Federal Reserve officials are debating whether New York Fed President John Williams must leave office in June 2027, the month of his 65th birthday — or whether he may stay until June 2028, a full decade after he took the New York post.

Williams himself has picked a side. He told Bloomberg News last month that he plans to stay until June 2028. "That's my commitment to the board of directors here at the bank, and also the commitment I had with my family, moving to New York, and we're going to be here for 10 years," he said.

A commitment, however, is not a ruling. A Board of Governors spokesperson declined to say when the central bank's leadership believes Williams has to step down. Pat Wang, who chairs the New York Fed's board of directors, also turned down a request for comment. Neither side is showing its hand.

Why the dates are disputed

Under Fed rules, regional bank presidents must step down when they turn 65. The usual practice allows presidents who start after turning 55 to serve a decade, provided their boards still view them favorably.

The dispute turns on how you count that decade. Williams led the San Francisco Fed from 2011 to 2018 before moving to New York. If those years count toward the ten-year term, he exits in 2027; if only the New York tenure counts, he stays to 2028.

The Federal Reserve Act (the 1913 law establishing the central bank) does not settle the question cleanly. Peter Conti-Brown, a Fed historian at the University of Pennsylvania, said the law can be read either way. The Board of Governors has the last word and could impose its view by removing a president, he noted — though he expects the board to avoid that confrontation and let Williams stay into 2028.

"Otherwise, it will look like John Williams got fired just as reserve banks are wary of greater board consolidation of their prior autonomy," Conti-Brown said.

What does this change for Fed Chair Kevin Warsh?

An exit in 2027 would let Warsh weigh in on who succeeds Williams 12 months sooner than a 2028 departure would. Whether Warsh or any Fed board officials would actually push for an earlier end to Williams' tenure remains unclear — a silence worth noting.

There is a cost to forcing the issue. Such a move might provoke pushback from fellow regional Fed presidents, who fear Washington is meddling in the affairs of banks they see as theirs.

The New York Fed seat carries unusual weight in any scenario. Its president holds a standing vote on the Federal Open Market Committee (the panel that sets interest rates) and serves as the central bank's main observer of Wall Street. Regional presidents are chosen by committees drawn from their banks' boards, and the Washington-based Fed board, which has seven members, must approve the picks.

Notably, the New York Fed's board has not launched an official search for a successor — a process that normally stretches across many months. That inaction suggests the bank itself is operating on the 2028 assumption, whatever the rules debate concludes.

A precedent, and an unease

A 2017 waiver for William Dudley offers the clearest precedent. The New York Fed's board granted, by unanimous vote, an exemption allowing Dudley, then its president, to remain in office after he turned 65 in January 2018. He retired the following June. Precedent, though, is not policy; the Board of Governors could treat Williams differently.

Derek Tang, an economist at Monetary Policy Analytics, included both possible departure dates next to Williams' name in a client note projecting when each Fed official will leave. "The fact that these issues are coming up in the first place is extraordinary," he said.

The extraordinary part is not the ambiguity itself, which has existed in the statute for decades. It is that the ambiguity is now actively contested — at a moment when the balance of power between Washington and the regional banks is already under strain. For markets, the practical question is who holds the New York seat and when; for now, nobody with authority to decide is willing to say.