national debt of the United States

{{Main|History of the United States public debt}}

The United States federal government has continuously had a fluctuating public debt since its formation in 1789, except for about a year during 1835–1836, a period in which the nation, during the presidency of Andrew Jackson, completely paid the national debt. To allow comparisons over the years, public debt is often expressed as a ratio to GDP. 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.

Public debt rose sharply during the 1980s, as Ronald Reagan negotiated with Congress to cut tax rates and increase military spending. It fell during the 1990s because of decreased military spending, increased taxes and the 1990s boom. Public debt rose sharply during George W. Bush's presidency and in the wake of the 2007–2008 financial crisis, with resulting significant tax revenue declines and spending increases, such as the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.{{cite web |url= http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=11766 |title=Congressional Budget Office – Historical Data on the Federal Debt |work=cbo.gov |year=2010 |access-date=January 3, 2012}}

In their September 2018 monthly report published on October 5 and based on data from the Treasury Department's "Daily Treasury Statements" (DTS), the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) wrote that the federal budget deficit was c.$782 billion for the fiscal year 2018—which runs from October 2017 through September 2018. This is $116 billion more than in FY2017.{{cite report |url=https://www.cbo.gov/system/files?file=2018-10/54551-MBR.pdf |title=Monthly Budget Review for September 2018 |date=October 5, 2018 |publisher=Congressional Budget Office |access-date=October 30, 2018 |pages=5}}{{rp|1}} The Treasury statements as summarized by in the CBO report that corporate taxes for 2017 and 2018 declined by $92 billion representing a drop of 31%. The CBO added that "about half of the decline ... occurred since June" when some of the provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 took effect, which included the "new lower corporate tax rate and the expanded ability to immediately deduct the full value of equipment purchases". (~${{Format price|{{Inflation|index=US-GDP|value=1338000000000|start_year=2018}}}} in {{Inflation/year|US-GDP}})

According to articles in The Wall Street Journal{{cite news |title=Treasury Expects to Issue Over $1 Trillion in Debt in 2018 |quote=Debt issuance this year could be highest since 2010, the Treasury said, as higher government spending and stagnant tax revenues have pushed the deficit higher. |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/treasury-estimates-annual-net-marketable-debt-to-total-1-338-trillion-in-2018-1540839709|first=Kate |last=Davidson |date=October 29, 2018 |access-date=October 30, 2018 |location=Washington, DC |publisher=Wall Street Journal }} and Business Insider,{{citation |title=The U.S. Government Is Set To Borrow Nearly $1 Trillion This Year, an 84 Percent Jump from Last Year |newspaper=The Washington Post |date=February 3, 2018 |first=Heather |last=Long}} based on documents released on October 29, 2018, by the Treasury Department,{{cite report |title=Daily Treasury Statement (DTS) |publisher=Treasury Department |date=October 29, 2018 |access-date=October 30, 2018 |url=https://www.fms.treas.gov/fmsweb/viewDTSFiles?dir=w&fname=18102900.pdf}} the department's projection{{cite news |url=https://www.businessinsider.in/the-us-will-issue-over-1-3-trillion-in-new-debt-in-2018-the-highest-amount-since-the-depths-of-the-recession/articleshow/66422837.cms |access-date=October 30, 2018 |title=The US will issue over $1.3 trillion in new debt in 2018, the highest amount since the depths of the recession |first=Bob |last=Bryan |date=October 30, 2018 |publisher=Business Insider}} estimated that by the fourth quarter of the FY2018, it would have issued c. $1.338 trillion (~${{Format price|{{Inflation|index=US-GDP|value=1338000000000|start_year=2018}}}} in {{Inflation/year|US-GDP}}) in debt. This would have been the highest debt issuance since 2010, when it reached $1.586 trillion (~${{Format price|{{Inflation|index=US-GDP|value=1586000000000|start_year=2010}}}} in {{Inflation/year|US-GDP}}). The Treasury anticipated that the total "net marketable debt"—net marketable securities—issued in the fourth quarter would reach $425 billion; which would raise the 2018 "total debt issuance" to over a trillion dollars of new debt, representing a "146% jump from 2017". According to the Journal that is the highest fourth quarter issuance "since 2008, at the height of the financial crisis." As cited by the Journal and the Business Insider, the primary drivers of new debt issuance are "stagnant", "sluggish tax revenues", a decrease in "corporate tax revenue", due to the GOP Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, the "bipartisan budget agreement", and "higher government spending".

File:Holders of the National Debt of the United States.gif

As of March 6, 2025, debt held by the public was $29 trillion, and intragovernmental holdings were $7.4 trillion, for a total of $36.4 trillion.{{Cite web |title=Fiscal Data Explains the National Debt |url=https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/national-debt/ |access-date=2025-02-27 |website=fiscaldata.treasury.gov |language=en}} Debt held by the public was approximately 77% of GDP in 2017, ranked 43rd highest out of 207 countries.{{cite web |title=The World Factbook — Central Intelligence Agency |url=https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2186rank.html#us |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070613005546/https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2186rank.html#us |archive-date=June 13, 2007 |website=www.cia.gov}} The CBO 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.

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 $2.82 trillion (~${{Format price|{{Inflation|index=US-GDP|value=2820000000000|start_year=2017}}}} in {{Inflation/year|US-GDP}}) in 2017.{{cite web|url=http://www.ssa.gov/oact/tr/2012/tr2012.pdf |title=The 2012 Annual Report of the Board of Trustees of the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance and Federal Disability Insurance Trust Funds |website=Ssa.gov |access-date=2016-08-27}}

The non-marketable securities represent amounts owed to program beneficiaries. For example, in the cash upon receipt but spent for other purposes.{{sentence fragment|date=February 2023}} 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.{{cite web|url=http://www.ssa.gov/oact/trsum/index.html|title=Social Security Trust Fund 2010 Report Summary|publisher=Ssa.gov|access-date=May 18, 2011}}{{failed verification|reason=These assertions could not be located in the 268-page report.|date=February 2023}}{{dubious|reason=The "deficits" discussed in the source appear to be Social Security operating deficits, not federal budget deficits.|date=February 2023}} 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|date=August 2016}}

File:USDebt.png

File:U.S. Intragovernmental debt - v1.png

Only debt held by the public is reported as a liability on the consolidated financial statements of the United States government. Debt held by US government accounts is an asset to those accounts but a liability to the Treasury; they offset each other in the consolidated financial statements.{{cite web|url=http://www.gao.gov/special.pubs/longterm/debt/debtbasics.html#difference|title=Federal debt basics – What is the difference between the two types of federal debt?|publisher=Government Accountability Office|access-date=April 28, 2012|archive-date=July 6, 2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110706055255/http://www.gao.gov/special.pubs/longterm/debt/debtbasics.html#difference|url-status=dead}} 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.{{cite web|url=http://www.gao.gov/special.pubs/longterm/deficit|title=Measuring the Deficit: Cash vs. Accrual|publisher=Government Accountability Office|access-date=January 19, 2011}} The United States public debt is often expressed as a ratio of public debt to GDP. The ratio of debt to GDP may decrease as a result of a government surplus as well as from growth of GDP and inflation.{{citation needed|date=September 2016}}

{{See also|Federal takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac}}

Under normal accounting rules, fully owned companies would be consolidated into the books of their owners, but the large size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac has made U.S. governments reluctant to incorporate them into its own books. When the two mortgage companies required bail-outs, White House Budget Director Jim Nussle, on September 12, 2008, initially indicated their budget plans would not incorporate the government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) debt into the budget because of the temporary nature of the conservator intervention.[https://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aXJSThdqLsXg Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac to Be Kept Off Budget, White House Says] (September 12, 2008), Bloomberg.com. As the intervention has dragged out, some pundits began to 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".[http://professional.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443713704577601403201175844.html The case for keeping Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac off the government's books has gotten even weaker], [http://professional.wsj.com/ professional.wsj.com] {{subscription required}}

