How the Federal Budget Deficit Doubled in a Single Year
It's not the first time that has happened, but there are key differences about what happened this year.

It's not totally unprecedented to see the federal budget deficit double from one year to the next, as it seems to have done this year.
But those occasions, at least in the past 50 years, have always corresponded with bad stuff happening to the national economy. Deficits surged in the late 1970s and early 1980s thanks to high inflation and a series of recessions. The budget deficit doubled between 2002 and 2003 thanks to a recession and as the War on Terror kicked off. And it skyrocketed again during the crises that bookended the 2010s: the mortgage crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic.
This year will likely be added to that list. The Congressional Budget Office last week projected that the federal government will post a deficit of $2 trillion when the current fiscal year ends on September 30.
At first blush, that might not appear to double last year's budget deficit of about $1.4 trillion, but keep in mind that last year's total included roughly $400 billion for President Joe Biden's student loan forgiveness plan—funds that were never spent because the Supreme Court struck down the proposal, as the CBO notes.
Compared to those other historical examples, however, this year seems like an outlier. Unemployment is low, the economy has been growing steadily, and inflation has significantly abated. America does not seem to be in a crisis at the moment, but the government's balance sheet certainly is.
And it is that way, in large part, because of the government's own programs—as opposed to, say, an external event like a pandemic or a mortgage crisis. The drivers of this year's rising deficit are four-fold, and three of them are the result of decades of poor policymaking: rising interest costs on the $33 trillion national debt, higher Social Security outlays, and more Medicare spending. As Axios points out, those three categories added more than $390 billion to the deficit relative to last year—a tremendous jump in a single year.
The fourth category is falling federal income tax revenue, which is responsible for about $171 billion of the added deficit this year versus last. That's likely a blip and not a long-term problem—federal tax revenue was unexpectedly high a year ago, and bigger swings in annual revenue tallies seem to be becoming more common, as The Wall Street Journal explained in May.
That's not the case for the other three categories driving this year's deficit, all of which are going to keep getting worse for the foreseeable future.
The two big federal entitlement programs are both on a trajectory toward insolvency. Lawmakers have known that for a long time, and have chosen to do nothing about it. They've also known that as the country ages and, in particular, as the Baby Boomer generation grows old, those programs would be strained. Again, they've done nothing about that looming problem.
The rising cost to service the national debt, meanwhile, is a feedback loop created by the other poor decisions and compounded by higher interest rates. Over the next decade, the federal government will spend $10.6 trillion just to pay the interest on borrowing that's already occurred or is planned—and that total could go up if the federal government has to respond to an unexpected crisis or if lawmakers vote for higher levels of borrowing in future budgets.
The current pace of borrowing is staggering. The federal government has borrowed $1 trillion since June 15.
"We are becoming numb to these huge numbers, but it doesn't make them any less dangerous," said Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, in a statement last week.
The big difference, then, between this year and 2002 (or 1977 or any of the few other times in recent history when the deficit has doubled) is that the drivers of this year's shocking deficit growth are not temporary problems. They are structural problems—either as so-called "mandatory spending" or as a function of the borrowing the government has already done—that will continue to mount until they are meaningfully addressed.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Rig count and stuff. Oh, and Bowf sidez.
They can cook most of the economic numbers and we won’t know. On the other hand, falling tax revenues don’t typically accompany a growing economy.
You just summoned Buttplug AND White Mike.
Yeah, turd will be along soon to lie about how Trump is to blame!
One word: Biden
I give Boehm credit for one thing on this article. He doesn’t mention Trump.
Oh, speaking of this federal budget stuff and how culture war retardation affects us all-- Former Chicago mayor promised to #DefundThePolice. And despite some Fox News Hyperventilators, the new mayor was not elected as a rebuke to Lori Lightfoot, he was elected because Lightfoot was too light on her feet, and thus he ran on a campaign to Lightfoot-harder. In addition to #DefundThePolice (an entirely KulturWar Hurr Durr issue that crept up on unsuspecting Americans like a footpad in the night) Chicago decriminalized many crimes because overincarceration and systemic racism, another Kulturwar Hurr durr issue that snuck out of the safe confines of left-wing Academia and is now used in your mandatory HR trainings). Crime has skyrocketed in Chicago, murders up triple digit percentages, shoplifting, flashmob smash and grabs, robberies assaults etc, all up through the roof. As a result of THAT, many retail outlets are closing in poor and minority neighborhoods, creating what Chicago public officials call "food deserts".
The response from the Mayor's office-- a mayor who now will not affirm his previous recorded, public statements about #DefundingThePolice when asked by local media... point blank-- has now promised to RE-Fund the police AND open State Run Grocery Stores in neighborhoods that now find themselves without a place to shop for things like, you know, food. The good news, he tells us, is he will be tapping into both state AND federal resources to put these public retail institutions in place.
So now, I can no longer point, laugh and say, "you voted for it" because I'm quite literally paying for it.
In addition, for those of you who like to dive a little deeper into these Kulturwar hurr durr issues, this is a front-and-center example of how things like #DefundThePolice and their predictable results are NOT accidents, but part of the design. When people (including Reason) keep throwing out descriptors such as "well-meaning", they don't realize that The Shit is Chess, not Checkers, and the destabilizing effects are literally part of the process:
Institute the process.
Watch the chaos unfold.
Swing in with a state-run, nationalized solution to the problem that you created.
Profit.
These aren't even unintended consequences of failed policy, they are INTENDED consequences, with ready-made, pre-packaged solutions that were no-shit waiting in the wings.
