What, Me Worry? – The Alfred E. Neuman Fiscal Strategy

By the Curmudgeon with Victor Sperandeo

Introduction:

 

In last week’s column - Curmudgeon: Yielding to Reality: The Bond Market Rejects Tariff Optimism and Wall Street Euphoria - we described the problems facing the U.S. government bond market, most notably the ever increasing budget deficits which have created a supply/demand imbalance and an increasing risk premium.

 

While the S&P and other stock indexes had a terrific week, U.S. bonds remained in the doldrums. That’s despite very bullish news for bonds and five consecutive day advances for the S&P 500:

 

1. The CPI and PPI prints are coming in well below analyst forecasts:

A] The Consumer Price Index (CPI) for All Urban Consumers rose 0.2% seasonally adjusted and rose 2.3% over the last 12 months.

B] The Producer Price Index (PPI) for final demand fell -0.5% in April, seasonally adjusted. Final demand prices were unchanged in March and increased 0.2% in February.

 

2. The University of Michigan’s consumer confidence index was at a multi-year low at 50.2 (down from 52.2 in April and now at the second lowest level ever recorded).  Lower consumer confidence augurs for a weakening economy and lower interest rates. 

 

3. Consumer spending is ~68.5% of GDP as per Q1-2025.  In this month’s survey, 38% of consumers are prepared to forgo purchases due to tariff induced price increases. That share rises to nearly half (46%) among those living paycheck to paycheck.  Decreased consumer spending increases the probability of a recession which has always lowered interest rates across the board.

 

U.S. Treasury yields ignored that news and rose past significant undesirable milestones last week as the 10-year Treasury note topped 4.5% and the 30-year bond yield hit 5% intra-day before settling at 4.954% on Friday, May 16th.  The 5% mark on the U.S. long bond was briefly breached in October 2023 before the Treasury backed away from plans to boost longer-term borrowing.  It hasn’t been seen on a sustained basis since before the financial crisis in 2008-2009.

 

U.S. Debt Downgraded by Moody’s:

 

Late Friday, Moody’s Investors became the last of the major raters to strip U.S. government bonds of its AAA rating to Aa1.  The downgrade was “driven mainly by increased interest payments on debt, rising entitlement spending, and relatively low revenue generation.” Moody’s wrote in a statement:

 

“This one-notch downgrade on our 21-notch rating scale reflects the increase over more than a decade in government debt and interest payment ratios to levels that are significantly higher than similarly rated sovereigns.”

 

“Successive U.S. administrations and Congress have failed to agree on measures to reverse the trend of large annual fiscal deficits and growing interest costs. We do not believe that material multi-year reductions in mandatory spending and deficits will result from current fiscal proposals under consideration.”

 

Moody’s said it expects deficits to reach nearly 9% of GDP by 2035, up from 6.4% in 2024. Does anyone think that is sustainable?  Note that Standard & Poor’s and Fitch Ratings previously demoted Uncle Sam’s debt by one notch, so there are no credit rating agencies that award the U.S. with a AAA rating.

 

Speaking on NBC’s Meet the Press with Kristen Welker, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent addressed the Moody’s Ratings downgrade of the U.S. credit outlook: “Moody’s is a lagging indicator. That’s what everyone thinks of credit agencies. We didn’t get here in the past 100 days. It’s the Biden administration and the spending that we have seen over the past four years that we inherited.  We are determined to bring the spending down and grow the economy.”  FAT CHANCE!!!

 

Deutsche Bank economists wrote, “In short, there appears to be no serious effort at reining in historically elevated deficits, which remain on track to exceed over 6% of GDP in the coming years.”

 

Tax Bill Would Increase Deficits; Worsen Supply/Demand Imbalance:

 

President Trump’s “big, beautiful tax bill” to extend the 2017 tax cuts, due to expire at year-end, would make the federal budget deficits much, much worse. That proposed bill from the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee was rejected by five House Republicans who were holding out for a bigger expansion of the state and local tax deduction, otherwise known as SALT.

 

Of course, the U.S. bond market has to fund those sky-high budget deficits via the Treasury Department auctions of government securities.  -->That’s the essence of the supply/demand imbalance.

 

The Joint Committee on Taxation estimated that the bill, including the renewal of the Tax Cut and Jobs Act of 2017, would increase U.S. budget deficits by $3.8 trillion through 2034, equal to 1.1% of GDP.  If the bill was extended, the Bipartisan Policy Center estimated that the deficit would be $5.3 trillion higher, or 1.5% of GDP, even including some $2 trillion in spending cuts through 2034. 

 

The Penn Wharton Budget Model says the bill would increase the “primary” deficit by $6 trillion over 10 years. The so-called primary deficit excludes interest costs, focusing only on spending on programs.

 

The additional red ink would be added to the current U.S. budget deficit of $2 trillion/year, or close to 7% of GDP—a level only approached during recessions or wartime!

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, said Moody’s action “should be a wake-up call to Trump and Congressional Republicans to end their reckless pursuit of their deficit-busting tax giveaway.”