The federal 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.Barr, Colin (September 7, 2008). [https://money.cnn.com/2008/09/06/news/economy/fannie_freddie_paulson.fortune "Paulson readies the 'bazooka'"], CNN.com; retrieved January 17, 2011. The confusing independent but government-controlled status of the GSEs resulted in investors of the legacy common shares and preferred shares launching various activist campaigns in 2014.{{cite news|url=https://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304585004579415490523879118?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTWhatsNewsCollection&mg=reno64-wsj|title=Investor Fires Salvo Against Fannie, Freddie-Viewed March 2014|publisher=The Wall Street Journal|date=March 3, 2014|access-date=August 24, 2016|first=Nick|last=Timiraos}}

{{See also|Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program|Exchange Stabilization Fund}}

U.S. federal government guarantees were not included in the public debt total as they were not drawn against.{{clarification needed|date=September 2021}} In late 2008, the federal government had guaranteed large amounts of obligations of mutual funds, banks, and corporations under several programs designed to deal with the problems arising from the 2007–2008 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 Asset Relief Program, was included in the debt totals.

File:CBO debt milestone timeline.png

The U.S. federal 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 year 2010. These deficits require funding from other tax sources or borrowing. 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.Peter G. Peterson Foundation (April 2010). [http://www.pgpf.org/Special-Topics/Download-the-Citizens-Guide.aspx "Citizen's guide 2010: Figure 10 p. 16"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110210143607/http://www.pgpf.org/Special-Topics/Download-the-Citizens-Guide.aspx |date=February 10, 2011 }}. Peter G. Peterson Foundation website; retrieved February 5, 2011. However, these unfunded obligations are not counted in the national debt, as shown in monthly Treasury reports of the national debt.{{cite web |title=Government – Debt Position and Activity Report |url=https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/pd_debtposactrpt.htm |website=TreasuryDirect |access-date=June 27, 2017 |archive-date=March 7, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160307172624/http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/pd_debtposactrpt.htm |url-status=dead }}

File:Public debt percent of GDP.pdf

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.[http://www.cbo.gov/publication/42905 CBO – The Budget and Economic Outlook: Fiscal Years 2012 to 2022 – See Historical Budget Data Supplement], Cbo.gov, January 2012. 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.

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."{{cite web|url=https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/countries/united-states/|title=The World Factbook |date=April 6, 2022 |publisher= Central Intelligence Agency}} However, $1 trillion in additional borrowing since the end of FY 2015 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 intragovernmental federal debt to count only federal "debt held by the public" gives 96% of GDP.{{cite web|author=OECD |url=http://stats.oecd.org/ |title=OECD Statistics |website=Stats.oecd.org |access-date=2016-08-27}}

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 $13.84 trillion (~${{Format price|{{Inflation|index=US-GDP|value=13840000000000|start_year=2016}}}} in {{Inflation/year|US-GDP}}) 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%.Multiple references:

• [http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110418203433/http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np |date=April 18, 2011 }}
• [http://www.bizjournals.com/boston/blog/mass_roundup/2012/09/us-national-debt.html US national debt surpasses $16 trillion] – Boston Business Journal
• United States Department of the Treasury, Bureau of the Public Debt (December 2010). [http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np "The debt to the penny and who holds it".] TreasuryDirect. Retrieved August 26, 2012.

File:Deficit to Change in Debt Comparison - 2008.png

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.

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.[https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2013/assets/hist01z1.xls Table 1.1 – Summary of Receipts, Outlays, and Surpluses or Deficits (-): 1789–2017] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120706102517/http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2013/assets/hist01z1.xls |date=July 6, 2012 }}, Whitehouse.gov; accessed August 24, 2016.

For example, in January 2009 the CBO reported that for 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 because of 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.{{cite web|url=https://www.cbo.gov/publication/41753|title=CBO Budget and Economic Outlook 2009–2019|website=CBO|date=January 7, 2009|access-date=November 21, 2016}} The Treasury Department reported an increase in the national debt of $1,017B for FY2008.{{cite web|url=https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo5.htm|title=TreasuryDirect Historical Debt Outstanding|website=Treasury Direct|access-date=November 26, 2016|archive-date=May 8, 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190508122149/https://treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo5.htm|url-status=dead}} The $66 billion difference is likely from "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.{{cite web|url=http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/161/end-the-abuse-of-supplemental-budgets-for-war/|title=Money in budgets, but supplementals aren't going away|website=PolitiFact|access-date=November 26, 2016}}

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. Certain stimulus measures and earmarks were also outside the budget process. The federal government publishes the total debt owed (public and intragovernmental holdings) daily.{{Cite web |title=Debt to the Penny |url=https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/datasets/debt-to-the-penny/ |access-date=2022-08-23 |website=U.S. Treasury Fiscal Data |language=en}}

[[File:Federal Government debt holders.webp|thumb|300px|Federal Government debt holders

{{legend|#929292|Domestic private investors}}

{{legend|#004D80|Federal Reserve Treasuries}}

{{legend|#00A2FF|Domestic intergovernmental holdings}}

{{legend|#B51700|Foreign}}

]]

File:Estimated ownership of treasury securities by year.gif

Because a large variety of people own the notes, bills, and bonds in the "public" portion of the debt, the 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.)

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:

File:Composition of U.S. Long-Term Treasury Debt 2000-2014.svg

File:MAJOR FOREIGN HOLDERS OF TREASURY SECURITIES.webp

As of October 2018, foreigners owned $6.2 trillion of U.S. debt, or approximately 39% of the debt held by the public of $16.1 trillion and 28% of the total debt of $21.8 trillion.{{cite web|url=http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/mspd/2014/opds092014.pdf|title=Treasury Direct-Monthly Statement of the Public Debt Held by the U.S.|date=September 2014|access-date=November 30, 2014|archive-date=October 26, 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141026173929/http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/mspd/2014/opds092014.pdf|url-status=dead}} In December 2020, foreigners held 33% ($7 trillion out of $21.6 trillion) of publicly held US debt; of this $7 trillion, $4.1 trillion (59.2%) belonged to foreign governments and $2.8 trillion (40.8%) to foreign investors. Including both private and public debt holders, the top three December 2020 national holders of American public debt are Japan ($1.2 trillion or 17.7%), China ($1.1 trillion or 15.2%), and the United Kingdom ($0.4 trillion or 6.2%).{{cite report |author2=Jared C. Nagel |author1=Marc Labonte |date=July 9, 2021 |title=Foreign Holdings of Federal Debt |url=https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS22331.pdf |publisher=Congressional Research Service |page=ii |access-date=July 21, 2021}}

Historically, the share held by foreign governments had grown over time, rising from 13% of the public debt in 1988{{cite web|author=Amadeo, Kimberly|url=http://useconomy.about.com/od/fiscalpolicy/p/US_Debt.htm|title=The U.S. debt and how it got so big|work=About.com|date=January 10, 2011|access-date=July 7, 2007|archive-date=March 16, 2007|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070316083227/http://useconomy.about.com/od/fiscalpolicy/p/US_Debt.htm|url-status=dead}} to 34% in 2015.Schoen, John W. (March 4, 2007) [https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna17424874 "Just who owns the U.S. national debt?"] NBC News; retrieved January 17, 2011. In more recent years, foreign ownership has retreated both in percent of total debt and total dollar amounts. China's maximum holding of 9.1% or $1.3 trillion of U.S. debt occurred in 2011, subsequently reduced to 5% in 2018. Japan's maximum holding of 7% or $1.2 trillion occurred in 2012, subsequently reduced to 4% in 2018.{{Cite web|url=https://chinapower.csis.org/us-debt/|title=Is it a Risk for America that China Holds over $1 Trillion in U.S. Debt?|date=February 2, 2016}}

