document_title: National debt of the United States

question_text: who owned the largest share of u.s government intragovernmental debt holdings at the end of 2016

question_tokens: who owned the largest share of u.s government intragovernmental debt holdings at the end of 2016

text: National debt of the United States

text: History[edit]

text: The United States government has continuously had a fluctuating public debt since its formation in 1789, except for about a year during 1835–1836. To allow comparisons over the years, public debt is often expressed as a ratio to gross domestic product (GDP).

text: The United States public debt as a percentage of GDP reached its highest level during Harry Truman's first presidential term, during and after World War II. Public debt as a percentage of GDP fell rapidly in the post-World War II period, and reached a low in 1974 under Richard Nixon. Debt as a share of GDP has consistently increased since then, except during the presidencies of Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton.

text: Public debt rose sharply during the 1980s, as Ronald Reagan cut tax rates and increased military spending. It fell during the 1990s, due to decreased military spending, increased taxes and the 1990s boom. Public debt rose sharply in the wake of the 2007–2008 financial crisis and the resulting significant tax revenue declines and spending increases.[9]

text: Valuation and measurement[edit]

text: Public and government accounts[edit]

text: As of April 30, 2018, debt held by the public was $15.3 trillion and intragovernmental holdings were $5.7 trillion, for a total of $21 trillion.[10] Debt held by the public was approximately 77% of GDP in 2017, ranked 43rd highest out of 207 countries.[11] The Congressional Budget Office forecast in April 2018 that the ratio will rise to nearly 100% by 2028, perhaps higher if current policies are extended beyond their scheduled expiration date.[7]

text: The national debt can also be classified into marketable or non-marketable securities. Most of the marketable securities are Treasury notes, bills, and bonds held by investors and governments globally. The non-marketable securities are mainly the "government account series" owed to certain government trust funds such as the Social Security Trust Fund, which represented $2.74 trillion in 2011.[12]

text: The non-marketable securities represent amounts owed to program beneficiaries. For example, in the case of the Social Security Trust Fund, the payroll taxes dedicated to Social Security were credited to the Trust Fund upon receipt, but spent for other purposes. If the government continues to run deficits in other parts of the budget, the government will have to issue debt held by the public to fund the Social Security Trust Fund, in effect exchanging one type of debt for the other.[13] Other large intragovernmental holders include the Federal Housing Administration, the Federal Savings and Loan Corporation's Resolution Fund and the Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund (Medicare).[citation needed]

text: Accounting treatment[edit]

text: Only debt held by the public is reported as a liability on the consolidated financial statements of the United States government. Debt held by government accounts is an asset to those accounts but a liability to the Treasury; they offset each other in the consolidated financial statements.[14]

text: Government receipts and expenditures are normally presented on a cash rather than an accrual basis, although the accrual basis may provide more information on the longer-term implications of the government's annual operations.[15] The United States public debt is often expressed as a ratio of public debt to gross domestic product (GDP). The ratio of debt to GDP may decrease as a result of a government surplus as well as due to growth of GDP and inflation.[citation needed]

text: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac obligations excluded[edit]

text: Under normal accounting rules, fully owned companies would be consolidated into the books of their owners, but the large size of Fannie and Freddie has made the U.S. government reluctant to incorporate Freddie and Fannie into its own books. When Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae required bail-outs, White House Budget Director Jim Nussle, on September 12, 2008, initially indicated their budget plans would not incorporate the GSE debt into the budget because of the temporary nature of the conservator intervention.[16] As the intervention has dragged out, pundits have started to further question this accounting treatment, noting that changes in August 2012 "makes them even more permanent wards of the state and turns the government's preferred stock into a permanent, perpetual kind of security".[17]

text: The government controls the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, which would normally criticize inconsistent accounting practices, but it does not oversee its own government's accounting practices or the standards set by the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board. The on- or off-balance sheet obligations of those two independent GSEs was just over $5 trillion at the time the conservatorship was put in place, consisting mainly of mortgage payment guarantees and agency bonds.[18] The confusing independent but government-controlled status of the GSEs has resulted in investors of the legacy common shares and preferred shares launching various activist campaigns in 2014.[19]

text: Guaranteed obligations excluded[edit]

text: U.S. federal government guarantees are not included in the public debt total, until such time as there is a call on the guarantees. For example, the U.S. federal government in late-2008 guaranteed large amounts of obligations of mutual funds, banks, and corporations under several programs designed to deal with the problems arising from the late-2000s financial crisis. The guarantee program lapsed at the end of 2012 when Congress declined to extend the scheme. The funding of direct investments made in response to the crisis, such as those made under the Troubled Assets Relief Program, are included in the debt.

text: Unfunded obligations excluded[edit]

text: The U.S. government is obligated under current law to make mandatory payments for programs such as Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) projects that payouts for these programs will significantly exceed tax revenues over the next 75 years. The Medicare Part A (hospital insurance) payouts already exceed program tax revenues, and social security payouts exceeded payroll taxes in fiscal 2010. These deficits require funding from other tax sources or borrowing.[20] The present value of these deficits or unfunded obligations is an estimated $45.8 trillion. This is the amount that would have had to be set aside in 2009 in order to pay for the unfunded obligations which, under current law, will have to be raised by the government in the future. Approximately $7.7 trillion relates to Social Security, while $38.2 trillion relates to Medicare and Medicaid. In other words, health care programs will require nearly five times more funding than Social Security. Adding this to the national debt and other federal obligations would bring total obligations to nearly $62 trillion.[21] However, these unfunded obligations are not counted in the national debt, as shown in monthly Treasury reports of the national debt.[22]

text: Measuring debt burden[edit]

text: GDP is a measure of the total size and output of the economy. One measure of the debt burden is its size relative to GDP, called the "debt-to-GDP ratio." Mathematically, this is the debt divided by the GDP amount. The Congressional Budget Office includes historical budget and debt tables along with its annual "Budget and Economic Outlook." Debt held by the public as a percentage of GDP rose from 34.7% GDP in 2000 to 40.5% in 2008 and 67.7% in 2011.[23]

text: Mathematically, the ratio can decrease even while debt grows if the rate of increase in GDP (which also takes account of inflation) is higher than the rate of increase of debt. Conversely, the debt to GDP ratio can increase even while debt is being reduced, if the decline in GDP is sufficient.

