logo
An inflation surge could swamp Trump's presidency. This one investment will keep your money safe.

An inflation surge could swamp Trump's presidency. This one investment will keep your money safe.

Yahoo4 hours ago

America's financial outlook has darkened under President Donald Trump's leadership. All three major credit-rating agencies now rank U.S. federal debt one notch below triple-A, and Jamie Dimon, the chairman and CEO of JPMorgan Chase JPM, has warned of a crack in the U.S. bond market. With the 10-year U.S. Treasury yield BX:TMUBMUSD10Y at 4.4% on Wednesday and the 30-year rate BX:TMUBMUSD30Y at 4.9%, holders of nominal U.S. debt should be prepared for significant real losses.
The principal risk is not U.S. sovereign default, but rather unexpected increases in medium- and long-term interest rates, owing to market expectations of higher inflation. Fiscal policy under Trump is unsustainable, as it was under former President Joe Biden — but even more so if the Trump administration's 'big, beautiful' budget passes in anything like its current form.
'I'm at my wit's end': My niece paid off her husband's credit card but fell behind on her taxes. How can I help her?
Why the biggest-ever 'triple witching' options expiration could deliver a jolt to Friday's trading
Israel-Iran clash delivers a fresh shock to investors. History suggests this is the move to make.
'I prepaid our mom's rent for a year': My sister is a millionaire and never helps our mother. How do I cut her out of her will?
I'm 75 and have a reverse mortgage. Should I pay it off with my $200K savings — and live off Social Security instead?
The January 2025 Financial Report of the United States Government makes this clear. The U.S. ratio of federal debt held by the public to GDP at the end of the 2024 fiscal year was around 98%, although $4.7 trillion of the $28.3 trillion in federal debt was held by the Federal Reserve — meaning it is erroneously categorized as held by the 'public,' when really the central bank's accounts should be consolidated with those of the federal government.
Under current policy and based on the report's assumptions, federal debt held by the public would reach 535% of GDP by 2099. Stabilizing the U.S. debt-to-GDP ratio requires that the annual primary federal deficit (excluding interest payments) fall by an average of 4.3% of GDP over the next 75 years. And yet, the federal deficit and primary deficit were 6.4% and 3.3% of GDP, respectively, in fiscal-year 2024 — far above what can be justified with the economy near full employment.
Read: America's debt is at a breaking point — Trump's tax bill might just push it over the edge
With the U.S. Congress so dysfunctional, no one has any faith that it will deliver the required deficit reduction. Democrats do not do permanent spending cuts, and Republicans do not do permanent tax increases. The federal government does own about 28% of U.S. land (roughly 640 million acres), as well as other real commercial assets that could yield significant additional nontax revenues if properly managed. But neither party — nor even the misnamed Department of Government Efficiency — appears to have considered this option, so the federal deficit as a share of GDP is likely to rise over the next few years.
With no foreseeable improvement in fiscal policy, there are two possible outcomes. First, the U.S. government could default. There has long been a small, but recurrent, risk of a technical, short-lived default if Congress fails to raise, suspend, extend, revise or abolish the federal debt ceiling on time. Fortunately, it has averted this scenario 78 times since 1960, and we expect it to continue doing so.
As matters stand, the debt ceiling (including debt held by federal agencies) is set at $36.1 trillion, and debt subject to the limit is also $36.1 trillion. If needed, the Treasury has a highly liquid asset (the Treasury General Account held with the Fed) worth $332.9 billion that it can use to meet its obligations, and it may temporarily use 'extraordinary measures to continue to borrow additional amounts for a limited time.'
The second, more likely possibility is that the Fed will monetize enough federal debt to prevent default. Since U.S. federal debt is serviced in dollars, 'printing money' is always an option. But, as the Fed well knows, a large-scale monetization of federal debt would result in significantly above-target inflation. We believe the Fed will do this without its operational independence being revoked by Trump.
To get the Federal Open Market Committee to do something it does not want to do, the president would need to control the majority of its 12 voting members. These include the seven members of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors and five (out of 12) regional Federal Reserve Bank presidents who vote at any given FOMC meeting.
Neither the president nor Congress can appoint or fire Federal Reserve Bank presidents. The Board of Governors must approve them, and only the board can remove them. The president nominates board members, but the Senate must confirm them. Board members' current term limits imply that, assuming none are fired, Trump will have the opportunity to nominate only two new members.
True, with the power to fire board members 'for cause' — meaning 'inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance' — Trump could try to replace a majority of the members with loyalists. But this seems unlikely. Whether the 'for cause' criterion has been met will be contested in the courts, and the Senate would have to confirm Trump's appointees.
Read: Trump's pick to replace Fed Chair Powell could rock your mortgage and retirement. Buckle up.
Similarly, Congress could revise the Federal Reserve Act to replace the Fed's monetary-policy objectives with a mandate to buy or sell sovereign debt according to the wishes of the Treasury. But this, too, is unlikely. And the same goes for a scenario in which the Treasury sets a rapidly depreciating exchange-rate target for the dollar DXY that can be achieved only through large-scale Fed purchases of U.S. public debt that generate high inflation.
However, fiscal dominance — indeed, fiscal capture — is very likely, because the need to avoid a domestic and global financial crisis will force the FOMC's hand. It will do whatever is necessary to prevent a U.S. government default, because the Fed's financial-stability mandate (the Financial Stability Act of 2010 mentions the Fed 179 times) undoubtedly trumps its monetary-policy mandate of maintaining maximum employment, stable prices and moderate long-term interest rates.
The Fed cannot credibly threaten to refuse to monetize debt and deficits to compel fiscal retrenchment by the Treasury, let alone Congress. Thus, the Fed will have no choice but to engage in sovereign-debt purchases that it knows to be incompatible with its monetary-policy objectives.
With nominal interest rates for medium- and long-term U.S. sovereign debt far below the levels consistent with realistic expectations of future inflation, serious capital losses on nominal debt instruments (public and private) are likely. The inflation surge could be no more than three years away. As the prospect of fiscal capture comes into view, investing in Treasury inflation-protected securities (TIPS) and other indexed public and private debt instruments will become increasingly attractive.
Willem H. Buiter, a former chief economist at Citibank and former member of the Monetary Policy Committee of the Bank of England, is an independent economic adviser.
Anne C. Sibert is professor emerita of economics at Birkbeck, University of London.
This commentary — 'U.S. Debt Holders Should Brace for Impact' — is published with the permission of Project Syndicate.
Read: 'You are going to panic,' Jamie Dimon tells regulators about what will happen when the bond market cracks
More: What's at stake if world's most powerful market finally buckles after decades-long U.S. debt splurge
20 companies in the S&P 500 whose investors have gained the greatest rewards from stock buybacks
Israel-Iran conflict poses three challenges for stocks that could slam market by up to 20%, warns RBC
I'm 51, earn $129K and have $165K in my 401(k). Can I afford to retire when my husband, 59, draws Social Security at 62?
'It might be another Apple or Microsoft': My wife invested $100K in one stock and it exploded 1,500%. Do we sell?
Why the stock market will be performing a high-wire act over the summer, according to UBS