File:U.S. Net International Investment Position over time.png

According to Paul Krugman, "America actually earns more from its assets abroad than it pays to foreign investors."{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/02/opinion/krugman-nobody-understands-debt.html?_r=1&ref=paulkrugman|work=The New York Times|title=Nobody Understands Debt|date=2012-01-01|access-date=2012-02-04|first1=Paul|last1=Krugman}} Nonetheless, the country's net international investment position represents a debt of more than $9 trillion.{{Cite web|url=https://www.bea.gov/news/2019/us-net-international-investment-position-third-quarter-2018|title=US Net International Investment Position from BEA|date=February 1, 2019|access-date=April 1, 2019}}

{{Further|United States federal budget}}

File:CBO Deficit - Baseline Comparison - April 2018.png

The CBO estimated the impact of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and separate spending legislation over the 2018–2028 period in their annual "Budget & Economic Outlook", released in April 2018:

• 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 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:
• #$1.7 trillion less in revenues due to the tax cuts;
• #$1.0 trillion more in spending; and
• #Partially offsetting incremental revenue of $1.1 trillion due to higher economic growth than previously forecast.
• Debt held by the public is expected (Congressional Budget Office Outlook) 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 II.{{citation needed|date=March 2020}}
• 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.{{cite web|url=https://www.cbo.gov/publication/53651|title=The Budget and Economic Outlook: 2018 to 2028 – Congressional Budget Office|website=www.cbo.gov|date=April 9, 2018}}

The CBO estimated that the budget deficit for fiscal year 2020 would increase to $3.3 trillion or 16% GDP, more than triple that of 2019 and the largest as % GDP since 1945, because of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. CBO also forecast the debt held by the public would rise to 98% GDP in 2020, compared with 79% in 2019 and 35% in 2007 before the Great Recession.

File:Federal debt held by public CBO 2019.png

File:Federal Budget Outlays Projection.webp

File:CBO 2014 LTBO Spending Under Ext Baseline.png

The CBO reports its Long-Term Budget Outlook annually, providing at least two scenarios for spending, revenue, deficits, and debt. The 2019 Outlook mainly covers the 30-year period through 2049. The CBO reported:

Large budget deficits over the next 30 years are projected to drive federal debt held by the public to unprecedented levels—from 78 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) in 2019 to 144 percent by 2049. That projection incorporates CBO's central estimates of various factors, such as productivity growth and interest rates on federal debt. CBO's analysis indicates that even if values for those factors differed from the agency's projections, debt several decades from now would probably be much higher than it is today.[https://www.cbo.gov/publication/55331 CBO The 2019 Long-Term Budget Outlook], cbo.gov; accessed June 25, 2019.

Furthermore, under alternative scenarios:

If lawmakers changed current laws to maintain certain major policies now in place—most significantly, if they prevented a cut in discretionary spending in 2020 and an increase in individual income taxes in 2026—then debt held by the public would increase even more, reaching 219 percent of GDP by 2049. By contrast, if Social Security benefits were limited to the amounts payable from revenues received by the Social Security trust funds, debt in 2049 would reach 106 percent of GDP, still well above its current level.

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.

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.Saint Louis Federal Reserve (2012) [http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/DFII5 "5-Year Treasury Inflation-Indexed Security, Constant Maturity"] FRED Economic Data chart from government debt auctions (the x-axis at y=0 represents the inflation rate over the life of the security) 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.Carmen M. Reinhart and M. Belen Sbrancia (March 2011) [http://www.imf.org/external/np/seminars/eng/2011/res2/pdf/crbs.pdf "The Liquidation of Government Debt"] National Bureau of Economic Research working paper No. 16893David Wessel (August 8, 2012) [https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10000872396390444900304577577192417116440 "When Interest Rates Turn Upside Down"] The Wall Street Journal ([http://www.htisec.com/en/research/shownews.jsp?newsType=DJ&newsid=c-20120808DN019794 full text] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130120020448/http://www.htisec.com/en/research/shownews.jsp?newsType=DJ&newsid=c-20120808DN019794|date=January 20, 2013}}) Economist Lawrence Summers states that at such low interest rates, government borrowing actually saves taxpayer money and improves creditworthiness.Lawrence Summers (June 3, 2012) [https://web.archive.org/web/20120605042224/http://blogs.reuters.com/lawrencesummers/2012/06/03/breaking-the-negative-feedback-loop/ "Breaking the negative feedback loop"] Reuters

In the late 1940s through the early 1970s, the U.S. 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.William H. Gross (May 2, 2011) [http://www.pimco.com/EN/insights/pages/the-caine-mutiny-part-2.aspx "The Caine Mutiny (Part 2)"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121013181717/http://www.pimco.com/EN/Insights/Pages/The-Caine-Mutiny-Part-2.aspx |date=October 13, 2012 }} PIMCO Investment Outlook Between 1946 and 1974, the U.S. 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.[https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/02/why-the-us-government-never-ever-has-to-pay-back-all-its-debt/272747 "Why the U.S. Government Never, Ever Has to Pay Back All Its Debt"], The Atlantic, February 1, 2013.

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.Ambrose Evans-Pritchard (October 21, 2012) [https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/9623863/IMFs-epic-plan-to-conjure-away-debt-and-dethrone-bankers.html "IMF's epic plan to conjure away debt and dethrone bankers"] The TelegraphJaromir Benes and Michael Kumhof (August 2012) [http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2012/wp12202.pdf "The Chicago Plan Revisited"], International Monetary Fund working paper WP/12/202; accessed November 6, 2016. Economists at the Paris School of Economics have commented on the plan, stating that it is already the status quo for coinage currency,[http://hal.cirad.fr/docs/00/74/79/04/PDF/12064.pdf "Debt-Deflation versus the Liquidity Trap: the Dilemma of Nonconventional Monetary Policy"] CNRS, CES, Paris School of Economics, ESCP-Europe, October 23, 2012 and a Norges Bank economist has examined the proposal in the context of considering the finance industry as part of the real economy.{{Cite web|url=http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1009&context=thorvaldgrung_moe|title="Credit and debt in Economic Theory: Which Way forward?" Economics of Credit and Debt workshop, November 2012|access-date=February 13, 2013|archive-date=May 14, 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130514214641/http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1009&context=thorvaldgrung_moe|url-status=dead}} 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."[http://www.cepr.org/pubs/PolicyInsights/PolicyInsight62.pdf "The economic crisis: How to stimulate economies without increasing public debt"] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120916093844/http://www.cepr.org/pubs/PolicyInsights/PolicyInsight62.pdf|date=September 16, 2012}}, Centre for Economic Policy Research, August 2012.

File:Historical and projected US Federal Government revenues and spending 2018 GAO financial report.png

{{See also|Political debates about the United States federal budget|Deficit reduction in the United States}}

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

• 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.Huntley, Jonathan (July 27, 2010). [http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=11659 "Federal debt and the risk of a fiscal crisis"]. Congressional Budget Office: Macroeconomic Analysis Division; retrieved February 2, 2011.