text: According to the CIA World Factbook, during 2015, the U.S. debt to GDP ratio of 73.6% was the 39th highest in the world. This was measured using "debt held by the public."[24] However, $1 trillion in additional borrowing since the end of FY 2015 has raised the ratio to 76.2% as of April 2016 [See Appendix#National debt for selected years]. Also, this number excludes state and local debt. According to the OECD, general government gross debt (federal, state, and local) in the United States in the fourth quarter of 2015 was $22.5 trillion (125% of GDP); subtracting out $5.25 trillion for intergovernmental federal debt to count only federal "debt held by the public" gives 96% of GDP.[25]

text: The ratio is higher if the total national debt is used, by adding the "intragovernmental debt" to the "debt held by the public." For example, on April 29, 2016, debt held by the public was approximately $13.84 trillion or about 76% of GDP. Intra-governmental holdings stood at $5.35 trillion, giving a combined total public debt of $19.19 trillion. U.S. GDP for the previous 12 months was approximately $18.15 trillion, for a total debt to GDP ratio of approximately 106%.[26]

text: Calculating the annual change in debt[edit]

text: Conceptually, an annual deficit (or surplus) should represent the change in the national debt, with a deficit adding to the national debt and a surplus reducing it. However, there is complexity in the budgetary computations that can make the deficit figure commonly reported in the media (the "total deficit") considerably different from the annual increase in the debt. The major categories of differences are the treatment of the Social Security program, Treasury borrowing, and supplemental appropriations outside the budget process.[27]

text: Social Security payroll taxes and benefit payments, along with the net balance of the U.S. Postal Service, are considered "off-budget", while most other expenditure and receipt categories are considered "on-budget". The total federal deficit is the sum of the on-budget deficit (or surplus) and the off-budget deficit (or surplus). Since FY1960, the federal government has run on-budget deficits except for FY1999 and FY2000, and total federal deficits except in FY1969 and FY1998–FY2001.[28]

text: For example, in January 2009 the CBO reported that for fiscal year 2008 (FY2008) the "on-budget deficit" was $638 billion, offset by an "off-budget surplus" (mainly due to Social Security revenue in excess of payouts) of $183 billion, for a "total deficit" of $455 billion. This latter figure is the one commonly reported in the media. However, an additional $313 billion was required for "the Treasury actions aimed at stabilizing the financial markets," an unusually high amount due to the Subprime mortgage crisis. This meant that the "debt held by the public" increased by $768 billion ($455B + $313B = $768B). The "off-budget surplus" was borrowed and spent (as is typically the case), increasing the "intra-governmental debt" by $183 billion. So the total increase in the "National debt" in FY2008 was $768B +$183B = $951 billion.[27] The Treasury Department reported an increase in the National Debt of $1,017B for FY2008.[29] The $66 billion difference is likely due to "supplemental appropriations" for the War on Terror, some of which were outside the budget process entirely until President Obama began including most of them in his FY2010 budget.[30]

text: In other words, spending the "off budget" Social Security surplus adds to the total national debt (by increasing the intragovernmental debt) while the "off-budget" surplus reduces the "total" deficit reported in the media. Certain spending called "supplemental appropriations" is outside the budget process entirely but adds to the national debt. Funding for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars was accounted for this way prior to the Obama administration.[30] Certain stimulus measures and earmarks were also outside the budget process. The federal government publishes the total debt owed (public and intragovernmental holdings) monthly.[31]

text: Reduction[edit]

text: Negative real interest rates[edit]

text: Since 2010, the U.S. Treasury has been obtaining negative real interest rates on government debt, meaning the inflation rate is greater than the interest rate paid on the debt.[32] Such low rates, outpaced by the inflation rate, occur when the market believes that there are no alternatives with sufficiently low risk, or when popular institutional investments such as insurance companies, pensions, or bond, money market, and balanced mutual funds are required or choose to invest sufficiently large sums in Treasury securities to hedge against risk.[33][34]

text: Economist Lawrence Summers has stated that at such low interest rates, government borrowing actually saves taxpayer money and improves creditworthiness.[35]

text: In the late 1940s through the early 1970s, the US and UK both reduced their debt burden by about 30% to 40% of GDP per decade by taking advantage of negative real interest rates, but there is no guarantee that government debt rates will continue to stay this low.[33][36] Between 1946 and 1974, the US debt-to-GDP ratio fell from 121% to 32% even though there were surpluses in only eight of those years which were much smaller than the deficits.[37]

text: Raising reserve requirements and full reserve banking[edit]

text: The two economists, Jaromir Benes and Michael Kumhof, working for the International Monetary Fund, published a working paper called The Chicago Plan Revisited suggesting that the debt could be eliminated by raising bank reserve requirements and converting from fractional reserve banking to full reserve banking.[38][39] Economists at the Paris School of Economics have commented on the plan, stating that it is already the status quo for coinage currency,[40] and a Norges Bank economist has examined the proposal in the context of considering the finance industry as part of the real economy.[41] A Centre for Economic Policy Research paper agrees with the conclusion that, "no real liability is created by new fiat money creation, and therefore public debt does not rise as a result".[42]

text: Debt ceiling[edit]

text: The debt ceiling is a legislative mechanism to limit the amount of national debt that can be issued by the Treasury. In effect, it will restrain the Treasury from paying for expenditures after the limit has been reached, even if the expenditures have already been approved (in the budget) and have been appropriated. If this situation were to occur, it is unclear whether Treasury would be able to prioritize payments on debt to avoid a default on its debt obligations, but it would have to default on some of its non-debt obligations.

