Rather than explicitly describing the possibility of a reduction of asset purchases, recent Fed statements have merely said that policy would be "adjusted" according to incoming data. It has never said what direction that adjustment may take. Yet somehow the market has concluded that an imminent reduction is the only possibility. But the opposite conclusion is more likely. Recession avoidance is really the Fed's only concern and it will always come down on the side of accommodation. Therefore an expectation for a 2014 taper is just wishful thinking.
(Read more: Sen. Paul threatens to hold up Yellen nomination)
But that does not mean that QE will go on forever. It will come to an end, but not because the Fed wants it to, but because the currency markets give it no choice. A dollar crisis will ultimately force the Fed's hand, and the longer the Fed succeeds in postponing the inevitable, the more damage its policy mistakes will inflict on our economy.
Her second task will be equally impossible. Since the QE campaign began in 2010 the Fed has more than quadrupled the amount of bonds that it holds on its balance sheet, to more than $4 trillion of Treasury and mortgage-backed bonds. To accumulate this massive cache the Fed has become by far the largest buyer in both markets. Their purchases have pushed up the prices of those bonds and have kept long term interest rates low for both consumers and businesses.
When the QE was first launched, Ben Bernanke tamped down fears of the program by saying the Fed would one day sell the bonds that it was buying. But as the Fed's balance sheet ballooned, many in the market began fearing that the unwinding of these trades would crush the market for Treasuries and mortgage-backed securities. Bernanke soon allayed these fears by saying that the Fed would never not actively sell, but would simply allow bonds to mature. But this is just a convenient fiction.
(Read more: Op-ed: By not tapering, Fed actually increased stimulus)
If stock or real-estate prices were to enter into bubble territory (which I believe has already happened already), or if inflation were ever to surge past the Fed's low target range (which I believe is certain to happen), then the Fed would have to sell bonds to get in front of these trends.
Through Operation Twist, the Fed has already swapped a very large portion of their short-term bonds for long-term bonds. The slow process of waiting for bonds to mature is unlikely to slow down asset bubbles or inflation. The argument also does not account for the fact that the Treasury will have to sell new bonds in order retire the principle on the maturing bonds. Since the Fed is the primary buyer of Treasury bonds, the Fed would have to add to its balance sheet when it's trying to shrink it. Such a cycle is just a debt rollover that leaves the size of the Fed's balance sheet unchanged.
Unless other buyers of Treasurys or MBS can be found to replace the Fed's prodigious buying, they will remain the only game in town. Given these realities, how can we possibly expect Janet Yellen to actually diminish the amount of assets the Fed holds? She won't be able to do it and any expectations to the contrary are pure fantasy.
So we should not be asking when Ms. Yellen will begin withdrawing stimulus and shrinking the Fed's balance sheet. Instead we should be asking how the markets will react when she runs out of excuses for delaying the taper, or ultimately decides to expand QE rather than contract it.
— By Peter Schiff.
Peter Schiff is CEO of Euro Pacific Capital. Follow him on Twitter