The U.S. has never fully defaulted.{{cite news |last=Carney |first=John |title=Has the United States Ever Defaulted on Its Debt? |newspaper=CNBC |url=https://www.cnbc.com/2011/05/23/has-the-united-states-ever-defaulted-on-its-debt.html |access-date=January 18, 2013}}{{cite news |last=Comstock |first=Courtney |title=10 Things You Need To Know About The Debt Ceiling |newspaper=The Fiscal Times |url=http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2011/07/04/10-Things-You-Need-To-Know-About-The-Debt-Ceiling.aspx#page1 |access-date=January 18, 2013}} In April 1979, however, the U.S. may have technically defaulted on $122 million (~${{Format price|{{Inflation|index=US-GDP|value=122000000|start_year=1979}}}} in {{Inflation/year|US-GDP}}) 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%.{{cite news |last=Zweig |first=Jason |title=Own Government Bonds? Here's Why You Should Be Worried |newspaper=The Wall Street Journal |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704083904576335420994526968?mod=WSJ_PersonalFinance_PF2 |access-date=January 18, 2013}} Others view it as a temporary, partial default.{{cite news |last=Marron |first=Donald |title=The Day the United States Defaulted on Treasury Bills |url=http://dmarron.com/2011/05/26/the-day-the-united-states-defaulted-on-treasury-bills |access-date=January 18, 2013}}{{cite news |last=O'brien |first=Matthew |title=Here's What Happened the Last Time the U.S. Defaulted on Its Debt |newspaper=The Atlantic |url=https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/01/heres-what-happened-the-last-time-the-us-defaulted-on-its-debt/267205 |access-date=January 18, 2013}}{{cite news |last=Siegel |first=Robert |title=When Did The U.S. Last Default On Treasury Bonds? |newspaper=NPR |url=https://www.npr.org/2011/07/11/137773341/looking-at-when-the-u-s-last-defaulted-on-treasury-bonds |access-date=January 18, 2013}}

{{Main|United States debt ceiling}}

The United States debt ceiling is a legislative constraint on the amount of national debt that can be incurred by the U.S. Treasury. It limits how much money the federal government may pay on the debt it already has by borrowing even more money. The debt ceiling applies to almost all federal debt, including accounts owned by the public and intra-government funds for Medicare and Social Security.[http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL31967.pdf The Debt Limit: History and Recent Increases, October 2013], p 4.{{Cite web |date=2023-05-05 |title=Q&A: Everything You Should Know About the Debt Ceiling {{!}} Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget |url=https://www.crfb.org/papers/qa-everything-you-should-know-about-debt-ceiling |access-date=2023-06-01 |website=www.crfb.org |language=en}}

In 2009 the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported that the United States was on a "fiscally unsustainable" path because of projected future increases in Medicare and Social Security spending.Congress of the United States, Government Accountability Office (February 13, 2009). [http://www.gao.gov/financial/citizensguide2008.pdf "The federal government's financial health: a citizen's guide to the 2008 financial report of the United States government", pp. 7–8] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110805001133/http://www.gao.gov/financial/citizensguide2008.pdf |date=August 5, 2011 }}, gao.gov; retrieved February 1, 2011. According to the Treasury report in October 2018, summarized by Business Insider's Bob Bryan, the U.S. federal budget deficit rose as a result of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 signed into law by President Donald Trump on December 22, 2017{{cite news|last1=Pullen|first1=John Patrick|title=Here's When the GOP Tax Reform Bill Will Take Effect|url=http://fortune.com/2017/12/20/gop-tax-bill-cuts-start/|access-date=December 23, 2017|work=Fortune|date=December 20, 2017}} and the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 signed into law on March 23, 2018.{{cite news |last1=Werner |first1=Erica |last2=DeBonis |first2=Mike |date=March 22, 2018 |access-date=October 30, 2018 |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/house-prepares-for-rapid-vote-today-on-jam-packed-13-trillion-spending-deal/2018/03/22/2074fe7e-2dd6-11e8-8688-e053ba58f1e4_story.html |title=House approves jam-packed $1.3 trillion spending bill |newspaper=The Washington Post|issn=0190-8286}}{{cite news |url=https://www.businessinsider.com/us-budget-deficit-779-billion-highest-since-2012-2018-10 |access-date=October 30, 2018 |title=The US budget deficit ballooned to $779 billion this year, the highest since 2012, driven by Trump's tax law and the massive budget deal |first=Bob |last=Bryan |date=October 15, 2018 |publisher=Business Insider}}

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).U.S. House of Representatives Republican Caucus (May 27, 2010). [http://budget.house.gov/UploadedFiles/debtthreat27may2010.pdf "The perils of rising government debt"], budget.house.gov; retrieved February 2, 2011. 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.{{cite web|url=http://www.businessinsider.com/herndon-responds-to-reinhart-rogoff-2013-4|title=Herndon Responds To Reinhart Rogoff|first=Thomas|last=Herndon|work=Business Insider|access-date=April 22, 2013}}{{cite web|url=http://www.businessinsider.com/reinhart-and-rogoff-admit-excel-blunder-2013-4|title=Reinhart And Rogoff Admit Excel Blunder|first=Joe|last=Weisenthal|work=Business Insider|access-date=April 22, 2013}} 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.[http://www.peri.umass.edu/fileadmin/pdf/working_papers/working_papers_301-350/WP322.pdf Herndon, Thomas, Michael Ash, and Robert Pollin, "Does High Public Debt Consistently Stifle Economic Growth? A Critique of Reinhart and Rogoff"] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130418125357/http://www.peri.umass.edu/fileadmin/pdf/working_papers/working_papers_301-350/WP322.pdf |date=April 18, 2013}}, University of Massachusetts Amherst Department of Economics, April 15, 2013. Reinhart and Rogoff maintain that after correcting for errors, a negative relationship between high debt and growth remains.{{cite web|url=http://blogs.ft.com/ftdata/2013/04/17/the-reinhart-rogoff-response-i/?|title=Reinhart-Rogoff recrunch the numbers|work=Financial Times}} 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.Krugman, Paul (May 27, 2010). [https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/05/27/bad-analysis-at-the-deficit-commission/ "Bad analysis at the deficit commission"]. The New York Times: The Opinion Pages: Conscience of a Liberal Blog. Retrieved February 9, 2011.Vikas Bajaj (April 17, 2013) [http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/17/does-high-debt-cause-slow-growth/ "Does High Debt Cause Slow Growth?"], The New York Times; retrieved May 7, 2013.Matthew O'Brien, [https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/04/forget-excel-this-was-reinhart-and-rogoffs-biggest-mistake/275088 "Forget Excel: This Was Reinhart and Rogoff's Biggest Mistake"], The Atlantic; accessed November 6, 2016.

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."Bernanke, Ben S. (April 27, 2010). [http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/bernanke20100427a.htm "Speech before the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform: Achieving fiscal sustainability"], Federalreserve.gov; retrieved February 2, 2011.

File:Federal interest payments.webp}}

{{legend-line|#00A2FF solid 3px|Interest payments % of total Federal revenue}}

]]

File:U.S. Federal Net Interest as Pct GDP.png

File:2023 Interest on federal debt.png

Interest expense on the public debt was approximately $678 billion in FY2023. During FY2023, the government also accrued a non-cash interest expense of $197 billion for intra-governmental debt, primarily the Social Security Trust Fund, for a total interest expense of $875 billion. This accrued interest is added to the Social Security Trust Fund and therefore the national debt each year and will be paid to Social Security recipients in the future. However, since it is a non-cash expense it is excluded from the budget deficit calculation.{{cite web |url=https://www.gao.gov/assets/d24106340.pdff |title=GAO FINANCIAL AUDIT Bureau of the Fiscal Service's FY 2023 and FY 2022 Schedules of Federal Debt |page=18 |date=November 2023 |access-date=2024-01-25 }}

The federal debt at the end of the 2018/19 fiscal year (ended September 30, 2019) was $22.7 trillion (~${{Format price|{{Inflation|index=US-GDP|value=22700000000000|start_year=2018}}}} in {{Inflation/year|US-GDP}}). The portion that is held by the public was $16.8 trillion. Neither figure includes approximately $2.5 trillion owed to the government.{{Cite web|url=https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-20-117|title=Financial Audit: Bureau of the Fiscal Service's FY 2019 and FY 2018 Schedules of Federal Debt|first=U. S. Government Accountability|last=Office|website=www.gao.gov}} Interest on the debt was $404 billion.https://www.gao.gov/assets/710/702591.pdf, https://www.gao.gov/assets/710/704983.pdf

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.[https://www.cbo.gov/publication/51384 CBO-Updated Budget Projections 2016–2026], cbo.gov; retrieved May 11, 2016. 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% of GDP, to $799 billion in 2024, or 3.0% of GDP—the highest ratio since 1996."[https://www.cbo.gov/publication/45684 CBO-Projection of Federal Interest Payments], cbo.gov, September 3, 2014.