text: Debt holdings[edit]

text: This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (August 2016) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: Because a large variety of people own the notes, bills, and bonds in the "public" portion of the debt, Treasury also publishes information that groups the types of holders by general categories to portray who owns United States debt. In this data set, some of the public portion is moved and combined with the total government portion, because this amount is owned by the Federal Reserve as part of United States monetary policy. (See Federal Reserve System.)

text: As is apparent from the chart, a little less than half of the total national debt is owed to the "Federal Reserve and intragovernmental holdings". The foreign and international holders of the debt are also put together from the notes, bills, and bonds sections. To the right is a chart for the data as of June 2008:

text: Foreign holdings[edit]

text: This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (November 2016) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: As of September 2014, foreigners owned $6.06 trillion of U.S. debt, or approximately 47% of the debt held by the public of $12.8 trillion and 34% of the total debt of $17.8 trillion.[43] The largest holders were China, Japan, Belgium, the Caribbean banking centers, and oil exporters.[45]

text: The share held by foreign governments has grown over time, rising from 13% of the public debt in 1988[46] to 25% in 2007.[47]

text: As of September 2014 the largest single holder of U.S. government debt was China, with 21% of all foreign-held U.S. Treasury securities (10% of total U.S. public debt).[48] China's holdings of government debt, as a percentage of all foreign-held government debt are up significantly since 2000 (when China held just 6 percent of all foreign-held U.S. Treasury securities).[49]

text: This exposure to potential financial or political risk should foreign banks stop buying Treasury securities or start selling them heavily was addressed in a June 2008 report issued by the Bank of International Settlements, which stated, "Foreign investors in U.S. dollar assets have seen big losses measured in dollars, and still bigger ones measured in their own currency. While unlikely, indeed highly improbable for public sector investors, a sudden rush for the exits cannot be ruled out completely."[50]

text: On May 20, 2007, Kuwait discontinued pegging its currency exclusively to the dollar, preferring to use the dollar in a basket of currencies.[citation needed] Syria made a similar announcement on June 4, 2007.[51] In September 2009 China, India and Russia said they were interested in buying International Monetary Fund gold to diversify their dollar-denominated securities.[52] However, in July 2010 China's State Administration of Foreign Exchange "ruled out the option of dumping its vast holdings of US Treasury securities" and said gold "cannot become a main channel for investing our foreign exchange reserves" because the market for gold is too small and prices are too volatile.[citation needed]

text: According to Paul Krugman, "It's true that foreigners now hold large claims on the United States, including a fair amount of government debt. But every dollar's worth of foreign claims on America is matched by 89 cents' worth of U.S. claims on foreigners. And because foreigners tend to put their U.S. investments into safe, low-yield assets, America actually earns more from its assets abroad than it pays to foreign investors. If your image is of a nation that's already deep in hock to the Chinese, you've been misinformed. Nor are we heading rapidly in that direction."[53] Nonetheless, the country's net investment position (including both debt to and debt owed by other countries) is a debt of more than $7 trillion and has recently been rising very rapidly.

text: Forecasting[edit]

text: CBO ten-year outlook 2018-2028[edit]

text: The CBO estimated the impact of Trump's tax cuts and separate spending legislation over the 2018-2028 period in their annual "Budget & Economic Outlook", released in April 2018:

text:
The budget deficit in fiscal 2018 (which runs from October 1, 2017 to September 30, 2018, the first year budgeted by President Trump) is forecast to be $804 billion, an increase of $139 billion (21%) from the $665 billion in 2017 and up $242 billion (39%) over the previous baseline forecast (June 2017) of $580 billion for 2018. The June 2017 forecast was essentially the budget trajectory inherited from President Obama; it was prepared prior to the Tax Act and other spending increases under President Trump.
For the 2018-2027 period, CBO projects the sum of the annual deficits (i.e., debt increase) to be $11.7 trillion, an increase of $1.6 trillion (16%) over the previous baseline (June 2017) forecast of $10.1 trillion.
The $1.6 trillion debt increase includes three main elements: 1) $1.7 trillion less in revenues due to the tax cuts; 2) $1.0 trillion more in spending; and 3) Partially offsetting incremental revenue of $1.1 trillion due to higher economic growth than previously forecast.
Debt held by the public is expected to rise from 78% of GDP ($16 trillion) at the end of 2018 to 96% GDP ($29 trillion) by 2028. That would be the highest level since the end of World War Two.
CBO estimated under an alternative scenario (in which policies in place as of April 2018 are maintained beyond scheduled initiation or expiration) that deficits would be considerably higher, rising by $13.7 trillion over the 2018-2027 period, an increase of $3.6 trillion over the June 2017 baseline forecast. Maintaining current policies for example would include extending the individual Trump tax cuts past their scheduled expiration in 2025, among other changes.
The debt increase of $1.6 trillion represents approximately $12,700 per household (assuming 126.2 million households in 2017), while the $3.6 trillion represents $28,500 per household.[7]

text: CBO long-term outlook[edit]

text: The CBO reports its Long-Term Budget Outlook annually, providing at least two scenarios for spending, revenue, deficits, and debt. The 2014 Outlook mainly covers the 25-year period through 2039. The "extended baseline scenario" assumes that the laws currently on the books will be implemented, for the most part. The CBO reported in July 2014 that under this scenario:

text: If current laws remained generally unchanged in the future, federal debt held by the public would decline slightly relative to GDP over the next few years. After that, however, growing budget deficits would push debt back to and above its current high level. Twenty-five years from now, in 2039, federal debt held by the public would exceed 100 percent of GDP. Moreover, debt would be on an upward path relative to the size of the economy, a trend that could not be sustained indefinitely. By 2039, the deficit would equal 6.5 percent of GDP, larger than in any year between 1947 and 2008, and federal debt held by the public would reach 106 percent of GDP, more than in any year except 1946—even without factoring in the economic effects of growing debt.[54]

text: The "extended alternative fiscal scenario" assumes the continuation of present trends, which result in a more unfavorable debt position and adverse economic consequences relative to the baseline scenario. The CBO reported in July 2014 that under this scenario:

text: [C]ertain policies that are now in place but are scheduled to change under current law are assumed to continue, and some provisions of current law that might be difficult to sustain for a long period are assumed to be modified. Under that scenario, deficits excluding interest payments would be about $2 trillion larger over the first decade than those under the baseline; subsequently, such deficits would be larger than those under the extended baseline by rapidly increasing amounts, doubling as a percentage of GDP in less than 10 years. CBO projects that real GNP in 2039 would be about 5 percent lower under the extended alternative fiscal scenario than under the extended baseline with economic feedback, and that interest rates would be about three-quarters of a percentage point higher. Reflecting the budgetary effects of those economic developments, federal debt would rise to 183 percent of GDP in 2039.[54]

text: Over the long-term, the CBO projects that interest expense and mandatory spending categories (e.g., Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security) will continue to grow relative to GDP, while discretionary categories (e.g., Defense and other Cabinet Departments) continue to fall relative to GDP. Debt is projected to continue rising relative to GDP under the above two scenarios, although the CBO did also offer other scenarios that involved austerity measures that would bring the debt to GDP ratio down.[54]

text: The CBO estimated under the baseline scenario that the U.S. debt held by the public would increase approximately $8.5 trillion between the end of 2014 and 2024. Under a $2 trillion deficit reduction scenario during that first decade, federal debt held by the public in 2039 would stand at 75 percent of GDP, only slightly above the value of 72 percent at the end of 2013. Under a $4 trillion deficit reduction scenario for that decade, federal debt held by the public would fall to 42 percent of GDP in 2039. By comparison, such debt comprised 35 percent of GDP in 2007 and has averaged 39 percent of GDP during the past 40 years.[54]

text: The CBO reported in September 2011: "The nation cannot continue to sustain the spending programs and policies of the past with the tax revenues it has been accustomed to paying. Citizens will either have to pay more for their government, accept less in government services and benefits, or both."[55]

text: Risks and debates[edit]

text: CBO risk factors[edit]

text: The CBO reported several types of risk factors related to rising debt levels in a July 2010 publication:

text:
A growing portion of savings would go towards purchases of government debt, rather than investments in productive capital goods such as factories and computers, leading to lower output and incomes than would otherwise occur;
If higher marginal tax rates were used to pay rising interest costs, savings would be reduced and work would be discouraged;
Rising interest costs would force reductions in government programs;
Restrictions to the ability of policymakers to use fiscal policy to respond to economic challenges; and
An increased risk of a sudden fiscal crisis, in which investors demand higher interest rates.[56]

text: Concerns over Chinese holdings of U.S. debt[edit]

text: Many American and other economic analysts have expressed concerns on account of the People's Republic of China's "extensive" holdings of United States government debt,[57][58] as part of their reserves.

text: The National Defense Authorization Act of the fiscal year 2012 included a provision requiring the Secretary of Defense to conduct a "national security risk assessment of U.S. federal debt held by China." The Department issued its report in July 2012, stating that "attempting to use U.S. Treasury securities as a coercive tool would have limited effect and likely would do more harm to China than to the United States. As the threat is not credible and the effect would be limited even if carried out, it does not offer China deterrence options, whether in the diplomatic, military, or economic realms, and this would remain true both in peacetime and in scenarios of crisis or war."[59]

text: The 112th United States Congress introduced legislation whose aim was the assessment of the implications of China's ownership of U.S. debt.[59] The 2013 Report claimed that "[a] potentially serious short-term problem would emerge if China decided to suddenly reduce their liquid U.S. financial assets significantly" [emphasis in the original text], noting, also, that Federal Reserve System Chairman Ben Bernanke had, in 2007, stated that "because foreign holdings of U.S. Treasury securities represent only a small part of total U.S. credit market debt outstanding, U.S. credit markets should be able to absorb without great difficulty any shift of foreign allocations."[59]

text: A significant number of economists and analysts dismiss any and all concerns over foreign holdings of United States government debt denominated in U.S. dollars, including China's holdings.[60][61][62][63]

text: Sustainability[edit]

text: According to the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the United States is on a "fiscally unsustainable" path because of projected future increases in Medicare and Social Security spending.[20]

text: Risks to economic growth[edit]

text: Debt levels may affect economic growth rates. In 2010, economists Kenneth Rogoff and Carmen Reinhart reported that among the 20 developed countries studied, average annual GDP growth was 3–4% when debt was relatively moderate or low (i.e. under 60% of GDP), but it dips to just 1.6% when debt was high (i.e., above 90% of GDP).[64] In April 2013, the conclusions of Rogoff and Reinhart's study came into question when a coding error in their original paper was discovered by Herndon, Ash and Pollin of the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.[65][66] Herndon, Ash and Pollin found that after correcting for errors and unorthodox methods used, there was no evidence that debt above a specific threshold reduces growth.[67] Reinhart and Rogoff maintain that after correcting for errors, a negative relationship between high debt and growth remains.[68] However, other economists, including Paul Krugman, have argued that it is low growth which causes national debt to increase, rather than the other way around.[69][70][71]

