The
following is my answer to a Quora question: “Do
you think the risk of a fiscal crisis due to the national debt is priced into
current US interest rates?”
No. US interest rates are not a risk premium on
fiscal sustainability. They are a
response to inflation. The Federal
Reserve’s dual mandate is price stability and maximum employment. Sovereign credit risk does not appear in that
mandate. When the Federal Open Market
Committee sets the Federal Funds Rate, its primary input is the Consumer Price
Index — not the Congressional Budget Office’s debt trajectory projections.
A
market that prices fiscal risk into rates is a market making a judgement about
the US government’s long-term ability to service its obligations. The US rate market is doing something
categorically different. It is making a
judgement about whether current monetary conditions are tight enough to bring
inflation to 2 per cent. The US$36
trillion national debt is background noise, not a pricing input.
The
Federal Reserve raised the Federal Funds Rate from near zero in March 2022 to
5.25 to 5.50 per cent by July 2023. This
was a response to inflation reaching 9.1 per cent in June 2022 — the highest
since November 1981. The national debt
was over US$30 trillion throughout this period.
The rate decisions did not reference the debt level. They referenced CPI, PCE deflator, and labour
market data.
The
Federal Reserve then cut rates three times in the second half of 2024, reducing
the Federal Funds Rate to 4.25 to 4.50 per cent. At that point, the national debt had crossed
US$36 trillion. The cuts were made
because inflation had declined toward target.
The fact that the debt had increased by trillions during the hiking
cycle did not affect the cutting decision.
The Federal Reserve can, and does, set rates at levels inconsistent with
what sovereign credit risk would demand if the market were pricing it.
The
Moody’s Downgrade
Moody’s
downgraded the United States from AAA to Aa1 in May 2025 — the last of the
three major credit rating agencies to strip the US of its top rating, following
Standard & Poor’s in 2011 and Fitch in 2023. The rationale was the trajectory of the
national debt and the government’s inability to agree on fiscal consolidation.
US
Treasury yields moved modestly and briefly.
The dollar remained the world’s primary reserve currency. Foreign central banks continued purchasing
Treasuries. The 10-year yield was 4.5
per cent before the downgrade and 4.5 per cent shortly after. The S&P downgrade of 2011 produced a
similar non-event. Standard & Poor’s
removed the AAA rating in August 2011 — and US Treasury yields fell, because
investors fleeing equity market volatility ran into Treasuries as the
haven. The downgrade of the issuer
caused investors to buy more of the issuer’s debt. Credit risk theory does not cover this
scenario.
It
is not that the market trusts the US government’s fiscal discipline. It is that the alternatives are worse. The dollar’s reserve currency status means
that global demand for dollar-denominated assets is structural and not driven
by yield. Central banks hold Treasuries
because they need to hold something liquid, globally accepted, and available in
sufficient scale — not because US fiscal policy is admirable.
The
Doom Loop
The
projection is that the US debt-to-GDP ratio will rise — it is currently
approximately 122 per cent, and the CBO projects it reaching 122 per cent by
2034 on the current trajectory.
Investors demand a higher yield to compensate for the increasing
risk. Higher yields increase the cost of
servicing the existing debt. Higher debt
service costs increase the deficit. A
larger deficit requires more borrowing.
More borrowing pushes yields higher.
The spiral continues until the fiscal position becomes unsustainable.
This
doom loop has been predicted for the United States with remarkable consistency
for approximately forty years. It has
not materialised. The primary reason is
the reserve currency mechanism. The US
can issue debt in its own currency to investors who need that currency. A doom loop requires investors to lose
confidence and demand compensation.
Structural demand from reserve managers who need dollar assets
regardless of yield prevents the confidence loss from reaching the threshold
required to trigger the spiral.
This
does not mean the risk is zero. It means
the risk is deferred — and the deferral mechanism depends on the continued
willingness of the world to treat dollar assets as the default store of value.
That
willingness is eroding. The dollar’s
share of global foreign exchange reserves has fallen from 71 per cent in 1999
to approximately 56 per cent in mid-2025.
Central banks are diversifying into gold — purchasing over 1,000 tonnes
annually for three consecutive years.
Gold overtook US Treasuries in total central bank foreign exchange
reserve holdings in early 2026. The
weaponisation of dollar assets against Russia in 2022 accelerated this
diversification among non-aligned central banks.
The
erosion is slow. It is measurable. Each percentage point of reserve share lost
reduces the structural demand for Treasuries and marginally increases the yield
required to attract the marginal buyer.
Over a decade, those basis points compound.
The
Inflation Mechanism versus the Solvency Mechanism
The
critical distinction is between two different mechanisms by which fiscal stress
could eventually manifest in rates. The
first is the solvency mechanism — markets conclude the US cannot or will not
service its debt and demand a risk premium.
This is the fiscal crisis scenario.
It has not happened and, given the reserve currency architecture, is
unlikely to happen suddenly.
The
second is the inflation mechanism — the US government finances its deficit
through money creation rather than borrowing; the monetary base expands,
inflation rises, and the Federal Reserve responds by raising rates. This is not fiscal risk being priced into
rates. This is fiscal irresponsibility
causing inflation, which the Federal Reserve then addresses through its
standard inflation mandate.
The
United States has been operating closer to the second mechanism than the
first. The fiscal stimulus of 2020 and
2021 — US$5 trillion deployed in response to COVID-19 — contributed materially
to the inflation surge of 2022. The
Federal Reserve’s subsequent rate hikes were the inflation response, not the
fiscal risk response. The distinction is
not semantic. It determines whether the
rate increases represent a market assessment of US sovereign creditworthiness
or simply a central bank doing its job.
The
answer is the latter. US interest rates
reflect inflation, not fiscal risk. The
fiscal risk will eventually manifest — but it will most likely do so through
the inflation channel rather than through a sudden repricing of sovereign
credit. The Federal Reserve will raise
rates. It will call it fighting
inflation. The underlying cause will be
fiscal. The mechanism will remain
monetary.
By
the time the market prices fiscal risk into Treasury yields — if it ever does —
the question of whether it was priced in will be academic. The more useful question, for investors
positioning today, is whether they have sufficient non-dollar, non-Treasury
exposure to absorb the adjustment when the inflation mechanism runs its course. The answer, for most retail portfolios, is
no.
Terence
Nunis | Executive Chairman, Equinox Zenith | Author, The 1% Playbook: The
Billionaire Cheat Code

No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for taking the time to share our thoughts. Once approved, your comments will be poster.