According to a study by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB), the U.S. government will spend more on servicing their debts than they do for their national defense budget by 2024.{{Cite web|last=Swanson|first=Ian|date=2018-03-15|title=US could spend more on servicing debt than defense by 2024: study|url=https://thehill.com/policy/finance/378607-us-could-spend-more-on-servicing-debt-than-defense-by-2024-study|access-date=2021-09-09|website=The Hill|language=en}}

In October 2023, yields for 10-year Treasury notes breached 5% as traders adjusted their assessment of United States' fiscal position and lowered their expectation that Congress or the White House would take any action to improve it. The impact was felt by homebuyers, with 30-year mortgage rate at its highest in two decades, and corporations facing higher costs of borrowing. Interests paid by the federal government jumped by $184 billion during the 2022 fiscal year and are still climbing.{{Cite news |date=2023-10-23 |title=Why Bond Yields Are Sending a Warning Signal to Washington |language=en |work=Bloomberg.com |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2023-10-23/with-us-debt-piling-up-bond-market-is-sending-a-warning-signal |access-date=2023-10-26}}

According to a 2013 Forbes article, many American and other economic analysts have expressed concerns on the amount of United States government debt the People's Republic of China is holding as part of their reserves.[https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2013/01/23/is-chinas-ownership-of-u-s-debt-a-national-security-threat/#41479958afa3 "Is China's Ownership Of U.S. Debt A National Security Threat?"] by Kenneth Rapoza, Forbes, 23 January 2013"... Should Americans be concerned that China has started dumping some of its Treasury holdings? After all, it raises serious questions about whether China will keep lending Washington money to help finance the federal deficit in the future.": From [https://money.cnn.com/2015/09/10/investing/china-dumping-us-debt "China is dumping U.S. debt"], CNN.com, September 11, 2015. The National Defense Authorization Act of FY2012 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.” {{citation needed|date=April 2024}} An August 19, 2013 Congressional Research Service report said that the threat is not credible and the effect would be limited even if carried out. The report said that the threat would 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."[https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL34314.pdf Report] on "China's Holdings of U.S. Securities: Implications for the U.S. Economy" by Wayne M. Morrison & Marc Labonte, Congressional Research Service, 19 August 2013

A 2010 article by James K. Galbraith in The Nation, defends deficits and dismisses concerns over foreign holdings of United States government debt denominated in U.S. dollars, including China's holdings.: "... What about indebtedness to foreigners? ... To acquire [U.S. gov't bonds], China must export goods to us, not offset by equivalent imports. That is a cost to China. It's a cost Beijing is prepared to pay, for its own reasons: export industries promote learning, technology transfer and product quality improvement, and they provide jobs to migrants from the countryside. But that's China's business. For China, the bonds themselves are a sterile hoard. There is almost nothing that Beijing can do with them; ... its stock of T-bonds will just go on growing. And we will pay interest on it, not with real effort but by typing numbers into computers. There is no burden associated with this; not now and not later." From [http://www.thenation.com/article/defense-deficits/ "In Defense of Deficits"] by James K. Galbraith, The Nation, March 4, 2010. In 2010, Warren Mosler, wrote that "When[ever] the Chinese redeem those T-securities, the money is transferred back to China's checking account at the Fed. During the entire purchase and redemption process, the dollars never leave the Fed.""... The Chinese buy U.S. T-securities by transferring U.S. dollars (not yuan) from their checking account at the Federal Reserve Bank to China's T-security account, also at the Federal Reserve Bank. When[ever] the Chinese redeem those T-securities, the money is transferred back to China's checking account at the Fed. During the entire purchase and redemption process, the dollars never leave the Fed." [http://moslereconomics.com/2010/09/23/what-policies-for-global-prosperity/ "What Policies for Global Prosperity?"] by Warren Mosler, September 23, 2010. Australian economist Bill Mitchell argued that the United States government had a "nearly infinite capacity...to spend."Mitchell, Bill, University of Newcastle (Australia). [http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=18813 "The nearly infinite capacity of the US government to spend"] (March 28, 2012); [http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=25161 "The US government can buy as much of its own debt as it chooses"] (August 27, 2013) Against the backdrop of escalating Sino-U.S. tensions in 2020, Yuzo Sakai, a manager at Ueda Totan Forex Ltd., said that if China undertakes a massive sales of U.S. bonds, investors may flock to the Japanese yen as a safe-haven currency. Since 2018, China had been gradually decreasing its holdings of U.S. federal debt, bringing the total to $1.07 trillion in June 2020, behind Japan who became the biggest foreign creditor of the United States. Stephen Nagy, a professor at the International Christian University, said a sell-off by China "might damage the United States in the short term" but also cause "critical economic instability" in the Chinese and global economy. Jeff Kingston, a professor and director of Asian Studies at Temple University, Japan, echoed the view, adding that dumping would lower the price of U.S. bonds, making it more attractive to other countries. According to an institutional investor, however, it may be difficult for Japan to boost its already large holdings of U.S. government debt, as such a move could be seen as "currency manipulation".{{Cite web |last=Tachikawa |first=Tomoyuki |date=Aug 20, 2020 |title=Fears grow over China's possible massive sales of U.S. debt as weapon |url=https://english.kyodonews.net/news/2020/08/fb165250518a-focus-fears-grow-over-chinas-possible-massive-sales-of-us-debt-as-weapon.html |website=Kyodo News+}}

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. 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.Horney, James R. (May 27, 2010). [http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3197 "Recommendation that president's fiscal commission focus on gross debt is misguided"], Center on Budget and Policy Priorities [website]; retrieved February 9, 2011.

There is debate regarding the economic nature of the intragovernmental debt, which was approximately $4.6 trillion in February 2011.United States Treasury, Bureau of the Public Debt (April 30, 2010). [http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/mspd/2010/opds042010.pdf "Monthly statement of public debt of the United States"], TreasuryDirect; retrieved February 9, 2011. 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." 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".{{cite web|url=http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/115xx/doc11580/07-01-SSOptions_forWeb.pdf|title=CBO-Social Security Policy Options-July 2010|access-date=May 18, 2011}}{{cite news|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424053111903480904576510660976229354|title=A Short Primer on the National Debt|first=John Steele|last=Gordon|author-link=John Steele Gordon|newspaper=The Wall Street Journal|date=August 29, 2011|access-date=2016-08-27}}

{{See also|Intergenerational equity}}

File:1979 $10,000 Treasury Bond .jpg

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:

• 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.{{cite web|url=https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/28/debt-is-mostly-money-we-owe-to-ourselves/|title=Debt Is (Mostly) Money We Owe to Ourselves|website=Krugman.blogs.nytimes.com|date=December 28, 2011 |access-date=2016-08-27}}
• As of 2010, approximately 72% of the financial assets were held by the wealthiest 5% of the population.{{cite web|url=http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html|title=Who Rules America: Wealth, Income, and Power|website=Ucsc.edu|access-date=2016-08-27}} 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.
• 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).
• 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.{{cite web|url=http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/david-brooks-is-projecting-his-self-indulgence-again|title=David Brooks Is Projecting His Self Indulgence Again|first=Dean|last=Baker|publisher=cepr.net|access-date=September 23, 2016|archive-date=April 2, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150402162004/http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/david-brooks-is-projecting-his-self-indulgence-again|url-status=dead}}
• 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|date=September 2016}}

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.{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/29/opinion/krugman-cheating-our-children.html|title=Cheating Our Children|date=March 29, 2013|work=The New York Times}}