text: Commenting on fiscal sustainability, former Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke stated in April 2010 that "Neither experience nor economic theory clearly indicates the threshold at which government debt begins to endanger prosperity and economic stability. But given the significant costs and risks associated with a rapidly rising federal debt, our nation should soon put in place a credible plan for reducing deficits to sustainable levels over time."[72]

text: Interest and debt service costs[edit]

text: Despite rising debt levels, interest costs have remained at approximately 2008 levels (around $450 billion in total) due to lower than long-term interest rates paid on government debt in recent years.[73] However, interest rates may return to higher historical levels.[74]

text: The cost of servicing the U.S. national debt can be measured in various ways. The CBO analyzes net interest as a percentage of GDP, with a higher percentage indicating a higher interest payment burden. During 2015, this was 1.3% GDP, close to the record low 1.2% of the 1966–1968 era. The average from 1966 to 2015 was 2.0% of GDP.[75] However, the CBO estimated in 2016 that the interest amounts and % GDP will increase significantly over the following decade as both interest rates and debt levels rise: "Interest payments on that debt represent a large and rapidly growing expense of the federal government. CBO's baseline shows net interest payments more than tripling under current law, climbing from $231 billion in 2014, or 1.3 percent of GDP, to $799 billion in 2024, or 3.0 percent of GDP—the highest ratio since 1996."[76]

text: Definition of public debt[edit]

text: Economists also debate the definition of public debt. Krugman argued in May 2010 that the debt held by the public is the right measure to use, while Reinhart has testified to the President's Fiscal Reform Commission that gross debt is the appropriate measure.[69] The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) cited research by several economists supporting the use of the lower debt held by the public figure as a more accurate measure of the debt burden, disagreeing with these Commission members.[77]

text: There is debate regarding the economic nature of the intragovernmental debt, which was approximately $4.6 trillion in February 2011.[78] For example, the CBPP argues: that "large increases in [debt held by the public] can also push up interest rates and increase the amount of future interest payments the federal government must make to lenders outside of the United States, which reduces Americans' income. By contrast, intragovernmental debt (the other component of the gross debt) has no such effects because it is simply money the federal government owes (and pays interest on) to itself."[77]

text: However, if the U.S. government continues to run "on budget" deficits as projected by the CBO and OMB for the foreseeable future, it will have to issue marketable Treasury bills and bonds (i.e., debt held by the public) to pay for the projected shortfall in the Social Security program. This will result in "debt held by the public" replacing "intragovernmental debt".[79][80]

text: Intergenerational equity[edit]

text: One debate about the national debt relates to intergenerational equity. For example, if one generation is receiving the benefit of government programs or employment enabled by deficit spending and debt accumulation, to what extent does the resulting higher debt impose risks and costs on future generations? There are several factors to consider:

text:
For every dollar of debt held by the public, there is a government obligation (generally marketable Treasury securities) counted as an asset by investors. Future generations benefit to the extent these assets are passed on to them.[81]
As of 2010, approximately 72% of the financial assets were held by the wealthiest 5% of the population.[82] This presents a wealth and income distribution question, as only a fraction of the people in future generations will receive principal or interest from investments related to the debt incurred today.
To the extent the U.S. debt is owed to foreign investors (approximately half the "debt held by the public" during 2012), principal and interest are not directly received by U.S. heirs.[81]
Higher debt levels imply higher interest payments, which create costs for future taxpayers (e.g., higher taxes, lower government benefits, higher inflation, or increased risk of fiscal crisis).[56]
To the extent the borrowed funds are invested today to improve the long-term productivity of the economy and its workers, such as via useful infrastructure projects or education, future generations may benefit.[83]
For every dollar of intragovernmental debt, there is an obligation to specific program recipients, generally non-marketable securities such as those held in the Social Security Trust Fund. Adjustments that reduce future deficits in these programs may also apply costs to future generations, via higher taxes or lower program spending.[citation needed]

text: Krugman wrote in March 2013 that by neglecting public investment and failing to create jobs, we are doing far more harm to future generations than merely passing along debt: "Fiscal policy is, indeed, a moral issue, and we should be ashamed of what we're doing to the next generation's economic prospects. But our sin involves investing too little, not borrowing too much." Young workers face high unemployment and studies have shown their income may lag throughout their careers as a result. Teacher jobs have been cut, which could affect the quality of education and competitiveness of younger Americans.[84]

text: Credit default[edit]

text: The US has never fully defaulted.[85][86]

text: In April 1979, however, the United States may have technically defaulted on $122 million in Treasury bills, which was less than 1% of U.S. debt. The Treasury Department characterized it as a delay rather than as a default, but it did have consequences for short-term interest rates, which jumped 0.6%.[87] Others view it as a temporary, partial default.[88][89][90]

text: Appendix[edit]

text: National debt for selected years[edit]

text:
Fiscal year
Total debt,
$Bln[91][92][93]
Total debt
as % of GDP
Public debt,
$Bln, 1996–
Public debt
as % of GDP
GDP, $Bln,
BEA/OMB[94]