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

FBI increases surveillance of Iran-backed operatives in US: source
FBI increases surveillance of Iran-backed operatives in US: source

Fox News

time9 minutes ago

  • Fox News

FBI increases surveillance of Iran-backed operatives in US: source

The FBI is increasing its monitoring of Iran-backed operatives in the U.S. as President Donald Trump weighs involvement in the Israel-Iran conflict, a senior law enforcement source confirmed to Fox News Friday. The White House said Thursday Trump will make a decision on U.S. involvement in the conflict within two weeks. The monitoring reportedly includes surveillance of possible sleeper cells linked to the Tehran-backed terrorist organization Hezbollah, according to CBS News. The Lebanon-based terror group also got a clear warning from Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz not to join the conflict. The decision to increase monitoring comes just days after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu confirmed Iran was plotting to assassinate Trump because the regime saw him as a threat to its nuclear program. "They want to kill him. He's enemy No. 1. He's a decisive leader. He never took the path that others took to try to bargain with them in a way that is weak, giving them basically a pathway to enrich uranium, which means a pathway to the bomb, padding it with billions and billions of dollars," the prime minister told Fox News' Bret Baier during a Sunday edition of "Special Report." While Trump has called for an "unconditional surrender," he has yet to decide whether to involve the U.S. in the conflict. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters Thursday he would make a decision within two weeks. Critics from both sides of the aisle have called on the president not to get involved, while others see involvement as a necessity to protect American interests. On Friday, a U.S. official told Fox News the USS Nimitz, which left the South China Sea Monday, would arrive in the Middle East this weekend. The USS Carl Vinson has already been deployed for some time, meaning two U.S. aircraft carriers would be in the Middle East at the same time.