The COVID-19 pandemic in the United States impacted the economy significantly beginning in March 2020, as businesses were shut-down and furloughed or fired personnel. About 16 million persons filed for unemployment insurance in the three weeks ending April 9. It caused the number of unemployed persons to increase significantly, which is expected to reduce tax revenues while increasing automatic stabilizer spending for unemployment insurance and nutritional support. As a result of the adverse economic impact, both state and federal budget deficits will dramatically increase, even before considering any new legislation.{{Cite news |last1=Cohen |first1=Patricia |last2=Hsu |first2=Tiffany |date=April 9, 2020 |title='Sudden Black Hole' for the Economy With Millions More Unemployed |newspaper=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/09/business/economy/unemployment-claim-numbers-coronavirus.html}}

To help address lost income for millions of workers and assist businesses, Congress and President Trump enacted the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) on March 27, 2020. It included loans and grants for businesses, along with direct payments to individuals and additional funding for unemployment insurance. The act carried an estimated $2.3 trillion price tag, with an expectation that some or all of the loans would ultimately be paid back including interest. While the law would have almost certainly increased budget deficits relative to the January 2020 10-year CBO baseline (completed prior to the COVID-19 pandemic), in the absence of the legislation, a complete economic collapse could have occurred.{{Cite web |date=April 8, 2020 |title=Short-Run Economic Effects of the CARES Act |url=https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/issues/2020/4/8/short-run-effects-of-the-cares-act |website=Penn Wharton Budget Model}} However, as of 2023, many of these loans have been forgiven.{{Cite web |last=Pfieffer |first=Sacha |date=January 9, 2023 |title=How the Paycheck Protection Program went from good intentions to a huge free-for-all |url=https://www.npr.org/2023/01/09/1145040599/ppp-loan-forgiveness |access-date=March 27, 2024 |website=NPR}}

CBO provided a preliminary score for the CARES Act on April 16, 2020, estimating that it would increase federal deficits by about $1.8 trillion over the 2020-2030 period. The estimate includes:

• A $988 billion increase in mandatory outlays;
• A $446 billion decrease in revenues; and
• A $326 billion increase in discretionary outlays, stemming from emergency supplemental appropriations.

CBO reported that not all parts of the bill will increase deficits: “Although the act provides financial assistance totaling more than $2 trillion, the projected cost is less than that because some of that assistance is in the form of loan guarantees, which are not estimated to have a net effect on the budget. In particular, the act authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to provide up to $454 billion to fund emergency lending facilities established by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Because the income and costs stemming from that lending are expected to roughly offset each other, CBO estimates no deficit effect from that provision.”{{Cite web |date=April 16, 2020 |title=H.R. 748, CARES Act, Public Law 116-136 |url=https://www.cbo.gov/publication/56334 |access-date=April 16, 2020 |work=cbo.gov}}

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimated that the budget deficit for fiscal year 2020 would increase to a record $3.8 trillion (~${{Format price|{{Inflation|index=US-GDP|value=3800000000000|start_year=2020}}}} in {{Inflation/year|US-GDP}}), or 18.7% GDP.{{Cite web |title=NYT-Reuters-U.S. Deficit to Soar to Record $3.8 Trillion in 2020, Budget Watchdog Group Says-April 13, 2020 |url=https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2020/04/13/us/13reuters-health-coronavirus-usa-budget.html |website=The New York Times}} For scale, in 2009 the budget deficit reached 9.8% GDP ($1.4 trillion nominal dollars) in the depths of the Great Recession. CBO forecast in January 2020 that the budget deficit in FY2020 would be $1.0 trillion (~${{Format price|{{Inflation|index=US-GDP|value=1000000000000|start_year=2020}}}} in {{Inflation/year|US-GDP}}), prior to considering the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic or CARES.{{Cite web |date=January 28, 2020 |title=The Budget and Economic Outlook: 2020 to 2030 | Congressional Budget Office |url=https://www.cbo.gov/publication/56020 |website=www.cbo.gov}} CFRB further estimated that the national debt would reach 106% of U.S. GDP in September 2020, a record since the aftermath of World War II.{{cite news |last1=Lynch |first1=David J. |date=18 April 2020 |title=Record government and corporate debt risks 'tipping point' after pandemic passes |language=en |newspaper=The Washington Post |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2020/04/18/record-government-corporate-debt-risk-tipping-point-after-pandemic-passes/ |access-date=19 April 2020}}

President Biden also allocated significant amounts of money towards relief of the COVID-19 pandemic. According to a May 2021 report, Biden has or plans to spend $5.72 (~${{Format price|{{Inflation|index=US-GDP|value=5720000000000|start_year=2021}}}} in {{Inflation/year|US-GDP}}) trillion dollars toward this effort and others such as climate change including providing stimulus checks and serving schools and low-income children.{{cite news |last=Tankersley |first=Jim |date=April 9, 2021 |title=Biden's Budget Includes $1.52 Trillion in Federal Spending |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/live/2021/04/09/us/biden-news-today}} Economists are divided if this unprecedented level of spending from the Biden Administration has, in part, contributed to the inflation spike from 2021 to 2022 as a result of increasing the money supply in the economy.{{Cite news |last=Morgan |first=David |date=2021-11-01 |title=Explainer: Republicans blame Biden for inflation, but are they right? |language=en |work=Reuters |url=https://www.reuters.com/world/us/republicans-blame-biden-inflation-are-they-right-2021-11-01/ |access-date=2022-03-24}}{{Cite web |last=Tolliver |first=Sandy |date=2022-02-25 |title=Runaway inflation discredits Democrats' fiscal and monetary policy |url=https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/595019-runaway-inflation-discredits-democrats-fiscal-and-monetary-policy |access-date=2022-03-24 |website=The Hill |language=en}}

{{smalldiv|1=

On July 29, 2021, the BEA revised its GDP figures in a comprehensive update and figures back to FY1970 were revised accordingly.

On July 27, 2018, the BEA revised its GDP figures in a comprehensive update and figures back to FY2013 were revised accordingly.{{Cite web|url=https://www.bea.gov/news/2018/gross-domestic-product-2nd-quarter-2018-advance-estimate-and-comprehensive-update|title=Gross Domestic Product, 2nd quarter 2018 (advance estimate), and comprehensive update | U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)|website=www.bea.gov}}

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.

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.

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.

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.

1909–1930 calendar year GDP estimates are from MeasuringWorth.comMeasuringWorth.com (December 14, 2010) [http://www.measuringworth.com/usgdp "What was the U.S. GDP then?"], MeasuringWorth.com; retrieved January 30, 2011. Fiscal Year estimates are derived from simple linear interpolation.

(a1) Audited figure was "about $5,659 billion."United States Congress, Government Accountability Office (March 1, 2001). [http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-01-389 Financial Audit: Bureau of the Public Debt's Fiscal Years 2000 and 1999 Schedules of Federal Debt GAO-01-389] United States Government Accountability Office (GAO); retrieved August 6, 2012.

(a2) Audited figure was "about $5,792 billion."United States Congress, Government Accountability Office (November 1, 2002). [http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/feddebt/feddebt_ann2002.pdf Financial Audit: Bureau of the Public Debt's Fiscal Years 2002 and 2001 Schedules of Federal Debt GAO-03-199] United States Government Accountability Office (GAO); retrieved February 2, 2011.

(a3) Audited figure was "about $6,213 billion."

(a) Audited figure was said to be "about" the stated figure.United States Congress, Government Accountability Office (November 5, 2004). [http://www.gao.gov/docdblite/details.php?rptno=GAO-05-116 Financial Audit: Bureau of the Public Debt's Fiscal Years 2004 and 2003 Schedules of Federal Debt GAO-05-116] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080829162702/http://www.gao.gov/docdblite/details.php?rptno=GAO-05-116 |date=August 29, 2008 }} United States Government Accountability Office (GAO); retrieved January 16, 2011.