1910
2.65/-
8.1%
2.65
8.1%
est. 32.8

1920
25.95/-
29.2%
25.95
29.2%
est. 88.6

1927
[95] 18.51/-
19.2%
18.51
19.2%
est. 96.5

1930
16.19/-
16.6%
16.19
16.6%
est. 97.4

1940
42.97/50.70
43.8–51.6%
42.77
43.6%
-/98.2

1950
257.3/256.9
92.0%
219.00
78.4%
279.0

1960
286.3/290.5
53.6–54.2%
236.80
44.3%
535.1

1970
370.9/380.9
35.4–36.4%
283.20
27.0%
1,049.0

1980
907.7/909.0
32.4–32.6%
711.90
25.5%
2,796.0

1990
3,233/3,206
54.2–54.6%
2,400.00
40.8%
5,915.0

2000
a1 5,659
a 55.8%
a 3,450.00
33.9%
10,150.0

2001
a2 5,792
a 54.8%
a 3,350.00
31.6%
10,550.0

2002
a3 6,213
a 57.1%
a 3,550.00
32.7%
10,900.0

2003
a 6,783
a 59.9%
a 3,900.00
34.6%
11,350.0

2004
a 7,379
a 61.0%
a 4,300.00
35.6%
12,100.0

2005
a4 7,918
a 61.4%
a 4,600.00
35.7%
12,900.0

2006
a5 8,493
a 62.1%
a 4,850.00
35.4%
13,700.0

2007
a6 8,993
a 62.8%
a 5,050.00
35.3%
14,300.0

2008
a7 10,011
a 67.9%
a 5,800.00
39.4%
14,750.0

2009
a8 11,898
a 82.5%
a 7,550.00
52.4%
14,400.0

2010
a9 13,551
a 91.6%
a 9,000.00
61.0%
14,800.0

2011
a10 14,781
a 96.1%
a 10,150.00
65.8%
15,400.0

2012
a11 16,059
a 100.2%
a 11,250.00
70.3%
16,050.0

2013
a12 16,732
a 101.3%
a 12,000.00
72.6%
16,500.0

2014
a13 17,810
a 103.4%
a 12,800.00
74.2%
17,200.0

2015
a14 18,138
a 101.3/101.8%
a 13,100.00
73.3%
17,900.0

2016
(Oct. '15 –
Jul. '16 only)
~19,428
~106.1%
~13,998.00
~76.5%

text: On June 25, 2014, the BEA announced: "[On July 30, 2014, i]n addition to the regular revision of estimates for the most recent 3 years and for the first quarter of 2014, GDP and select components will be revised back to the first quarter of 1999.

text: Fiscal years 1940–2009 GDP figures were derived from February 2011 Office of Management and Budget figures which contained revisions of prior year figures due to significant changes from prior GDP measurements. Fiscal years 1950–2010 GDP measurements were derived from December 2010 Bureau of Economic Analysis figures which also tend to be subject to revision, especially more recent years. Afterwards the OMB figures were revised back to 2004 and the BEA figures (in a revision dated July 31, 2013) were revised back to 1947.

text: Regarding estimates recorded in the GDP column (the last column) marked with a "~" symbol, absolute differences from advance (one month after) BEA reports of GDP percent change to current findings (as of November 2013) found in revisions are stated to be 1.3% ± 2.0% or a 95% probability of being within the range of 0.0–3.3%, assuming the differences to occur according to standard deviations from the average absolute difference of 1.3%. E.g. with an advance report of a $400 billion increase of a $10 trillion GDP, for example, one could be 95% confident that the range in which the exact GDP dollar amount lies would be 0.0 to 3.3% different than 4.0% (400 ÷ 10,000) or within the range of $0 to $330 billion different than the hypothetical $400 billion (a range of $70–730 billion). Two months after, with a revised value, the range of potential difference from the stated estimate shrinks, and three months after with another revised value the range shrinks again.

text: Fiscal years 1940–1970 begin July 1 of the previous year (for example, Fiscal Year 1940 begins July 1, 1939 and ends June 30, 1940); fiscal years 1980–2010 begin October 1 of the previous year. Intragovernmental debts before the Social Security Act are presumed to equal zero.

text: 1909–1930 calendar year GDP estimates are from MeasuringWorth.com[96] Fiscal Year estimates are derived from simple linear interpolation.

text: (a1) Audited figure was "about $5,659 billion."[97]

text: (a2) Audited figure was "about $5,792 billion."[98]

text: (a3) Audited figure was "about $6,213 billion."[98]

text: (a) Audited figure was said to be "about" the stated figure.[99]

text: (a4) Audited figure was "about $7,918 billion."[100]

text: (a5) Audited figure was "about $8,493 billion."[100]

text: (a6) Audited figure was "about $8,993 billion."[101]

text: (a7) Audited figure was "about $10,011 billion."[101]

text: (a8) Audited figure was "about $11,898 billion."[102]

text: (a9) Audited figure was "about $13,551 billion."[103]

text: (a10) GAO affirmed Bureau of the Public debt figure as $14,781 billion.[104]

text: (a11) GAO affirmed Bureau of the Public debt figure as $16,059 billion.[104]

text: (a12) GAO affirmed Bureau of the Fiscal Service's figure as $16,732 billion.[105]

text: (a13) GAO affirmed Bureau of the Fiscal Service's figure as $17,810 billion.[106]

text: (a14) GAO affirmed Bureau of the Fiscal Service's figure as $18,138 billion.[107]

text: Interest paid[edit]

text:
Fiscal
Year
Historical
debt outstanding,
$billions, US[108]
Interest paid
$billions, US[109]
Interest rate

2017

458.5

2016

432.6

2015
18,150
402.4
2.22%

2014
17,824
430.8
2.42%

2013
16,738
415.7
2.48%

2012
16,066
359.8
2.24%

2011
14,790
454.4
3.07%

2010
13,562
414.0
3.05%

2009
11,910
383.1
3.22%

2008
10,025
451.2
4.50%

2007
9,008
430.0
4.77%

2006
8,507
405.9
4.77%

2005
7,933
352.4
4.44%

2004
7,379
321.6
4.36%

2003
6,783
318.1
4.69%

2002
6,228
332.5
5.34%

2001
5,807
359.5
6.19%

2000
5,674
362.0
6.38%

1999
5,656
353.5
6.25%

1998
5,526
363.8
6.58%

1997
5,413
355.8
6.57%

1996
5,225
344.0
6.58%

1995
4,974
332.4
6.68%

1994
4,693
296.3
6.31%

1993
4,411
292.5
6.63%

1992
4,065
292.4
7.19%

1991
3,665
286.0
7.80%

text: Foreign holders of US Treasury securities[edit]

text: The following is a list of the top foreign holders (over $150 billion) of US Treasury securities as listed by the US Treasury (revised by March 2018 survey):[110]

text:
Leading foreign holders of US Treasury securities as of March 2018

Country or region
Billions of dollars (est.)
Ratio of owned US debt
to 2017 GDP (est.)[111][112]
Percent change since
March 2017

