It could signal an intention to amend the Federal Reserve Act and diminish policymakers’ independence, according to analysts at JPMorgan.

On Thursday, President Donald Trump named Miran, the chair of the White House’s Council of Economic Advisers, to fill a vacancy left by Adriana Kugler, who stepped down before her term was due to expire in January.

While he is known for a proposal authored before joining the administration that’s been dubbed the “Mar-a-Lago Accord” to address the U.S. trade deficit, another paper he cowrote in 2024 calling for the overhaul of the Federal Reserve is gaining more attention now.

In a note on Friday, JPMorgan analysts led by chief economist Bruce Kasman highlighted key proposals, such as giving at-will power to the U.S. president to fire Fed board members and Fed bank presidents, giving Congress control of the Fed’s operating budget, and shifting the Fed’s regulatory responsibility over banks and financial markets to the Treasury. 

“There is little doubt that the consequence of these reforms would be to materially increase the influence of the president over US monetary and regulatory policy,” analysts wrote.

Such changes would require approval from Congress, and JPMorgan pointed out that it’s not clear support for such broad changes exists.

But what is clear is that Miran is joining the Fed board—armed with a reform agenda. His 2024 paper accused the Fed of suffering from “groupthink” and mission creep, arguing that changes to the Fed would actually help preserve its independence. JPMorgan doesn’t see it that way.

“The main threat to the Fed independence is not politically motivated turnover shifting the outcome of votes,” analysts said. “Rather, the appointment fuels an existential threat as the administration looks likely to take aim at the Federal Reserve Act to permanently alter US monetary and regulatory authority.”

The White House didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

How the Fed could play defense

Congress has the power to modify the central bank’s authority and mission. Wharton finance professor Jeremy Siegel flagged this potential last month, when he told CNBC that Powell may need to resign in order to preserve the Fed’s long-term independence. 

His reasoning: if the economy stumbles, then Trump can point to Powell as the “perfect scapegoat” and ask Congress to give him more power over the Fed.

“That is a threat. Don’t forget, our Federal Reserve is not at all a part of our Constitution. It’s a creature of the U.S. Congress, created by the Federal Reserve Act 1913. All its powers devolve from Congress,” Siegel explained. “Congress has amended the Federal Reserve Act many times. It could do it again. It could give powers. It could take away powers.”

Sen. Bernie Moreno, R-Ohio, signaled willingness last week to amend the Federal Reserve Act, including the interest it pays on bank reserves and its dual mandate, though he said he believes in central bank independence.

JPMorgan said the Fed still enjoys support in the Senate, where changes to the Federal Reserve Act would need 60 votes to overcome a filibuster.

Still, the Fed will also take the threat to its independence seriously and actively protect it, which could mean “some accommodation” toward demands from the White House and Congress, analysts predicted.

“While dramatic shifts are not expected, the coming pressure on the Federal Reserve Act could bias Fed policy dovishly and regulatory decisions in a direction that lightens burdens,” they said.

A tilt toward monetary easing would come amid relentless pressure from the White House to cut rates, which have remained unchanged as Fed officials eye inflationary pressure from Trump’s tariffs.

Independence is meant to insulate the Fed from such political pressure. But Fed independence is a tricky concept, as it largely derives from a mix of laws, norms, informal agreements and traditions, Michael Pugliese, senior economist at Wells Fargo, told Fortune in an earlier interview.

He thinks it’s highly unlikely Congress will amend the Federal Reserve Act to allow for more explicit influence from the White House.

That’s because Democrats wouldn’t go along with it, and Republicans probably wouldn’t get rid of the filibuster rule in the Senate to immediately erode the Fed’s independence, he said.

“Getting rid of the filibuster would probably open the door to tons and tons and tons of other policy discussions on a lot of different issues, not just the Federal Reserve Act,” Pugliese explained. “The filibuster has stuck around as long as it has because both parties have had reasons and cause to not change it. And maybe that changes one day, but I would be very surprised if the thing that changed it was the Fed.”

Warner Music Group has reported total revenue of $1.689 billion in calendar Q2 (fiscal Q3), representing a 7.0% YoY increase in constant currency.

Yet, when one-time items are excluded, the company’s underlying recorded music performance was significantly stronger than headline figures suggest.

Warner’s quarterly recorded music revenue of $1.354 billion was officially up 6.4% YoY in constant currency. But excluding one-time items, the underlying growth was actually up 8.3% YoY in constant currency.