(a4) Audited figure was "about $7,918 billion."United States Congress, Government Accountability Office (November 7, 2006). [http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/feddebt/feddebt_ann2006.pdf Financial Audit: Bureau of the Public Debt's Fiscal Years 2006 and 2005 Schedules of Federal Debt GAO-07-127] United States Government Accountability Office (GAO); retrieved February 2, 2011.

(a5) Audited figure was "about $8,493 billion."

(a6) Audited figure was "about $8,993 billion."United States Congress, Government Accountability Office (November 7, 2008). [http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/feddebt/feddebt_ann2008.pdf Financial Audit: Bureau of the Public Debt's Fiscal Years 2008 and 2007 Schedules of Federal Debt GAO-09-44] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110721062604/http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/feddebt/feddebt_ann2008.pdf |date=July 21, 2011 }} United States Government Accountability Office (GAO); retrieved January 29, 2011.

(a7) Audited figure was "about $10,011 billion."

(a8) Audited figure was "about $11,898 billion."United States Congress, Government Accountability Office (November 10, 2009). [http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/feddebt/feddebt_ann2009.pdf Financial Audit: Bureau of the Public Debt's Fiscal Years 2009 and 2008 Schedules of Federal Debt GAO-10-88] United States Government Accountability Office (GAO); retrieved February 2, 2011.

(a9) Audited figure was "about $13,551 billion."United States Congress, Government Accountability Office (November 8, 2010). [http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/feddebt/feddebt_ann2010.pdf Financial Audit: Bureau of the Public Debt's Fiscal Years 2010 and 2009 Schedules of Federal Debt GAO-11-52] United States Government Accountability Office (GAO); retrieved February 2, 2011.

(a10) GAO affirmed Bureau of the Public debt figure as $14,781 billion.United States Congress, Government Accountability Office (November 8, 2012). [http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/feddebt/feddebt_ann2012.pdf Financial Audit: Bureau of the Public Debt's Fiscal Years 2012 and 2011 Schedules of Federal Debt GAO-13-114] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130120065025/http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/feddebt/feddebt_ann2012.pdf |date=January 20, 2013 }} United States Government Accountability Office (GAO); retrieved November 27, 2013.

(a11) GAO affirmed Bureau of the Public debt figure as $16,059 billion.

(a12) GAO affirmed Bureau of the Fiscal Service's figure as $16,732 billion.United States Congress, Government Accountability Office (December 12, 2013). [http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/feddebt/feddebt_ann2013.pdf Financial Audit: Bureau of the Fiscal Service's Fiscal Years 2013 and 2012 Schedules of Federal Debt GAO-14-173], United States Government Accountability Office (GAO); retrieved July 2, 2014.

(a13) GAO affirmed Bureau of the Fiscal Service's figure as $17,810 billion.[http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/feddebt/feddebt_ann2014.pdf GAO-Financial Audit-Bureau of the Fiscal Service's Fiscal Years 2014 and 2013 Schedules of Federal Debt], treasurydirect.gov, November 2014.

(a14) GAO affirmed Bureau of the Fiscal Service's figure as $18,138 billion.[http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/feddebt/feddebt_ann2015.pdf GAO-Financial Audit-Bureau of the Fiscal Service's Fiscal Years 2016 and 2015 Schedules of Federal Debt], treasurydirect.gov, November 2015.

(a15) GAO affirmed Bureau of the Fiscal Service's figure as $19,560 billion.[https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/feddebt/feddebt_ann2016.pdf GAO-Financial Audit-Bureau of the Fiscal Service's Fiscal Years 2016 and 2015 Schedules of Federal Debt], treasurydirect.gov, November 2016.

(a16) GAO affirmed Bureau of the Fiscal Service's figure as $20,233 billion.[https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/feddebt/feddebt_ann2017.pdf GAO-Financial Audit-Bureau of the Fiscal Service's Fiscal Years 2017 and 2016 Schedules of Federal Debt] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200919092003/https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/feddebt/feddebt_ann2017.pdf |date=September 19, 2020 }}, treasurydirect.gov, November 2017.

(a17) GAO affirmed Bureau of the Fiscal Service's figure as $21,506 billion.[http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/feddebt/feddebt_ann2018.pdf GAO-Financial Audit-Bureau of the Fiscal Service's Fiscal Years 2018 and 2017 Schedules of Federal Debt], treasurydirect.gov, November 2018.

(a18) GAO affirmed Bureau of the Fiscal Service's figure as $22,711 billion.[https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/feddebt/feddebt_ann2019.pdf GAO-Financial Audit-Bureau of the Fiscal Service's FY 2019 and FY 2018 Schedules of Federal Debt] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201112023258/https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/feddebt/feddebt_ann2019.pdf |date=November 12, 2020 }}, treasurydirect.gov, November 2019.

}}

According to federal government data, interest payment on debt has crossed above one trillion on October 1, 2023.{{Cite journal|url=https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=172rZ|title=Federal government current expenditures: Interest payments|date=October 30, 2024|website=fred.stlouisfed.org}}

Note that this is all interest the U.S. paid, including interest credited to Social Security and other government trust funds, not just "interest on debt" frequently cited elsewhere.

File:Federal interest payments 2023.webp

{{main|United States Treasury security#International}}

The following is a list of the top foreign holders of Treasury securities as listed by the Federal Reserve Board (revised by February 2025 survey):{{cite web |url=https://ticdata.treasury.gov/resource-center/data-chart-center/tic/Documents/slt_table5.html |title=Major Foreign Holders of Treasury Securities |publisher=Department of the Treasury / Federal Reserve Board |date=April 16, 2025}}

{{table alignment}}

File:Revenue and Expense to GDP Chart 1993 - 2012.png

• U.S. official gold reserves {{As of|2014|7|31|lc=on}} total 261.5 million troy ounces with a book value of approximately $11.04 billion.{{cite web |url=http://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/fsreports/rpt/goldRpt/current_report.htm|title=Status report of U.S. Treasury-owned gold|author=U.S. Department of the Treasury, Bureau of the Fiscal Service|date=July 13, 2014}}
• Foreign exchange reserves $140 billion {{As of|2014|9|lc=on}}.International Money Fund (September 5, 2014). [http://www.imf.org/external/np/sta/ir/IRProcessWeb/data/usa/eng/curusa.htm#1 "International Reserves and Foreign Currency Liquidity: Official reserve assets and other foreign currency assets]. International Monetary Fund [website]; retrieved September 17, 2014 File:US Trade Balance from 1960.svg (from 1960), with negative numbers denoting a trade deficit]]
• The national debt was up to $80,885 per person as of 2020.{{cite web |url=https://www.statista.com/statistics/203064/national-debt-of-the-united-states-per-capita/|title=United States national debt per capita from 1990 to 2020|author=Erin Duffin|date=September 9, 2021}}
• The national debt equated to $59,143 per person U.S. population, or $159,759 per member of the U.S. working taxpayers, back in March 2016.{{cite web |url=http://usdebtclock.org|title=United States Debt Clock|author=U.S. Department of the Treasury, Bureau of the Fiscal Service|date=March 14, 2016}}
• 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.
• 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.Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (March 9, 2006). [http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/ "Z.1-Flow of Funds Accounts of the United States"], pp. 8, 102. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System [website]; retrieved January 29, 2011.
• Total U.S. Consumer Credit Card revolving credit was $931.0 billion in April 2009.Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (June 5, 2009). [http://www.federalreserve.gov/RELEASES/g19/ "G.19-Consumer Credit"]. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System [website]; retrieved January 30, 2011.
• The U.S. balance of trade deficit in goods and services was $725.8 billion in 2005.United States Department of Commerce, United States Census Bureau (February 19, 2006). [http://arquivo.pt/wayback/20090710081451/http%3A//www%2Ecensus%2Egov/foreign%2Dtrade/statistics/highlights/annual%2Ehtml Archived copy] at the Portuguese Web Archive (July 10, 2009).. U.S. Census Bureau [website]; retrieved January 30, 2011.
• 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.[http://www.treasury.gov/ticdata/Publish/shcprelim.html Preliminary Annual Report on U.S. Holdings of Foreign Securities], treasury.gov, August 29, 2014.
• The entire public debt in 1998 was equal to the cost of research, development, and deployment of U.S. nuclear weapons and nuclear weapons-related programs during the Cold War."The peak U.S. inventory was around 35,000 nuclear weapons. The United States spent more than $5.5 trillion on the nuclear arms race, an amount equal to its national debt in 1998 ..." {{Cite book | last=Graham | first=Thomas Jr. | title = Disarmament sketches: three decades of arms control and international law | publisher = University of Washington Press | date = 2002 | location = USA | page = 35 | isbn = 978-0-295-98212-0}}"...the total figure will likely be equal to the $5 trillion national debt. In short, one quarter to one third of all military spending since World War II has been devoted to nuclear weapons and their infrastructure ..." p. 33, {{Cite journal|author1=Steven I. Schwartz|author2=Nuclear Weapons Cost Study Committee|title=Four Trillion Dollars and Counting|journal=Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists|volume=51|issue=6|pages=32–53|publisher=Educational Foundation for Nuclear Science, Inc.|date=November 1995|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=DQwAAAAAMBAJ&q=national+debt+attributed+to+nuclear+weapons&pg=PA33|issn=0096-3402|access-date=August 24, 2016|doi=10.1080/00963402.1995.11658102|bibcode=1995BuAtS..51f..32S}}

