It is far too early to judge the effects of the Brexit vote. As the global outlook evolves, it will be important to assess the implications for the U.S. economy, and for the stance of policy appropriate to foster continued progress toward our objectives of maximum employment and price stability.

I am often asked why rates remain so low now that we are near full employment. A big part of the answer is that, at least for the time being, the appropriate level of rates is simply lower than it was before the crisis. As a result, policy is not as stimulative as it might appear to be. Estimates of the real interest rate needed to keep the economy on an even keel if it were operating at 2 percent inflation and full employment--the "neutral rate" of interest--are currently around zero. Today, the real short term interest rate is about negative 1-1/4 percent, so policy is actually only moderately stimulative. I anticipate that the neutral rate will move up over time, as some of the headwinds that have weighed on economic growth ease.

I don't know that it would, but I think [a Brexit vote] could have significant economic consequences by launching a period of uncertainly, both for the United Kingdom and possibly the future of European economic integration. Most analyses suggest it would have negative economic consequences for the U.K. and spillover to Europe.

More broadly speaking, I think the financial market reaction to the uncertainties that would be unleashed by that decision could result in a kind of risk-off sentiment that we would see impacts on financial markets, that we might see flight to safety flows that could push up the dollar or other so-called safe haven currencies. 

I don't want to overblow the likely impacts, but we're aware of them. We will watch them and consider those impacts as we make future decisions on monetary policy.

Minneapolis Fed President Neel Kashkari on Monday said Monday that the “base case” of the U.S. central bank is that there will be only “moderate direct effects” on the U.S. economy if Britain votes later this week to leave the European Union.

“If we’re wrong and it ends up being a much larger effect, then I think all policy options would be on the table in response to that."

A U.K. vote to exit the European Union could have significant economic repercussions.

“This is adding a lot of uncertainty to the global economic environment, and there’s already a lot of uncertainty with global slowing around the world,” Evans said in an interview with Anna Edwards on Bloomberg Television on Friday. “This is just a very big unknown.”

I'm not an expert [on the issue of Brexit] and I think that it's a very critical decision obviously and it's going to have important ramifications for the country so I think everybody's attuned to this and looking to see how that plays out. I think in terms of the U.S., it's difficult to judge the influence. I think that markets must have been expecting, coming up to this decision time, and we'll have to see how it plays out. I'm not sure it plays an important role in our policy making beyond us just monitoring the U.S. data and general global financial conditions and having confidence that things are still on a good track.

With Brexit, obviously, there’s just a lot of uncertainty... Obviously, if there are implications for growth over time, that’s something that would affect our ongoing monetary policy.”

“With Brexit, obviously, there’s just a lot of uncertainty,” Tarullo said in a Bloomberg Television interview Thursday, pointing to the question of whether the U.K. would vote in the June 23 referendum to remain in the EU or leave. “In the short term I think it’s more of a question of the immediate impact on markets. Obviously, if there are implications for growth over time, that’s something that would affect our ongoing monetary policy.”

"Brexit" is a consideration in policy but not fundamental to US economy

He [Bullard] said that even if the U.K. decides to leave, “the next day nothing happens” and the country will enter into departure negotiations bound to go “very slowly.”

“I also see the probability of an exit vote as having fallen somewhat recently,” Bullard told an audience at a monetary and financial institution forum in Beijing on Monday. “Because of these factors I feel it won’t influence the FOMC’s decision.”

"[Brexit] is a factor in the decision for June obviously because you have an event right after, and we can obviously hold off until July if we wanted," Williams, speaking to reporters here, said of raising rates at the next two policy meetings.

"But of course we could also make a decision to raise rates at a meeting and if later on economic conditions for the U.S. change, we can always move interest rates back down," said Williams, an influential centrist who does not have a vote on policy this year.

Votes by themselves shouldn’t be a reason for altering monetary policy. If we were experiencing significant changes in financial conditions that made us significantly alter the outlook going
forward that would be something that we should take into account.

But the fact that there happens to be an election or not be an election on a particular date by itself should not be determinative . . . What we care about is we will have data on the second quarter but ideally we want to see the third and fourth quarter making the same kind of progress that we are hopefully going to be seeing in the second quarter and if there were events to alter our expectation for how the economy was going to evolve in the future that we obviously should take into account before we tighten rates.

If there is nothing that is altering our overall forecast for the economy that shouldn’t influence the timing of a decision.

In terms of the Brexit issue, obviously that is another variable in the mix. The meeting concludes a week before the Brexit vote, and so there’s a possibility of an event a week later that could potentially have consequences for financial market conditions. We’ll have to think about that in terms of waiting, whether it makes sense to go in June or wait a little bit later. My own view is that, in thinking about Brexit, I wouldn’t want to say that it is determinative, that whether you go or wait. It depends a bit on (1) the probability of an adverse vote in the UK, a “leave” vote, what’s our assessment of the likelihood of that, (2) what’s our assessment of what the likely impact on financial conditions would be if there was such a vote and (3) viewing at that in the context of how strong the economy looks at the time.

"Brexit could be a source of heightened global uncertainty," Lockhart said in a speech before the World Affairs Council of Jacksonville, Florida, adding it "has some potential to loom large as we approach the June meeting."

. . . 

"It is the repercussions [Brexit's] for the U.S. economy that would concern me...it's really a question of indications in financial markets of a reaction to rising uncertainty and the degree of volatility we are seeing again in financial markets"

“It’ll be a factor,” Kaplan said Friday about the U.K.’s approaching vote on whether to exit the European Union. If the result is uncertain heading into the June 23 referendum, that could roil currency and bond markets and “create some instability”

. . . 

“I’m going to have to make an assessment on June 15th what the likelihood is,” said Kaplan, who doesn’t vote this year on the policy-setting Federal Open Market Committee. “Right now it’s unclear, and if it’s still unclear on June 15 it is going to be a factor.”

Evans cited the U.K. referendum on leaving the European Union and the the surge of refugees entering Europe. He added there’s also a “large uncertainty” about the U.S. presidential election in November.

“It’s hard to know what risks might be hitting us,” said Evans, who will vote on monetary policy next year. “We’re in a period where there are more uncertainties than you would normally have.”