This is 100% wrong. Defund the Police is not a Kulture War front, unless Republicans Pounce and point out how silly it is. Once it starts being a successful way to hurt Democrats, THEN it is a Kulture War.
This is 100% correct. It’s not Kultur War until the people with defensive knife wounds start fighting back. Up until that moment, it’s merely a quiet occupation.
“Let’s agree to disagree”
“Ok, what will be the state of things if we agree to disagree”
“I get my way"
"Umm, not so fast." <------- Kultur War
Maybe he can be like Oakland (I think), that is suing Kia and Hyundai because their cars are too easy to steal.
I did just read that Chicago did just signed a contact to build a tent city,
At least you have the Da Bears...oops
Look, you have to spend money to make money.
We have to make money so they can spend it.
Lawmakers have known that for a long time, and have chosen to do nothing about it.
Voters have known that for just as long and have chosen to keep those same lawmakers who choose to do nothing. A perfect alignment of interests.
Plus - who said our problem is that we elect lawmakers who promise to 'do something'.
It’s always the stupid voter’s fault. Never the politicians.
Well it is the voters fault – low info, vote because of the D or R in front, just what they can get now who cares about the future. Oops left out race.
I mean come on they elected AOC, Sanders, and Hillary and Trump were the best we could get. Obama is going to pay my mortgage. Biden is going to pay my student loans.
I recall vividly my 8th grade social studies teacher circa 1985 sounding the drumbeat of what would happen when all the Boomers retired. I just figured since he was a Boomer it was an elevated sense of self importance.
Addressing these problems, for which the can has been kicked down the road for decades, is going to be painful; VERY painful.
No one in power wants to take that on, no more then anyone who is affected by the pain wants to see it happen. Push it off to tomorrow.
When it does reach the tipping point where government can no longer borrow, then it will be "throw the bums out" and elect or appoint someone who will "get it down." For an example see the history of the Weimar Republic and its aftermath. That is when things will get very very bad.
Sieg heil or red terror everyone. It's your future.
One of these days people will stop buying bonds. Then it will get interesting.
4 trillion a year was enough to fund a large and wasteful federal government, just 5 years ago.
Now, for some reason, they need to spend 6 trillion dollars.
Why did spending go up 50%?
This has nothing to do with tax cuts, revenues are still rising, currently at 4 trillion a year, enough to balance the budget if it were cut back to 2018 levels.
Biden wants to spend $8.3 trillion.
"4 trillion a year was enough to fund a large and wasteful federal government, just 5 years ago.
Now, for some reason, they need to spend 6 trillion dollars..."
Ignoring droolin' Joe's attempts at buying US votes (student loan forgiveness, etc) let's connect (some of) the dots here:
1) Biden's kid sold influence to Ukrainian interests through the ability to call dear old dad in the middle of a business meeting, which is now claimed to be "the appearance of influence peddling" rather than the influence peddling it was.
2) Biden's kid thereby received millions of dollars as a supposed 'employment' in a position in which he had no experience at all, with some portion going to 'the big guy'.
3) Knowledge of these machinations are not a secret within the Ukraine government functionaries.
4) Droolin' Joe would rather not have those Ukrainians familiar with such not make it known to the world at large.
Now:
A) I do not support the Ukrainian government as a model for any government; it might be as horrible as the Russian government under Putin.
B) The Russians invaded Ukraine, not the other way around; Ukraine gets my sympathy.
C) And Ukraine can buy all the US weapons they can pay for!
"But those occasions, at least in the past 50 years, have always corresponded with bad stuff happening to the national economy."
Not really. They correspond to Democrat-Trifecta's.
As-if the FDR 12-year administration debt and great depression didn't close that case.
“Deficits surged in the late 1970s and early 80s” Deficits actually fell in the late 70s as they always do under democrat presidents. Thanks Jimmy Carter who always put the nation ahead of his own political interests.
year deficit
1976 73.7 billion
1977 53.6
1978 59.1
1979 40.7
1980 73.8 (adjusting for inflation would make the collapse in the deficit much clearer.) They did explode in the early 80s, as they do 100% of the time under republican presidents. ‘Thanks’ Reagan for spending like a drunken sailor.
lol... Way to cherry-pick a slot and take it out of focus.
1970 3 billion
1971 23
1972 23
1973 15
1974 6
1975 53
Now do tax rates?
Yes, deficits increased during Reagan. If you look at it in a fish eye, oh no it’s bad. The whole reason was to bankrupt the USSR which it did.
Btw if deficits always fall under Democrat presidents – why hasn’t it yet with Biden? Wait lets look up Obama, I think he was a D right? Debt grew from $10.6 trillion on Inauguration Day 2009 to $19.4 trillion as of July 21.
Wow lowering the deficit somehow double the national debt. How does that work?
I thought that the Democrat line was for every dollar spent you get 2 back.
The left lamely blames inflation on a massive drop in federal tax receipts after the 2017 tax reform.
Only problem is that the "Trump" tax cuts did NOT decrease federal revenue.
FY 2017 $3.32 trillion
FY 2021 $ 4.05 trillion -- a 22% increase in four years.
https://www.thebalancemoney.com/current-u-s-federal-government-tax-revenue-3305762#Current%20Revenue
Federal revenue in FY 2022 is estimated to be $4.9 trillion. That's a 47.6% increase in federal revenue in only 5 years.
https://usgovernmentrevenue.com/recent_revenue
The problem was and IS the massive increase in spending -- NOT some shortage of revenue. All Democrats and too many Republicans including Trump voted for this ill-advised spending increase.