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.{{cite book |title=Atomic audit: the costs and consequences of U.S. nuclear weapons since 1940 |author1=Stephen I. Schwartz |author2= Bruce G. Blair, The Brookings Institution|author3=Thomas S. Blanton and William Burr, the National Security Archive|author4=Steven M. Kosiak, Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments|author5=Arjun Makhijani, Institute for Energy and Environmental Research|author6=Robert S. Norris, Natural Resources Defense Council|author7=Kevin O'Neill, Institute for Science and International Security|author8=John E. Pike, Federation of American Scientists|author9=William J. Weida, Global Resource Action Center for the Environment|year=1998|publisher=Brookings Institution Press|isbn=978-0-8157-7774-8|pages=3, 12, 105, 107, 461, 546, 551}} The total public debt at the end of fiscal year 1998 was $5,478,189,000,000 in 1998 Dollars[https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/omb/budget/Historicals Historical Budget Tables], whitehouse.gov; accessed August 24, 2016. or $5.3 trillion in 1996 Dollars.

{{Main|List of countries by public debt}}

{{update section|date=January 2015}}

Sources: Eurostat,[http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&plugin=1&language=en&pcode=tps00001 Eurostat – Tables, Graphs and Maps Interface (TGM) table] Retrieved April 26, 2018 International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook (emerging market economies); Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Economic Outlook (advanced economies),Cecchetti, Stephen G. et al. (March 2010). [http://www.bis.org/publ/work300.pdf "The future of public debt: prospects and implications"], p. 3. Bank for International Settlements [website]; retrieved July 4, 2011. IMF[http://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/GGXWDG_NGDP@WEO/EURO/EU/USA/JPN/CHN World Economic Outlook (April 2018) – General government gross debt] Retrieved April 26, 2018

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, Tajikistan, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Vietnam

File:U.S. Total Deficits vs. National Debt Increases 2001-2010.png

{{smalldiv|1=

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.

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.

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 [http://bea.gov/national/pdf/2013briefingslides%20for%20web.pdf 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.

}}

{{See also|History of the United States debt ceiling}}

{{:History_of_United_States_debt_ceiling}}

{{See also|Puerto Rican government-debt crisis|Detroit bankruptcy}}

U.S. states have a combined state and local government debt of about $3 trillion{{cite web |url=https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/SLGSDODNS|title=State and local governments, excluding employee retirement funds; debt securities and loans; liability, Level|date=June 6, 2019}} and another $5 trillion in unfunded liabilities.{{cite news |title=Debt Myths, Debunked |url=https://www.usnews.com/opinion/economic-intelligence/articles/2016-12-01/myths-and-facts-about-the-us-federal-debt |work=U.S. News & World Report |date=December 1, 2016|access-date=June 25, 2019}}{{cite news |title=Social security and Medicare could add trillions to the national debt |url=https://www.businessinsider.com/social-security-and-medicare-could-add-trillions-to-the-national-debt-2018-7 |work=Business Insider |date=July 11, 2018}}{{cite news |last1=Strauss |first1=Adam |title=How To Invest In An Era Of $100 Trillion Financial Obligations: Part I |url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamstrauss/2018/07/12/how-to-invest-in-an-era-of-100-trillion-financial-obligations-part-i/#40b4deb67ccb |work=Forbes |date=July 12, 2018}}

{{Portal|Money}}

• Criticism of the Federal Reserve
• Financial position of the United States
• List of countries by public debt
• Sovereign default
• Troubled Asset Relief Program
• United States federal government credit-rating downgrades
• World debt

{{reflist|group=n}}

{{reflist}}

{{refbegin|30em}}

• Andrew J. Bacevich, "The Old Normal: Why we can't beat our addiction to war", Harper's Magazine, vol. 340, no. 2038 (March 2020), pp. 25–32. "In 2010, Admiral Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, declared that the national debt, the prime expression of American profligacy, had become 'the most significant threat to our national security.' In 2017, General Paul Selva, Joint Chiefs vice chair, stated bluntly that 'the dynamics that are happening in our climate will drive uncertainty and will drive conflict.'" (p. 31.)
• {{cite book |first=William |last=Bonner |author2=Wiggin, Addison |title=Empire of Debt: the Rise of an Epic Financial Crisis |url=https://archive.org/details/empireofdebtrise0000bonn |url-access=registration |publisher=Wiley |year=2006 |isbn=0-471-78253-X}}
• {{cite book |first=Simon |last=Johnson |author2=Kwak, James |title=White House Burning: The Founding Fathers, Our National Debt, and Why It Matters To You |publisher=Pantheon |year=2012 |isbn=978-0-307-90696-0 |url-access=registration |url=https://archive.org/details/whitehouseburnin0000john }}
• {{cite encyclopedia |last1=Eisner |first1=Robert |author-link=Robert Eisner |editor= David R. Henderson |encyclopedia=Concise Encyclopedia of Economics |title=Federal Debt |url=http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc1/FederalDebt.html |year=1993 |edition= 1st |publisher=Library of Economics and Liberty }} {{OCLC|317650570|50016270|163149563}}.
• {{cite book |first=James |last=Macdonald |title=A Free Nation Deep in Debt: The Financial Roots of Democracy |publisher=Princeton University Press |year=2006 |isbn=0-691-12632-1}}
• {{cite book |first=Robert |last=Wright |title=One Nation Under Debt: Hamilton, Jefferson, and the History of What We Owe |url=https://archive.org/details/onenationunderde0000wrig |url-access=registration |publisher=Mc-Graw Hill |year=2008 |isbn=978-0-07-154393-4}}

{{Refend}}

{{Commons category|United States government debt}}

• [https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS22331.pdf Foreign Holdings of Federal Debt] Congressional Research Service
• [https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/omb/budget/Historicals Historical Tables], Office of Management and Budget
• [http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/data-chart-center/tic/Pages/index.aspx U.S. Treasury Resource Center – Treasury International Capital (TIC) System]
• [http://www.usdebtclock.org Real-time debt clock]

{{United States topics}}

Category:Economy of the United States

Category:Government debt by country

Category:Government finances in the United States

Category:United States federal budgets

Category:United States fiscal cliff