 China
1,187.7
5%
+ 9%

 Japan
1,043.5
21%
− 7%

 Ireland
317.9
98%
+ 1%

 Brazil
286.0
14%
+10%

 United Kingdom
263.7
10%
+16%

  Switzerland
245.4
36%
+ 8%

 Cayman Islands
242.9
n/a
− 2%

 Luxembourg
221.6
349%
+ 2%

 Hong Kong
196.2
59%
+ 1%

 Taiwan
170.1
30%
– 7%

 India
157.0
6%
+34%

 Saudi Arabia
151.2
22%
+21%

other
1,810.8
n/a
+ 3%

Grand total
6,294.0
n/a
+ 4%

text: Statistics[edit]

text:
U.S. official gold reserves as of 31 July 2014[update] total 261.5 million troy ounces with a book value of approximately $11.04 billion.[113]
Foreign exchange reserves $140 billion as of September 2014[update].[114]

United States balance of trade (1980–2014), with negative numbers denoting a trade deficit

The national debt equates to $59,143 per person U.S. population, or $159,759 per member of the U.S. working taxpayers, as of March 2016.[115]
In 2008, $242 billion was spent on interest payments servicing the debt, out of a total tax revenue of $2.5 trillion, or 9.6%. Including non-cash interest accrued primarily for Social Security, interest was $454 billion or 18% of tax revenue.[101]
Total U.S. household debt, including mortgage loan and consumer debt, was $11.4 trillion in 2005. By comparison, total U.S. household assets, including real estate, equipment, and financial instruments such as mutual funds, was $62.5 trillion in 2005.[116]
Total U.S. Consumer Credit Card revolving credit was $931.0 billion in April 2009.[117]
The U.S. balance of trade deficit in goods and services was $725.8 billion in 2005.[118]
According to the U.S. Department of Treasury Preliminary 2014 Annual Report on U.S. Holdings of Foreign Securities, the United States valued its foreign treasury securities portfolio at $2.7 trillion. The largest debtors are Canada, the United Kingdom, Cayman Islands, and Australia, whom account for $1.2 trillion of sovereign debt owed to residents of the U.S.[119]
The entire public debt in 1998 was attributable to the cost of research, development, and deployment of U.S. nuclear weapons and nuclear weapons-related programs during the Cold War.[120][121][122]

text: A 1998 Brookings Institution study published by the Nuclear Weapons Cost Study Committee (formed in 1993 by the W. Alton Jones Foundation), calculated that total expenditures for U.S. nuclear weapons from 1940 to 1998 was $5.5 trillion in 1996 Dollars.[120] The total public debt at the end of fiscal year 1998 was $5,478,189,000,000 in 1998 Dollars[123] or $5.3 trillion in 1996 Dollars.

text: International debt comparisons[edit]

text: This section needs to be updated. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (January 2015)

text:
Gross debt as percentage of GDP

Entity
2007
2010
2011
2017/2018

United States
62%
92%
102%
108%

European Union
59%
80%
83%
82%

Austria
62%
78%
72%
78%

France
64%
82%
86%
97%

Germany
65%
82%
81%
64%

Sweden
40%
39%
38%
41%

Finland
35%
48%
49%
61%

Greece
104%
123%
165%
179%

Romania
13%
31%
33%
35%

Bulgaria
17%
16%
16%
25%

Czech Republic
28%
38%
41%
35%

Italy
112%
119%
120%
132%

Netherlands
52%
77%
65%
57%

Poland
51%
55%
56%
51%

Spain
42%
68%
68%
98%

United Kingdom
47%
80%
86%
88%

Japan
167%
197%
204%
236%

Russia
9%
12%
10%
19%

Asia 1 (2017+)2
37%
40%
41%
80%

text: Sources: Eurostat,[124] International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook (emerging market economies); Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Economic Outlook (advanced economies)[125]IMF,[126]

text: 1China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Korea, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand 2Afghanistan, Armenia, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, China, People's Republic of, Fiji, Georgia, Hong Kong SAR, India, Indonesia, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Korea, Republic of, Kyrgyz Republic, Lao P.D.R., Macao SAR, Malaysia, Maldives, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Fed. States of, Mongolia, Myanmar, Nauru, Nepal, New Zealand, Pakistan, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Samoa, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Taiwan Province of China, Tajikistan, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Vietnam

text: Recent additions to the public debt of the United States[edit]

text:
Recent additions to U.S. public debt[127][91][92][94]

Fiscal year (begins
Oct. 1 of year prior
to stated year)
GDP
$Billions
New debt
for
fiscal year
$Billions
New debt
as
% of GDP
Total debt
$Billions
Total debt
as % of GDP
(Debt to GDP
ratio)

