
By Era Dabla-Norris, Vitor Gaspar, and Marcos Poplawski-Ribeiro
Major policy shifts underway have heightened global uncertainty. The series of recent tariff announcements by the United States, and countermeasures by other countries have increased financial market volatility, weakened growth prospects, and increased risks. They come in the context of rising debt levels in many countries and already strained public finances, which in many cases will also need to accommodate new and permanent increases in spending, such as defense. Rising yields in major economies and widening spreads in emerging markets further complicate the fiscal landscape.
We project global public debt to increase by 2.8 percentage points this year—more than twice the estimates for 2024—pushing debt levels above 95 percent of gross domestic product. This upward trend is likely to continue, with public debt nearing 100 percent of GDP by the end of the decade, surpassing pandemic levels. These numbers are based on the World Economic Outlook reference projections, reflecting tariff announcements made between Feb. 1 and April 4. Amid substantial policy uncertainty and a shifting economic landscape, debt levels could rise even further.
In this environment, fiscal policy faces critical trade-offs: balancing debt reduction, building buffers against uncertainties, and meeting urgent spending needs amid weaker growth prospects and higher financing costs. Navigating these complexities will be essential for fostering stability and growth.
Risk of higher debt
Debt risks were already elevated. According to the Fiscal Monitor’s debt-at-risk, which utilises data up to December 2024, in a severely adverse scenario global public debt could reach 117 percent of GDP by 2027. This would represent the highest level since World War II, exceeding reference projections by almost 20 percentage points.
Risks to the fiscal outlook have further intensified. Debt levels may rise even further than the debt-at-risk estimates if revenues and economic output decline more significantly than current forecasts due to increased tariffs and weakened growth prospects. Additionally, escalating geoeconomic uncertainties could heighten debt risks, driving up public debt through increased expenditures, particularly in defense. Demands for fiscal support could also rise for those vulnerable to severe disruptions from trade shocks, pushing up spending. The Fiscal Monitor estimates that a significant rise in geoeconomic uncertainty could lead to a public debt increase of approximately 4.5 percent of GDP in the medium term.
Tighter and more volatile financial conditions in the United States may have ripple effects on emerging markets and developing economies, leading to higher financing costs. This significantly impacts commodity prices, resulting in lower prices and heightened price volatility. Limited fiscal improvements may further heighten risks from rising interest rates, especially as many countries have substantial financing needs. High interest rates could limit essential spending on social programs and public investments. Additionally, reduced foreign aid, due to shifting priorities among advanced economies complicates financing for low-income countries.
Complex policy tradeoffs
In an uncertain and rapidly changing world, countries will need to first and foremost put their own fiscal house in order. This means implementing prudent policies within robust fiscal frameworks to build public confidence and help reduce uncertainty.
Fiscal policy should prioritise reducing public debt and establishing and widening buffers to address spending pressures and economic shocks. This means finding the right balance between adjustment and supporting economic growth, tailored to each country's unique situation, available resources, and overall economic conditions.
Countries with limited room in government budgets should implement gradual and credible consolidation plans and allow automatic stabilisers, like unemployment benefits, to work effectively. Any new spending needs should be offset by spending cuts elsewhere or new revenues. For countries with greater fiscal flexibility, it is important to utilise available resources judiciously within well-defined medium-term plans. Fiscal support for businesses and communities impacted by severe trade dislocations should be both temporary and targeted, with a strong emphasis on transparency and effective cost management.
More generally, advanced economies should tackle issues related to aging populations by reprioritising spending, advancing pension and healthcare reforms, and broadening the tax base. In emerging and developing economies, enhancing the tax system is crucial due to historically low revenues. Low-income developing countries should stay the course on fiscal adjustments given financing challenges. Timely and orderly debt restructuring alongside such adjustments is essential for countries facing debt distress.
