Federal Reserve Chair Warsh tells Senate the Fed has no reason to suspect criminal activity over record-keeping concerns

Kevin Warsh has barely settled into his chair at the Federal Reserve, and Congress is already asking uncomfortable questions. Two months after being sworn in as Fed Chair, Warsh appeared before the Senate Banking Committee on July 15, 2026, to address growing concerns about the central bank’s record-keeping practices and how it enforces trading blackout rules for its officials.

His answer on the most serious concern was direct: the Fed has no reason to believe criminal activity is occurring, but the institution will cooperate fully with any investigation that lawmakers or oversight bodies pursue.

What exactly is at issue

The Fed’s blackout period is one of the more straightforward governance tools in central banking. In the days before and after a Federal Open Market Committee meeting, Fed officials are prohibited from trading certain securities and from making public statements that could move markets. The idea is simple: people with advance knowledge of interest rate decisions should not be profiting from that knowledge.

The concern raised by lawmakers, including Senator Elizabeth Warren, is that record-keeping policies may have been loosened in ways that make it harder to verify whether officials are actually complying with those restrictions.

Warsh testified before the House on July 14, the day before his Senate appearance, making these back-to-back hearings his first major congressional test since the FOMC unanimously selected him as chair and he was sworn in on May 22, 2026.

For context, the Fed’s record-keeping and ethics framework came under heavy scrutiny in 2021 and 2022, when it emerged that multiple regional Fed presidents had made significant personal trades during a period when the central bank was making historic market-moving decisions. Several officials resigned or retired early. The fallout reshaped how the Fed approached its ethics rules, which makes the current suggestion that documentation standards may have softened a particularly sensitive topic for an institution still rebuilding credibility on this front.

Warsh’s posture: cooperative, not combative

Warsh’s approach in both chambers appears to have been measured. He did not dismiss the concerns, but he also did not concede that anything improper had occurred. He did not claim the record-keeping concerns were overblown or politically motivated.

Warsh himself is a familiar name in Fed circles. He served as a Fed Governor from 2006 to 2011, covering the full arc of the financial crisis, and was considered for the chair role during both the Obama and Trump administrations before finally landing the position.

What this means for markets and Fed watchers

The more pressing near-term question is whether the Senate Banking Committee’s concerns produce a formal investigation or remain at the level of oversight hearings.

Senator Warren’s focus on the record-keeping angle is strategically pointed. By framing the concern around documentation rather than alleging specific misconduct, critics can sustain scrutiny without needing to produce evidence of a concrete violation.

Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.