U.N. chief says Iran, Israel 'on course to chaos,' urges de-escalation
U.N. chief says Iran, Israel 'on course to chaos,' urges de-escalation

UPI

time9 minutes ago

  • UPI

U.N. chief says Iran, Israel 'on course to chaos,' urges de-escalation

June 20 (UPI) -- United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres on Friday urged de-escalation of the conflict between Israel and Iran because "we are on course to chaos." The United Nations Security Council met in New York City to discuss the conflict that began one week ago. Iran called for a special session of the 15-member Security Council. Iranian Ambassador Amir Saeid Iravani described the "large-scale, unprovoked military attack" by Israel. Guterres spoke to the UN. delegations from Geneva, Switzerland, where he working with the foreign ministers from Iran, France, Germany, Britain and the European Union on a diplomatic solution to the situation. Guterres said the war is "escalating rapidly with a terrible toll, killing and injuring civilians, devastating homes and civilian infrastructure, attacking nuclear facilities. The expansion of this conflict could ignite a fire that no one can control. We must not let that happen. "There are moments when our choices are defining, when the direction taken will potentially shape our collective future," he said. "The present conflict between Israel and Iran is such a moment. Let us not look back on this moment with regret. Let us act -- responsibly and together -- to pull the region, and our world, back from the brink." Rafael Grossi, the head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog, the Internatiomal Atomic Energy Agency, warned that Israeli strikes on Iranian nuclear sites had caused a "sharp degradation" in nuclear safety and security. He spoke from Geneva. The United States has largely stayed out of the conflict. But U.S. President Donald Trump said Thursday he would decide whether to bomb Iran "within two weeks." Trump wants a nuclear deal between the United States and Iran. Before the war began last week, they had met several times to agree on a pact regarding uranium enrichment. "President Trump has been clear in recent days that Iran's leadership must completely abandon its nuclear enrichment program and all aspirations of acquiring a nuclear weapon," acting U.S. Ambassador Dorothy Shea said Friday. She described the danger of Iran. "The Iranian government has long posed a constant menace to the peace and security of its neighbors and the entire world, which this council is charged to maintain," she said. "The Iranian government has repeatedly called for Israel's destruction and for 'death to America.' They have launched direct and proxy attacks on Israeli civilians, including most recently on southern Israel's largest hospital, and just recently -- in the last couple hours -- on Haifa. Iran's government has also spread chaos, terror, and suffering throughout the region." She said, "It is not too late for the government of Iran to do the right thing." The United States is a permanent member of the council and can veto any resolution. Russia and China, which also are permanent members, condemned Israel's strikes on Iran. Iraq's Ambassador Abbas Kadhom Obaid Al-Fatlawi agreed with them, saying: "Iraq strongly condemns the unjustified Israeli attacks against the Islamic Republic of Iran and the repeated Israeli violations of the sovereignty of states, especially the violations of Iraqi airspace to launch an aggression against neighboring Iran." Israeli planes have passed over Iraq en route to Iran. Al-Fatlawi said the attacks are blatant violations of the U.N. charter and international law, adding that "we will not allow Iraq to become a battleground for settling regional or international scores." Israel's Ambassador Danny Danon countered: "There is no greater threat to international peace and security than a nuclear Iran." He said Israel has acted "as a last resort" and would not "wait for another threat, rocket, missile, terrorist or atomic bomb." On the other side, the Iranian ambassador said: "The council's failure to act ... would constitute a profound abdication of the council's responsibilities." He said the assault was not accidental and "not collateral damage. They were deliberate war crimes, acts of state terror and an example of barbaric warfare." Iravani noted his nation's nuclear program is peaceful, and he said Israel remains the only country in the Middle East with undeclared nuclear weapons. Iran's military response to being attacked was carried out in accordance with international law, he said. The diplomatic bloc of France, Germany, Britain and European Union officials are engaging Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi in Geneva, calling it a "window of opportunity" to return to diplomacy. The other permanent Security Council members are Britain and France. British Ambassador Barbara Woodward called it "a dangerous moment for the entire region." She said she hoped for a diplomatic solution and reaffirmed Britain's support for the IAEA and its inspectors, and urged all parties to protect civilians and uphold international humanitarian law. Britain is not participating in Israeli strikes and has deployed assets only as a defensive measure, she said. French Ambassador Jerome Bonnafont also called for restraint and de-escalation. "Civilian lives need to be shielded and there is a need to re-embark on the path of diplomacy," he said. "France solemnly calls on Iran to finally take the opportunity of a negotiated diplomatic solution."