Perhaps most important for watching analysts: When the one-times are omitted, Warner Music Group’s underlying subscription streaming recorded music revenue was up 8.5% YoY in constant currency.

This figure represents a reacceleration of growth in perhaps WMG’s most critical metric for investors. (In the firm’s last quarter, calendar Q1, WMG’s recorded music subscription revenue was up by 3.2% YoY – while overall recorded music revenues were up just 0.7% YoY.)

Robert Kyncl, CEO, Warner Music Group, said today (August 7): “This quarter we delivered massive chart hits, breakthrough stars, strong revenue growth, and market share gains… all of which show our strategy is working.

“As we continue to evolve our company, we’re focusing on the artists, songwriters, and markets with the greatest potential, while expanding our iconic catalog, and building the dynamic teams and tools that will help our talent have the biggest global impact.”

WMG’s calendar Q2 2025 one-time adjustments cover two specific items:

• (i) The prior-year quarter (calendar Q2 2024) was boosted by +$22 million in catch-up payments from a digital service provider for previous periods; and
• (ii) Both quarters (calendar Q2 2024 and Q2 2025) were impacted by Warner’s terminated distribution agreement with BMG, which reduced current quarter revenue by $14 million compared to the prior year.

In addition, WMG’s recorded music result was impacted by +$16 million copyright settlement revenue in calendar Q2, which is also omitted to reach the underlying RM revenue growth figure.

Armin Zerza, CFO, Warner Music Group, said: “Our strong performance this quarter reflects our commitment to investing in great music, driving greater efficiency, and creating long-term value for our artists, songwriters, and shareholders.”

WMG’s calendar Q2: breaking down that $1.354B Recorded Music revenue

Within WMG’s $1.354 billion in recorded music revenue in calendar Q2, the firm’s streaming revenue (across ad-supported and subscription) totaled $895 million.

That was officially up 2.6% YoY in constant currency. However, excluding the one-time items, underlying streaming revenue growth was 5.8% YoY in constant currency.

Subscription recorded music streaming revenue reached $674 million, representing 4.2% YoY growth in constant currency. Yet on an underlying basis, as explained, this metric was up 8.5% YoY.

Ad-supported recorded music streaming revenue declined 1.8% YoY in constant currency to $221 million.

Warner’s biggest revenue-generating artists quarter included BAEKHYUN, ROSÉ, Bruno Mars, Grateful Dead and Teddy Swims.

Although WMG cited “strong market share gains in the US” to investors today, there was a particularly interesting geographic stat buried in its recorded music results: ex-US recorded music revenue grew significantly faster than revenue within the United States.

US-based recorded music revenue hit $536 million, up 4% YoY in constant currency (USD vs. USD); international recorded music revenue totaled $818 million, up 8% YoY in constant currency.

Elsewhere in WMG’s global recorded music results, physical revenue decreased 4.0% YoY in constant currency to $119 million, with the BMG termination accounting for $10 million of the decline.

Artist services and expanded-rights revenue increased 19.6% YoY in constant currency to $195 million, driven by higher concert promotion revenue primarily in France and Spain.

Licensing revenue increased 19.4% YoY in constant currency to $111 million, driven by licensing deals primarily in the U.K. and China, and timing of copyright infringement settlements.

WMG’s calendar Q2: Publishing generates $336 million

Warner’s music publishing division, led by Guy Moot and Carianne Marshall, posted $336 million in revenue, an increase of 9.4% YoY in constant currency.

Music publishing streaming revenue totaled $202 million, up 4.1% YoY in constant currency from $192 million in Q2 2024.

Total music publishing digital revenue reached $204 million, an increase of 4.6% YoY in constant currency.

WMG’s calendar Q2: Profits etc.

Warner’s adjusted OIBDA increased 15.8% YoY in constant currency to USD $373 million, with Adjusted OIBDA margin rising to 22.1% from 20.4% in constant currency.

Cash provided by operating activities decreased to $46 million compared to $188 million in the prior-year quarter, largely due to higher A&R spend and other movements in working capital.

The company reported a cash balance of $527 million as of June 30, 2025, with total debt of $4.363 billion and net debt of $3.836 billion.

Music Business Worldwide

A required part of this site couldn’t load. This may be due to a browser
extension, network issues, or browser settings. Please check your
connection, disable any ad blockers, or try using a different browser.