Additionally, fiscal policy, alongside other structural policies, should focus on enhancing potential growth. This can help ease challenging tradeoffs between growth and debt sustainability. For instance, well-designed pensions and energy subsidy reforms can generate savings that can be used to support social programs and infrastructure investments.
As significant policy changes and heightened uncertainty reshape the global economic landscape, the fiscal outlook has worsened. To effectively navigate these challenges, governments should focus on building public trust, ensuring fair taxation, and managing resources wisely. By doing so, they can foster resilience and promote sustainable growth in uncertain times.
—This blog is based on Chapter 1 of the April 2025 Fiscal Monitor, “Fiscal Policy under Uncertainty.”
The authors are all senior managers at the IMF. This article was originally posted here.
10 Comments
Navigating these complexities will be essential for fostering stability and growth.
These people haven't a clue.
That is what happens when you studiously avoid accounting for real stocks and sinks.
The joke is that that debt is increasingly unrepayable - or it would have been.
Funny, was reading to the bottom just to come and post.... 'And PDK in 3.. 2.. 1.' 100% they're off the charts.
This is all unsurprising. Economic growth is bound to take a bit of hit due to global tensions. Defense spending will have to be increased. Yet growth is still anticipated. If you drill down into the IMF link it makes quite interesting reading. I would like to point out that they only offer economic growth estimates for 2025 and 2026, in line with my assertion that this is in fact quite normal. Only short term estimates offer any value.
However some things can lend themselves to long term estimations. Population growth looks to reach 0% some time between 2080 and 2100. This is quite significant. I've noticed an uptick in interest in the economic viability of older folk. When I first entered the workforce people were being put on the scrap heap at 40. I have been under pressure to continue my employment past retirement age. I'm not sure what to make of that.
We can 'grow' our balance sheets as much as we (issuing governments) like but it will not resolve the problem of reducing resources. We would be far better served using that balance sheet capacity to ensure that the necessities are available to all, at whatever level we can manage.
Fail in that and we will waste even more resources unnecessarily.
Oh, good lord this is tiresome for so many reasons I don't know where to start. So, in no particular order...
- Who is the whole wide world in debt to? Aliens? Govt debt is the Govt's contribution to the liabilites side of the big global balance sheet. And, who owns the corresponding assets (those juicy Govt Bonds)? Yes, it's us! Govt debt = private sector savings. Oh no, sound the alarm everyone, private sector savings are forecast to be one gazillion per cent of GDP by the year 2063 (or whatevs)! Call the savings, errrm, debt police. Oh here they are ^^^.
- Now, let's compare some numbers and ask a few obvious questions.
- NZ Govt gross debt is about $200bn - a bit under 50% of GDP. But, Govt owns financial assets of around $280bn (shares, equity, loans, deposits, bonds etc). So... yes, NZ Govt has a net positive financial worth of about $80bn. Amazing, how people never ask about the whole balance sheet. I guess it wouldn't make a very interesting 'debt clock'.
- Now, what's the gross debt of NZ non-financial businesses? About $2,200 billion ($2.2 trillion) in 2023. So, eight times higher than our cute little Govt gross debt figure. What about business financial assets? Oh, yeah, they were worth $700 billion in 2023. WHAT!? Yes, the net financial worth of businesses is negative $1,500 billion. But, don't worry! Businesses balance their books out by owning a load of land ($700bn) and other machinery and stuff. I mean, land prices are safe as houses, right? At least, that $1,500 billion business financial liability isn't household wealth... oh, wait, crap.
- Of course, there are lots of problems with ever-expanding balance sheets.
- For example, asset owners (creditors) tend to be very wealthy folk, while debtors tend to actually work for a living. So, the more the balance sheet blows out, the greater the flow of earnings from workers to rentiers. This 'works' while interest rates are falling, but when rates increase, the flow of money from workers to rentiers gets too high and the economy crashes (and workers lose ther jobs).