Letters to the Editor: Vote-by-mail's not the reason Republicans are losing elections; chromosomes not a simple solution for trans sports issue
Letters to the Editor: Vote-by-mail's not the reason Republicans are losing elections; chromosomes not a simple solution for trans sports issue

Chicago Tribune

time9 minutes ago

  • Chicago Tribune

Letters to the Editor: Vote-by-mail's not the reason Republicans are losing elections; chromosomes not a simple solution for trans sports issue

I find it amusing that Kevin Coyne, chair of the DuPage County GOP, has concluded the only reason DuPage Republicans are losing elections is because they don't vote by mail. Like most of the Republicans left in his party, he refuses to admit that his is now a party of insanity. Many Republicans have jumped ship to the Democratic Party, wandered off as independents or become non-voters out of disgust. Some did so during President Trump's first term; still more in his latter. No, it must be that all-powerful vote by mail and not because Trump rejected the outcome of the 2020 elections, incited a violent insurrection on Jan. 6 and then pardoned the participants, hobbled emergency and health agencies like FEMA and the National Weather Service, and gutted the EPA so polluters are fully free to poison our air and water for greater profits. It can't possibly be because the president rolled back decades of progress for civil and human rights, shut down the heinous 'Sesame Street' or diverted money from seniors' Meals on Wheels so millionaires can be a given a greater tax break. He's made it so it's now OK to threaten universities and oppose law firms you don't like, to accept foreign gifts for personal favor and to sell U.S. citizenship, for which many veterans gave their lives, for the bargain price of $5 million. No, Republicans losing elections must be the result of something else. So, yes, Kevin, please sign your entire party up for vote-by-mail. It's a great plan — for the rest of us, who live in the world of the sane.I am writing in response to the letter, 'Chromosomes should dictate who competes against who,' which ran in the June 15 edition of the Naperville Sun. The idea that 'chromosomes should dictate who competes against who' in sports competitions is overly simplistic and does not reflect the reality of genetic diversity in human beings. Chromosomally, sex is not easily defined. There are many chromosomal variations other than XX or XY, including XXX, XYY and XXX, and many more. What about women who have Turner syndrome or only have one X chromosome or men with Klinefelter syndrome with an XXY karyotype? Should we bar them from sports too? The vast majority of people have not had their own genome sequenced. The original letter writer herself may even have a chromosomal variation other than XX and may never know it. There is no one way for women's bodies, and genes, to be. Trans people belong in sports and denying them the right to participate based on their chromosomes is up in Naperville deeply influenced my path. The opportunities I had at Naperville School District 203 ignited my passions for science and service. Later, federal research experiences shaped my future. When I approached graduation from Lake Forest College, I felt lost. How could I blend my passions into a career? I found the answer during a research internship at Rush University on a project funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Disease. Today, at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, I am a doctoral candidate in epidemiology, the field that works to understand and reduce disease. My research and training are largely supported by the National Cancer Institute. Epidemiologists help fight cancer by collecting and analyzing data on cancer cases and deaths. For example, epidemiology research supports the 2022-27 Illinois Cancer Control Plan to reduce cancer, promote prevention and improve care. My research explores why people get colorectal cancer at different rates. While overall rates have decreased since the 2010s, cases in people under 50 have increased by 44% in Illinois over the past two decades. At all ages, Black Illinoisans face the highest rates. Despite great strides, we have a long way to go in the fight to end cancer. But I fear for the future of this fight. This year, federally mandated cuts to the National Institutes of Health's budget will eliminate essential resources like staff, buildings and utilities. Public universities in Illinois are facing a $71.5 million loss in funding, devastating science infrastructure and destroying jobs. Additionally, Illinois universities have had millions in already-awarded grants canceled (including more than $1 million at Rush). These cuts pause essential research, threaten economic growth and undermine the training of the next generation of scientists. Dwindling research funds are not the only threat. In March, the Centers for Disease Control blocked $449 million awarded to the Illinois Department of Public Health. With these cuts, we lose support to fight chronic diseases, like cancer, and infectious disease, like the flu and COVID-19. This is not an issue of political affiliation. Sweeping cuts threaten the research and resources needed to fight disease, leaving everyone's health at stake. Please contact your local, state and federal elected officials and tell them you oppose cuts to science and public health funding. You can also express support by signing the Citizens for Science Policy pledge at was the recent U.S. Army's 250th anniversary overlooked? There was lots of coverage and criticism of the June 14 parade but not much in the way of gratitude for the U.S. Army. Although there's a lot of political turmoil right now, let us never, ever forget that freedom is not free. I'm not going to talk about political views but just be sure to thank all of our military folks and especially the U.S. Army, whose soldiers have protected our freedoms for 250 years! Maybe what was overlooked is that our military are the ones who really guard the gates of freedom around the world for all of us. They are the ones who enable the rights we all enjoy, especially the right to free speech, and have been doing so from 1775 to 2025. Whatever our political views may be, I think we should be both mindful of and thankful for the Army's faithful service to our country. They did a great job in the parade and made us proud. May God continue to bless our country and all of our military.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store