Contact us
CALL US NOW 1-888-GOLD-160
(1-888-465-3160)

The Federal Budget Mess Is Even Worse than Reported

  by    0   1

The federal government is borrowing money at levels one would expect to see during a major economic crisis. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the federal deficit for the fiscal year 2018 will come in at around $804 billion. That is expected to balloon to around $985 billion in fiscal 2019.

Does that seem pretty bad to you? Well, it’s even worse than you think.

If you look at the increase in the federal debt, you’ll find that it is bigger than the deficit. How can this be? The government simply excludes some of the money it borrows in the deficit.

To make sure we’re clear on terms, the deficit represents the amount of money the government spends each year above and beyond the amount of revenue it brings in. So, if the federal government spend $2 and collects $1 in revenue, it will run a $1 deficit. The debt represents the cumulative amount of all of the deficits. So if the government ran that $1 deficit for five years, it would end up with a $5 debt.

Now, if the government claimed to run a $1 deficit for fives years but reported a debt of $7, that would seem a little fishy, right? Well, that’s exactly what’s happening. For example, in the fiscal year 2016, the federal government claimed a deficit of $587 billion even though the total debt increased by $1,422 billion.

The feds are clearly understating the deficits. They simply pretend some of the money they are borrowing isn’t part of the deficit. So, what’s really going on here?

Ferris State University economics professor Mark Brandly dug deeper into the numbers in an article published on the Mises Wire.

According to the “Economic Report of the President,” government spending (outlays) over the twenty year period from Fiscal Year 1998 to FY 2017 more than doubled from $1,652.5 billion to $3,981.6 billion. In real terms, using the implicit price deflator as our measure of inflation, this was a 67% increase in spending.

Let’s take into account the economic growth during this period. Again, according to the Economic Report of the President, real GDP increased 54% in this twenty year period. So spending as a percentage of GDP only increased from 18.9% of GDP to 20.5% of GDP. It’s important to note that this does not include the substantial amount of spending at the state and local levels of government.

But the “Economic Report of the President” does not give us the full story of the government’s budget.

Return to the previous example. Assume that you were $20,000 in debt at the beginning of the year. But in addition to your $4,000 of other spending you were required to make $8,000 of payments on this debt in 2017. Your income was only $3,000. So you borrowed $9,000 to cover your deficit plus principal payments (again multiply these numbers by a billion dollars to approximate actual federal spending).

This example is roughly the situation for the federal government.

The Treasury Department with their Daily Treasury Statements (DTS) gives us an accounting of all deposits into and withdrawals from federal government accounts. The DTS shows that withdrawals more than tripled from $4,036 billion in FY 1998 to $12,995 billion in FY 2017. This is all outlays of federal spending, including government purchases, transfer payments, interest payments, principal payments on their debt, and all other withdrawals.

Adjusting for inflation, again using the implicit price deflator, this is a 124% increase in spending over twenty years. And DTS withdrawals as a percentage of GDP increased from 46% to 67% of GDP in this time period.

Let me say this again. If we define spending as total withdrawals from government accounts, then FY 2017 spending was $12,995 billion and government spending is 67% of GDP.

So, is federal spending, in 2017, 20.5% of GDP or 67% of GDP? What is the discrepancy between these estimates? The main issue here is the government’s debt service payments. Federal debt held by the public increased from $3.8 trillion at the start of FY 1998 to $14.7 trillion at the end of FY 2017. That’s 287% in twenty years. This has led to an increase in debt payments (called Public Debt Cash Redemptions) from $2.18 trillion to $8.43 trillion over this same time period. That’s right. The federal government paid $8.43 trillion in debt redemption payments in FY 2017. That’s ten times the Social Security Benefits paid out ($842 billion). Not counting these payments when reporting government spending is the chief reason that federal spending is reported to be 20.5% of GDP.

In order to cover the 2017 payments servicing the debt, federal government borrowing (called Public Debt Cash Issues), again this information comes from the DTS, was $8.89 trillion. This was the borrowing necessary to cover the $8.43 trillion in debt payments and the deficit resulting from the remaining parts of the budget.

Should this be a concern? On one hand, borrowing to pay for previous borrowing does not substantially change the government’s balance sheet. $8.4 trillion of liabilities is still $8.4 trillion of liabilities. In that sense, we should not be concerned about this matter. We should instead focus on changes in the total debt (the true deficit) and interest payments on the debt of $240 billion in FY 2017.

However, we must recognize that debt payments are a form of government spending and the fact that the feds must finance this spending. Due to the principal payments on the debt, 77% of federal spending is financed by borrowing. As the overall debt rises, the risk of default grows and lenders will demand higher interest rates on government securities to account for this risk. Borrowing to make the interest payments will compound the size of the debt. This exponential growth of the debt increases the risk associated with lending to our government and intensifies the problem.

Federal government spending is much higher and their budget position is more precarious than is typically reported. Including the federal debt payments as reported by the Daily Treasury Statements provides us with a more accurate picture of the federal budget and a better understanding of a possible upcoming budget crisis.

Get Peter Schiff’s latest gold market analysis – click here for a free subscription to his exclusive monthly Gold Videocast.
Interested in learning how to buy gold and buy silver?
Call 1-888-GOLD-160 and speak with a Precious Metals Specialist today!


Related Posts

West Virginia Legislature Approves Measure to Repeal Sales Tax on Gold and Silver Bullion

The West Virginia legislature has approved a bill that would take an important first step towards treating gold and silver like money instead of a commodity by repealing sales and use taxes on bullion. Related

READ MORE →

Consumer Debt Breaks Yet Another Record in January

Total consumer debt broke another record in January, according to the latest report by the Federal Reserve. Borrowing increased by $17.05 billion in the first month of 2019. The increase pushed overall consumer borrowing to a new $4.03 trillion record. That compares with $3.84 trillion in January 2018. That represents a 5.1% annual increase. Related

READ MORE →

China Increases Official Gold Reserves for Third Straight Month as Anti-Dollar Push Continues

the country of china shown on a globeChina added to its official gold reserves for the third straight month in February as the country continues efforts to minimize its exposure to the US dollar. The People’s Bank of China added 10 tons of gold to its horde last month. It has accumulated an additional 32 tons of the yellow metal since the […]

READ MORE →

Powell Pause for the Masses: Fed Chair Talks to 60 Minutes

Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell took his dovish message to the masses during a recent 60 Minutes interview. Powell continued to talk about “patience” and reiterated that the Fed “does not feel any hurry” to push rates any higher. He also said the interest rate is “roughly neutral” at this point, calling the current 2.25-2.5% […]

READ MORE →

Modern Monetary Theory and the Green New Deal: A Match Made in Hell?

How will America pay for Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal? After all, as Peter Schiff said a few weeks ago, you can’t print wealth. But there is a growing number of people who seem to believe you actually can – at least indirectly. And they have an economic theory they claim backs them up. It’s […]

READ MORE →

Comments are closed.

Call Now