Remember when Donald Trump and the GOP were going to cut the deficit, pay off debt and otherwise right America’s fiscal ship?
No? You don’t remember that? That’s ok, I don’t either. Because as discussed in the latest Monthly Letter, that was never on the cards. Arguably, it wasn’t even in the plan, Project 2025 being a roadmap to autocracy not a blueprint for budget discipline.
Anyway, the CBO on Wednesday released its latest budget projections and they aren’t what any real fiscal hawk would describe as favorable.
Specifically, deficit reductions associated with Trump’s tariffs are more than offset by red ink from his tax cuts and deportation campaign, leaving a shortfall that’s $1.4 trillion wider over 10 years than it was in the office’s last forecast.
There’s the chart. The total deficit (i.e., inclusive of debt servicing costs) will exceed $3.1 trillion in 2036, CBO reckons. Using their forecasts for growth, that’d be about 6.7% of GDP.
For context, deficits averaged less than 4% of GDP over the last half century. If you exclude net interest costs, you get a primary deficit of 2.6% of GDP this year and 2.1% in a decade. The last time the US ran a primary surplus was 2007 and before that the late 1990s, when the country briefly ran an overall surplus.
Note from the chart that the deficit’s seen at 6% of GDP in 2028 which should be (but won’t necessarily be) Trump’s last year as president. Scott Bessent says the administration’s going to get the deficit down to 3% by then. Suffice to say he’s not on track.
The CBO update also serves as a reminder: You can’t gimmick your way to a better fiscal trajectory. Without casting aspersions, raising tariffs to offset runaway domestic spending while simultaneously cutting taxes for the rich and corporations and eliminating anything that even sounds like it might be a regulation, is the worst kind of gimmickry: It’s protectionism meets supply-side legerdemain. Grievance-driven mercantilism meets voodoo economics.
When you throw in draconian immigration curbs and a sweeping deportation push, you’re left staring at an extraordinarily convoluted picture and a plan that couldn’t work even if its architects were well-intentioned, which they most assuredly aren’t (now I’m casting aspersions).
The CBO’s projections suggest the US economy will sustain a growth rate of about 1.8% from 2027 through 2036, no different (at all) than trend growth for a highly-advanced economy like America’s, and nowhere near the unrealistic 3% goal set out by Bessent.
On the debt front, the CBO sees America’s debt-to-GDP ratio hitting 120% in 2036 which, the office noted in an oblique nod to critics’ contention that the US is on an “unsustainable” path, would be “well above the previous record of 106% just after World War II.”



Get rid of the estate tax step up. Stop raising the estate tax exemption.
Hear hear! It is mind boggling that we not only favor capital over labor when it comes to taxation, but now, we give inheritance more favorable treatment than working or investing.
This is also what bugs me about prop 13 in California although the benefit around inheritance has been tightened slightly. A family just trying to gain a foothold is subsidizing people sitting on 6 or 7 figure gains in property value.
We, Americans, sure like to give the wealthy and their progeny every advantage we can.
How long before the director of the CBO gets fired? Or investigated for mortgage fraud?
No worries, the size of the federal debt doesn’t matter as long as the interest rate is 1%, and they have a plan for that.
I had a very realistic dream last night that someone (?) paid each of the Federal Reserve Governors one million dollars to resign/retire so that someone could fill the empty slots. How unrealistic! It would probably have to 5 mil each. That is how 1% fed funds could easily be achieved. Easy, peasy.
We need lower tariffs, and lower taxes on people who work (social security and medicaid). These taxes should be replaced by a vat which could be structured to tax basics that lower income folks need/buy. Vats can get refunded on exports so that would help trade. And a vat is a broader tax so everyone pays it not just working folks. It would really help the bottom 60%. If you made the vat high enough maybe you could finally fund some socially desirable goods like universal health care.It will never happen. Oh well.