1994
$7,200
$281–292
3.9–4.1%
~$4,650
64.6–65.2%

1995
7,600
277–281
3.7%
~4,950
64.8–65.6%

1996
8,000
251–260
3.1–3.3%
~5,200
65.0–65.4%

1997
8,500
188
2.2%
~5,400
63.2–63.8%

1998
8,950
109–113
1.2–1.3%
~5,500
61.2–61.8%

1999
9,500
127–130
1.3–1.4%
5,656
59.3%

2000
10,150
18
0.2%
5,674
55.8%

2001
$10,550
$  133
1.3%
$5,792
54.8%

2002
10,900
421
3.9%
6,213
57.1%

2003
11,350
570
5.0%
6,783
59.9%

2004
12,100
596
4.9%
7,379
61.0%

2005
12,900
539
4.2%
7,918
61.4%

2006
13,700
575
4.2%
8,493
62.1%

2007
14,300
500
3.5%
8,993
62.8%

2008
14,750
1,018
6.9%
10,011
67.9%

2009
$14,400
$1,887
13.1%
$11,898
82.5%

2010
14,800
1,653
11.2%
13,551
91.6%

2011[128]
15,400
1,230
8.0%
14,781
96.1%

2012
16,050
1,278
8.0%
16,059
100.2%

2013
16,500
673
4.1%
16,732
101.3%

2014
17,200
1,078
6.3%
17,810
103.4%

2015
17,900
328
1.8%
18,138
101.3%

2016 (Oct. '15 –
Jul. '16 only)

~1,290
~7.0%
~19,428
~106.1%

text: On July 29, 2016, the BEA released a revision to 2013–2016 GDP figures. The figures for this table were corrected the next week with changes to figures in those fiscal years.

text: On July 30, 2015, the BEA released a revision to 2012–2015 GDP figures. The figures for this table were corrected on that day with changes to FY 2013 and 2014, but not 2015 as FY 2015 is updated within a week with the release of debt totals for July 31, 2015.

text: On June 25, 2014, the BEA announced a 15-year revision of GDP figures would take place on July 31, 2014. The figures for this table were corrected after that date with changes to FY 2000, 2003, 2008, 2012, 2013 and 2014. The more precise FY 1999–2014 debt figures are derived from Treasury audit results. The variations in the 1990s and FY 2015 figures are due to double-sourced or relatively preliminary GDP figures respectively. A comprehensive revision GDP revision dated July 31, 2013 was described on the Bureau of Economic Analysis website. In November 2013 the total debt and yearly debt as a percentage of GDP columns of this table were changed to reflect those revised GDP figures.

text: Historical debt ceiling levels[edit]

text:
[show]Table of historical debt ceiling levels[129]

Date
Debt Ceiling
(billions of dollars)
Change in Debt Ceiling
(billions of dollars)
Statute

June 25, 1940
49[130]

February 19, 1941
65
+16

March 28, 1942
125
+60

April 11, 1943
210
+85

June 9, 1944
260
+50

April 3, 1945
300
+40

June 26, 1946
275
−25

August 28, 1954
281
+6

July 9, 1956
275
−6

February 26, 1958
280
+5

September 2, 1958
288
+8

June 30, 1959
295
+7

June 30, 1960
293
−2

June 30, 1961
298[131]
+5

July 1, 1962
308
+10

March 31, 1963
305
−3

June 25, 1963
300
−5

June 30, 1963
307
+7

August 31, 1963
309
+2

November 26, 1963
315
+6

June 29, 1964
324
+9

June 24, 1965
328
+4

June 24, 1966
330
+2

March 2, 1967
336
+6

June 30, 1967
358
+22

June 1, 1968
365
+7

April 7, 1969
377
+12

June 30, 1970
395
+18

March 17, 1971
430
+35

March 15, 1972
450[132]
+20

October 27, 1972
465
+15

June 30, 1974
495
+30

February 19, 1975
577
+82

November 14, 1975
595
+18

March 15, 1976
627
+32

June 30, 1976
636
+9

September 30, 1976
682
+46

April 1, 1977
700
+18

October 4, 1977
752
+52

August 3, 1978
798
+46

April 2, 1979
830
+32

September 29, 1979
879[133]
+49

June 28, 1980
925
+46

December 19, 1980
935
+10

February 7, 1981
985
+50

September 30, 1981
1,079
+94

June 28, 1982
1,143
+64

September 30, 1982
1,290
+147

May 26, 1983
1,389
+99
Pub.L. 98–34

November 21, 1983
1,490
+101
Pub.L. 98–161

May 25, 1984
1,520
+30

June 6, 1984
1,573
+53
Pub.L. 98–342

October 13, 1984
1,823
+250
Pub.L. 98–475

November 14, 1985
1,904
+81

December 12, 1985
2,079
+175
Pub.L. 99–177

August 21, 1986
2,111
+32
Pub.L. 99–384

October 21, 1986
2,300
+189

May 15, 1987
2,320[134]
+20

August 10, 1987
2,352
+32

September 29, 1987
2,800
+448
Pub.L. 100–119

August 7, 1989
2,870
+70

November 8, 1989
3,123
+253
Pub.L. 101–140

August 9, 1990
3,195
+72

October 28, 1990
3,230
+35

November 5, 1990
4,145
+915
Pub.L. 101–508

April 6, 1993
4,370
+225

August 10, 1993
4,900
+530
Pub.L. 103–66

March 29, 1996
5,500
+600
Pub.L. 104–121

August 5, 1997
5,950
+450
Pub.L. 105–33

June 11, 2002
6,400[135]
+450
Pub.L. 107–199

May 27, 2003
7,384
+984
Pub.L. 108–24

November 16, 2004
8,184[135]
+800
Pub.L. 108–415

March 20, 2006
8,965[136]
+781
Pub.L. 109–182

September 29, 2007
9,815
+850
Pub.L. 110–91

June 5, 2008
10,615
+800
Pub.L. 110–289

October 3, 2008
11,315[137]
+700
Pub.L. 110–343

February 17, 2009
12,104[138]
+789
Pub.L. 111–5

December 24, 2009
12,394
+290
Pub.L. 111–123

February 12, 2010
14,294
+1,900
Pub.L. 111–139

January 30, 2012
16,394
+2,100

May 19, 2013
16,700
+306