- New money is created when Govt or private balance sheets expand - and this fuels consumption. Unfortunately, we have got too good at the whole consumption thing and we seem to give zero zits about the consequences of our obscene behaviour. We are so stuck on the kind of 'growth' sought by ghoulish rentiers that we have forgotten that there are other kinds of growth that are much better for us. Knowledge, community, time spent with family, nurturing our children rather than sticking them in ECE cells while we slave away to pay the rentiers. That kind of thing.
Sorry for the extended absence folks. I've been busy working on Trump's first couple of months and helping Milei out with a bit of economics advice.
All true....but debt IS the issue because those that do the required production (work (and requied)) are also those indebted. Until that issue is resolved then debt can reasonably be considered a problem
If debt is 'the issue' then financial assets must also be an issue. After all, without the former, you can't have the latter.
As I know you understand it is the holder (and purpose) of that debt that is the issue....and we have a model where the creation of the debt is largely private and for no other purpose than (private) profit. That does not encourage (nor ultimately create) the products/services we need.
It also unnecessarily increases our cost of production making both exports and living costs more expensive than they need to be. Those burdens are borne by largely the same group that holds the debt and for what/whos benefit? So a (relatively) small proportion of our society can afford (more easily) to hob nob on a global scale?
So are financial assets an issue?....in the current form, definitely.
Completely agree - private debts have become ridiculous. An overly financialised world built for rent extraction.
Jonny, you said... "I've been busy working on Trump's first couple of months and helping Milei out with a bit of economics advice."
Well, I hope you had a stern word in Milei's ear!
Could anything have been more disastrous than this Wall Street establishment tool being installed by Washington to fire-sale Argentina's public utilities off to rapacious global corporations and render their central bank a New York Fed proxy?
Ben Norton reports...
"The IMF is a corrupt tool of US interests. Trump ordered the IMF to give Argentina’s last right-wing oligarch-run regime the biggest loan in IMF history. Now it’s bailing out Javier Milei’s failing libertarian project. Argentina’s IMF debt is projected to be 1352% of its quota."
Notes directly from the IMF this April...
"This April IMF report notes: “Peak Fund credit to Argentina” under US-backed right-wing libertarian Javier Milei “is projected to reach SDR (Special Drawing Rights) 43.1 billion in 2026 (1,352% of quota)”, or $58.44 billion US. This would be the Fund’s largest-ever exposure in absolute terms".
No wonder with his windsock mind, Milei gets on like a house on fire (literally) with Captain Chao$.
Milei, after comprehensively insulting China, and cancelling his country's confirmed full BRICS membership after he was elected, which was the only lifeline this potentially extremely wealthy country had left - now he comes crawling back for help as their odious and predatory level of debt cannot be repaid.
China gave them an unspecified swap line, just to keep the country's lights on and to avoid social disaster and massive numbers of hungry working-class families and beneficiaries. They are the vulnerable cohorts who wear the austerity and the social tragedy, just to keep Milei's cronies and the entrenched 5th-column comprador elite living like kings.
Argentina is basically in crisis mode with dangerously depleted foreign currency reserves and their pesos has deteriorated -99.24% in 10 years against the US dollar (and -99.26% to the EUR), both of which are in freefall against gold.
Argentina's legislative elections are scheduled to be held in Argentina on 26 October 2025. Half of the seats in the Chamber of Deputies (the lower house) and a third of the seats in the Senate (upper house) will be elected.
War$hington will no doubt be frantically trying to sway these elections in favour of their lackey Milei. Argentina is seen as a key to them maintaining their 200-year-old Monroe Doctrine throat-hold on as much of LatAm as they possibly can.
So too the strategic proximity to the Antarctic of a US military base planned for Ushuaia, Tierra del Fuego’s capital. This is the southernmost city in the world - the Drake Passage is only 1000 kilometres wide.
Milei’s announcement last year of this U.S. military base, as part of a strategy to also reclaim the Falkland Islands, reflects a bold geopolitical shift, aligning closely with the U.S. and Israel and stirring Latin American diplomatic waters.
Cheers
Col
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.