 

“Sadly, I am not holding my breath — today’s GOP simply does not care about deficits or our nation’s fiscal health,” he said in a statement. “Republicans are hell-bent on a multi-trillion tax cut for the ultra-wealthy, leading to nothing but higher prices, more debt, and fewer jobs.”

 

According to Mizuho economists Steven Ricchiuto and Alex Pelle: “The prospects of a large tax cut add to our view that interest rates at both ends of the yield curve will end the year decidedly higher than they are today.”

 

And the risks are rising. “Our view is that the nation is headed for a fiscal crisis because the economy cannot sustain budget deficits this big,” writes Carl Weinberg, chief economist at High Frequency Economics. “At some point, markets will rebel against unsound fiscal practices, and that includes the wisdom of cutting taxes and increasing the fiscal deficit when the economy is at full employment already, especially if it boosts the public sector debt to more than 100% of GDP,” he added.

 

Debt Service Expense Will Rise with Higher Deficit and Rates:

 

The current U.S. debt service cost this year includes $579 billion in net interest payments, which puts the United States on track for the highest annual interest bill in its history. 

 

As of 2024, the U.S. debt service cost was 3.02% of GDP. This percentage has been rising due to increasing debt levels and higher interest rates. In 2023, the cost was around 2.5% of GDP, and projections suggest it could reach 3.9% by 2034. The costs of financing the U.S. national debt is becoming much more of a problem now as old U.S. notes and bonds sold during the ultra-low-interest-rate era following the 2008-09 financial crisis are refinanced with the current 4% coupons. 

 

As noted in many previous Curmudgeon/Sperandeo posts, the U.S. government’s interest expense is the fastest-growing part of the budget and can NOT be cut by DOGE or Congress!  It is now greater than U.S. defense spending.


Victor’s Comment:

 

In the 54.33 years since the U.S. went off the gold standard in 1971, U.S. debt has been trending upwards at a +8.7% annual rate. Yet GDP is increasing at a 2.5% annual rate during the same period. This implies that the Debt- to- GDP ratio will go from the current 1.23:1 to 2.:24 to 1 in 10 years.! It appears the U.S. government has adopted Alfred E. Newman’s “WHAT ME WORRY” as per this MAD magazine cover:

 

A magazine cover with a child holding a sign

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

 

Term Premium Has Increased:

 

The term premium—the extra yield demanded by investors to compensate for the risk of holding longer maturities—has increased as we noted last week and is corroborated by BCA Research.  The increase is due to the large fiscal deficits and the pullback by overseas investors owing to concern over Treasuries’ safe-harbor status during the first four months of the Trump administration.

 

Blackrock analysts Simon Wan and Tom Becker write, “Without a larger “term premium” to compensate investors for bearing longer-term economic risks, it will be challenging to get Americans to increase the maturity profile of their fixed income holdings.”

 

Long-end US Treasuries offer a meager yield uplift and rising portfolio risk:

 

A graph of a number of people

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

Conclusions:

The 22V Research team led by Dennis DeBusschere says a further rise in longer-term Treasury yields would pose a “headwind” for risk assets, with 4.7% on the 10-year as a level seen by investors as “obviously problematic for the economy.”

Raymond James analysts Tavis C. McCourt and David Vargas write that the 4.5% on the benchmark 10-year Treasury has been an important marker for the stock market since 2021. Above 4.7% “has been death for equities with almost nothing working across any index as the equity market starts pricing in recession.”

 

Increased supply coupled with lower demand suggests that the U.S. government will have to pay more to borrow to cover the current deficit and to roll over older, low-interest rate debt. That poses a huge problem for fixed income investors like the Curmudgeon.

 

Rinse and repeat:

 

Higher budget deficits → Increased supply of Treasuries --> Higher interest rates → Higher debt service costs → More debt issuance → Even higher interest rates.

….……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Good health, success, good luck and till next time………………………………………


The Curmudgeon
ajwdct@gmail.com

Follow the Curmudgeon on Twitter @ajwdct247

Curmudgeon is a retired investment professional.  He has been involved in financial markets since 1968 (yes, he cut his teeth on the 1968-1974 bear market), became an SEC Registered Investment Advisor in 1995, and received the Chartered Financial Analyst designation from AIMR (now CFA Institute) in 1996.  He managed hedged equity and alternative (non-correlated) investment accounts for clients from 1992-2005.

Victor Sperandeo is a historian, economist and financial innovator who has re-invented himself and the companies he's owned (since 1971) to profit in the ever-changing and arcane world of markets, economies, and government policies.  Victor started his Wall Street career in 1966 and began trading for a living in 1968. As President and CEO of Alpha Financial Technologies LLC, Sperandeo oversees the firm's research and development platform, which is used to create innovative solutions for different futures markets, risk parameters and other factors.

Copyright © 2025 by the Curmudgeon and Marc Sexton. All rights reserved.

Readers are PROHIBITED from duplicating, copying, or reproducing article(s) written by The Curmudgeon and Victor Sperandeo without providing the URL of the original posted article(s).