Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
    • Reason TV
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • Free Media
    • The Reason Interview
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • Freed Up
    • The Soho Forum Debates
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Print Subscription
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Government Spending

U.S. To Spend $24.4 Trillion More Than It Has Over the Next Decade, Report Warns

The cost of paying the interest is now the central story, and it's a grim one.

Veronique de Rugy | 2.19.2026 3:50 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
0 bills float behind the U.S. Capitol | Illustration: Envato
(Illustration: Envato)

Despite what progressives have been arguing lately, the United States does not have a tax problem. Federal revenues, even after last year's extension of the Trump tax cuts, are running above their historical average as a share of gross domestic product (GDP). What America has is a spending problem so large that the Congressional Budget Office's latest 10-year outlook reads less like a fiscal forecast than a warning label.

Between now and 2036, the CBO projects $94.6 trillion in federal spending against $70.2 trillion in revenue, a decadelong deficit of $24.4 trillion. Outlays reached 23.1 percent of GDP in 2025, nearly two full percentage points above the 50-year average, meaning annual spending growth is outpacing the economy itself. Debt held by the public is projected to hit 101 percent of GDP this year, which will surpass the post-WWII record of 106 percent by 2030, and climb to 120 percent by 2036.

The Trump administration says it wants to cut the deficit to 3 percent of GDP by the end of this presidential term, roughly half the current trajectory. The CBO's numbers show how far that ambition is from reality.

The cost of paying the interest is now the central story, and it's a grim one. Net interest outlays will rise from about $1 trillion this year to more than $2.1 trillion by 2036, when interest payments alone are projected to consume more than a quarter of total tax revenues. The federal government will spend more on the costs of past borrowing than it spends on many of the programs the borrowing was supposed to fund.

The interest problem reflects both rising debt and the compounding effect of all that borrowing. As deficits raise indebtedness, interest payments increase, financed by additional borrowing. If interest rates rise more than projected, the dynamic accelerates.

These fiscal troubles are further intensified by spending on autopilot. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and net interest are projected to represent roughly 73% of total outlays by 2036 and absorb nearly all federal revenues.

Think about that: Virtually every dollar the government collects in taxes will pay for entitlements and interest before Congress appropriates even a single cent for defense, infrastructure, research, or anything else. Congress' room to maneuver shrinks each year, not because of the choices it's making so much as the choices it's not willing to make.

Nonetheless, politicians have been busy making things worse by further increasing the number of tax carveouts, which are better understood as spending through the tax code. The CBO notes that these tax expenditures, including no tax on tips and a new tax credit for seniors, equal 8 percent of GDP. In the coming decade, that cumulative revenue loss will amount to more than $34 trillion.

As always, the CBO's report relies on various optimistic assumptions: that temporary tax provisions are allowed to expire on schedule; that planned spending reductions actually occur; that controversial tariffs remain in place; that interest rates remain where they are now. It also assumes that in 2032, when the Social Security Trust fund dries up, Congress will borrow enough to maintain all benefits at their current level without creating more inflation. Not all these things will happen.

On the other hand, the report does embed several assumptions that might be tilting the outlook in a more pessimistic direction. The CBO assumes less economic growth than some private-sector forecasts, which could suppress projected revenues and elevate projected debt ratios. Stronger productivity or labor force growth would materially improve the fiscal picture. And, of course, if Congress decides against all expectations to reform Social Security (rather than slap on an expensive bandage) once the trust fund is exhausted, the long-term outlook would stabilize.

This is a two-party failure. Entitlement growth reflects demographic realities and longstanding, fixable design flaws. Recent tax legislation reduced revenue despite some welcomed spending offsets. The honest accounting is that both parties have contributed to this problem and neither has offered a plan equal to its scale. It's why both sides should care.

It's simply not possible to treat persistent, trillion-dollar budget deficits as an abstraction much longer. They divert capital away from productive private investment, raise real interest rates, and slow growth. They also hollow politicians' own fiscal capacity. When the next emergency hits, the government will start from a position of weakness. And in a stressed environment, every additional dollar of emergency borrowing comes at a higher cost than it should.

If policymakers refuse to align spending with revenues so as to reassure investors that America will pay its debt, the market's adjustment will be painful. It will unleash higher inflation.

President Donald Trump must make good on his deficit-reduction promise. Democrats must sign on. Reform is a choice. Disorder is what happens when that choice is deferred.

COPYRIGHT 2026 CREATORS.COM

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Federal Trade Commission Calls Chamber of Commerce ‘Left-Wing’—Because It Opposes Onerous Regulations

Veronique de Rugy is a contributing editor at Reason. She is a senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University.

Government SpendingDebtNational DebtDeficitsGDPCBOFederal governmentDonald TrumpTrump AdministrationEntitlementsSocial SecurityEconomy
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Show Comments (15)

Latest

DHS Spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin Goes Out at the Top of Her Game

C.J. Ciaramella | 2.19.2026 4:06 PM

U.S. To Spend $24.4 Trillion More Than It Has Over the Next Decade, Report Warns

Veronique de Rugy | 2.19.2026 3:50 PM

Federal Trade Commission Calls Chamber of Commerce 'Left-Wing'—Because It Opposes Onerous Regulations

Jack Nicastro | 2.19.2026 2:29 PM

Support for Republicans Is Tanking. But Why Are Democrats Hated Just as Much?

Nick Gillespie | 2.19.2026 2:03 PM

Trump Administration May Grant Asylum to Turkish National Who Burned a Quran in the U.K.

Reem Ibrahim | 2.19.2026 12:50 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS Add Reason to Google

© 2026 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

I WANT FREE MINDS AND FREE MARKETS!

Help Reason push back with more of the fact-based reporting we do best. Your support means more reporters, more investigations, and more coverage.

Make a donation today! No thanks
r

I WANT TO FUND FREE MINDS AND FREE MARKETS

Every dollar I give helps to fund more journalists, more videos, and more amazing stories that celebrate liberty.

Yes! I want to put my money where your mouth is! Not interested
r

SUPPORT HONEST JOURNALISM

So much of the media tries telling you what to think. Support journalism that helps you to think for yourself.

I’ll donate to Reason right now! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK

Push back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.

My donation today will help Reason push back! Not today
r

HELP KEEP MEDIA FREE & FEARLESS

Back journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

STAND FOR FREE MINDS

Support journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.

Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK AGAINST SOCIALIST IDEAS

Support journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BAD IDEAS WITH FACTS

Back independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BAD ECONOMIC IDEAS ARE EVERYWHERE. LET’S FIGHT BACK.

Support journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

JOIN THE FIGHT FOR FREEDOM

Support journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BACK JOURNALISM THAT PUSHES BACK AGAINST SOCIALISM

Your support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BACK AGAINST BAD ECONOMICS.

Donate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks