirth’s nomination for Fed Chair is finalized?

A: The nomination has passed the Senate Banking Committee (13-11). The next step is a full Senate floor vote, expected to be held as early as the week of May 11. If approved, Wirth can be sworn in on May 15, the day Powell’s term ends.

Q: Will the Fed follow Trump’s call for rate cuts?

A: At the April 29 FOMC meeting, the Fed voted 8-4 to keep rates unchanged, and the statement’s inflation language turned more hawkish. Even after Wirth takes office, he will still face a committee whose internal division is at a 34-year high, plus real obstacles to rate cuts in the short term from high oil prices (Brent crude at $116.85 per barrel).

Q: What does Wirth’s taking office mean for the crypto market?

A: Wirth favors using interest-rate tools rather than balance-sheet tools, which could weaken the liquidity-loosening logic that has supported Bitcoin. He called for a “paradigm shift” in monetary policy at the hearing and emphasized that stabilizing prices is the core duty. The market needs to closely watch how Wirth’s first FOMC wording changes after he takes office.