Calls are mounting in Germany and Italy to repatriate national gold reserves held in the United States, as rising geopolitical tensions and public criticism of the US Federal Reserve by former President Donald Trump prompt a reassessment of asset security across Europe.
On June 23, 2025, the Financial Times reported a growing sense of urgency in both countries to reevaluate the risks of storing gold abroad, particularly at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, where hundreds of billions of dollars in European gold remain under US custody.
This movement, once seen as symbolic, now reflects deeper concerns over trust in the American-led financial system amid shifting global power dynamics. With Trump continuing to question the Fed’s independence and competence, confidence in US stewardship is faltering — even among longtime allies.
Trump’s Fed Attacks Undermine Confidence Abroad
During and after his presidency, Donald Trump repeatedly criticized the US Federal Reserve, accusing it of incompetence and disloyalty. These attacks have had far-reaching consequences, casting doubt not only at home but across international circles that once viewed American institutions as models of stability.
For European powers like Germany and Italy, such rhetoric, paired with a volatile geopolitical climate, is amplifying calls to repatriate national assets. Analysts suggest the perception of vulnerability in leaving gold reserves in foreign hands is growing — especially as global alliances come under pressure and economic nationalism rises.
A History of Gold Held Abroad
Many countries began storing their gold in the US during and after World War II, when America was seen as a secure and politically stable safe haven. But that consensus has shifted.
Germany already repatriated substantial gold reserves between 2013 and 2017 from both New York and Paris, citing transparency and sovereignty. The current climate may push Berlin to accelerate those efforts. In Italy, while historically more passive on this issue, lawmakers and economists are now increasingly advocating for similar action.
Risks of Gold Custody in the US
At the core of the debate is a growing fear that foreign gold assets held in the US could be frozen or restricted during future geopolitical or financial crises. This concern, once considered far-fetched, has gained credibility in light of recent sanctions on Russia, restrictions on Middle Eastern banking, and the use of SWIFT network controls as geopolitical tools.
The potential return of Trump to the White House — and his unpredictable policy behavior — further intensifies the anxiety. For European nations whose postwar security frameworks were built on trust in US institutions, this marks a strategic crossroads.
Symbolism Meets Strategy
Gold repatriation is more than a logistical move; it’s a symbolic expression of sovereignty and strategic autonomy. In today’s fractured global environment, the once-pragmatic decision to store reserves in the US may now be viewed as a liability rather than an asset.
This trend dovetails with broader European Union discussions around military independence, trade policy, and technological self-sufficiency. Reclaiming national assets is becoming part of the growing call for a more self-reliant Europe — not just from populist factions, but from mainstream policymakers and academics as well.
A Contagion Effect in Motion?
Should Germany and Italy proceed with repatriating their gold, analysts warn it could trigger similar moves by other nations, including France, Austria, and even Asian economies such as Japan. Such a development would cast doubt on the US Federal Reserve’s role as the world’s most trusted custodian of gold.
More broadly, these actions could signal a crack in the foundation of the global financial system, prompting markets to rethink currency diversification, gold stockpiling strategies, and long-standing alliances. In a world reshaping itself along geopolitical lines, even the location of a country’s gold is no longer just symbolic — it’s strategic.
