首页 500强 活动 榜单 商业 科技 领导力 专题 品牌中心
杂志订阅

债务上限僵局没有真正的赢家,最大的输家是美国经济

Tristan Bove
2023-05-18

如果白宫和国会不能达成一致,可能就会对经济造成灾难性影响。

文本设置
小号
默认
大号
Plus(0条)

美国总统乔·拜登和美国众议院议长凯文·麦卡锡,摄于2023年3月。图片来源:CHIP SOMODEVILLA/GETTY IMAGES

白宫和国会正在就是否提高或限制美国的债务上限展开争论。债务上限是指政府可以借款来支付账单的金额上限。如果他们不能达成协议,可能就会对经济造成灾难性影响。这远不是近年来的第一次债务上限僵局,但专家表示,这次的不同之处在于,议员们正在接近今年6月的最后期限(最早可能引发违约的日期),这一局势非常危险。

债务上限是在106年前设立的,目的是简化政府融资,但现在它实际上已经被武器化。这种情况发生在2011年,当时共和党控制的众议院为了减少国家赤字,在债务上限问题上对白宫和参议院的民主党人采取了强硬态度。

由于众议院共和党人主张全面削减开支,一场如出一辙的僵局正在上演。美国在今年1月触及债务上限,迫使美国财政部部长珍妮特·耶伦开始采取“非常措施”以避免违约。

据智库两党政策中心(Bipartisan Policy Center)称,所谓“X日期”(即美国财政部现金耗尽的那一天)的确切时间尚不清楚,不过可能在今年6月初至8月初之间。但耶伦警告说,这也可能最早在6月1日发生,而共和党人正在玩火。

美国财政部部长珍妮特·耶伦警告说,有关债务上限的辩论可能对经济产生重大影响。图片来源:SHA HANTING/CHINA NEWS SERVICE/VCG VIA GETTY IMAGES

“在你开始看到因为等待过久而产生的真正后果之前,我们不知道这件事情是否紧急。我们已经等得太久了。我们应该在采取非常措施之前提高债务上限。”美国负责任联邦预算委员会(Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget)的主席玛雅·麦克金尼斯对《财富》杂志表示。该委员会是一家研究和沟通预算政策问题的温和派非营利组织。

美国总统乔·拜登和美国众议院议长凯文·麦卡锡原定于5月12日举行会议,以敲定一项妥协方案,但会议被推迟到本周,不过离X日期越近,风险就越大。

中间派货币和财政政策研究机构布鲁金斯学会(Brookings Institution)哈钦斯财政和货币政策中心(Hutchins Center on Fiscal and Monetary Policy)的政策主管路易斯·谢纳告诉《财富》杂志:“债务上限的力量来自于挟持经济作为杠杆。”她补充道,与以往的僵局不同,“这一次,我们似乎更有可能在债务上限生效之前不采取行动。”

违约将是一个未知的领域,没有人知道后果会是什么,但风险可能非常高。如果政府现金耗尽,它可能就不得不优先考虑不同的项目,影响军人工资和社保福利发放,并将不再能够履行对债券持有人的利息支付义务,从而增加违约风险。全球信贷市场可能受到冲击,不确定性可能削弱人们对美国金融体系的信心,加剧经济衰退的可能性。

“我们已经很脆弱了。我们担心的是银行业危机,美联储(Federal Reserve)加息——这不是我们需要给经济施加的东西。”谢纳说。“事情比你想象的更不稳定,更脆弱,而且以一种难以预测的方式实现互联。”

美国国会最喜欢的“谈判筹码”

自2001年以来,美国政府一直处于年度赤字状态。在通常情况下,这不是问题,但这确实意味着政府的大部分支出来自信贷。

根据美国宪法,任何借款都必须首先得到国会的批准,自1917年以来,债务上限一直是衡量政府借款额度的标志。根据美国财政部的数据,在1939年国会重组美国债务后,提高债务上限就或多或少地成为标准做法。自1960年以来,国会已经78次提高债务上限。

但近年来,随着赤字不断扩大,美国债务已经引发共和党人的不满。多年来,美国政府的借款一直在快速增长,唐纳德·特朗普政府和拜登政府在新冠疫情期间都借了数万亿美元用于纾困案计划。美国债务总额在2022年首次达到30万亿美元,目前的债务上限为31.4万亿美元。今年1月,美国债务上限已经被突破。

鉴于美国债务在未来10年将增加多达19万亿美元,共和党人呼吁大幅削减开支,作为提高债务上限的交换条件,尽管这对经济构成巨大威胁。

无党派研究机构美国预算与政策优先中心(Center on Budget and Policy Priorities)的高级研究员保罗·范德沃特对《财富》杂志表示:“确实不应该使用这一谈判筹码,因为它会产生有害影响。”

今年4月,共和党控制的众议院通过了一项法案,该法案将提高债务上限,条件是设定未来支出增长上限、取消免除学生贷款债务的计划、削减美国国税局(Internal Revenue Service)的新资金,以及在支持新的石油和天然气项目的同时取消能源和气候信贷。

白宫和民主党控制的参议院都明确表示,该提案已经夭折,但这一过程凸显了债务上限现在通常被用来引导反对党在政策目标上作出妥协。

“(共和党)正在试图利用这种威胁来获得立法杠杆,并将其作为战略的焦点。”纽约大学(New York University)的法学教授大卫·卡明曾经在贝拉克·奥巴马政府和拜登政府中担任高级经济和政策顾问,他告诉《财富》杂志:“这显然会带来非常真实的危险。”

不确定性的代价

虽然债务违约的后果可能是灾难性的,但随着离X日期越来越近,美国面临着另一种风险,因为围绕政府债务偿付能力的不确定性可能会削弱人们对金融体系的信心。

预算和政策优先权中心的范德沃特称:“尽早采取行动将是明智之举”,因为如果我们在接近X日期时没有达成协议,美国财政部的借款成本可能会上升,联邦支出也会削减。离X日期越近,美国债务危机的许多未知因素也可能使市场更加动荡,他说:“不确定性是有代价的,我们越接近违约(可能引发),代价就越大。”

对于已经受到高利率和银行业危机打击的金融市场而言,违约,甚至是合理的违约风险,都可能是灾难性的。到目前为止,股市表现良好,标准普尔500指数(S&P 500)今年以来上涨了近8%,但有初步迹象表明,投资者开始对冲他们的赌注。

美国负责任联邦预算委员会的麦克金尼斯表示:“我们每多等一天,就会增加市场动荡的可能性,并由此产生不必要的成本。”

随着投资者纷纷买入,美国信用违约掉期的成本在上周触及纪录高位,甚至比墨西哥和希腊等违约相对普遍的国家还要昂贵。(购买信用违约掉期旨在防止违约造成的损失。)

哈钦斯中心的谢纳说:“我认为,不确定性造成了一些损害。人们认识到我们的政治制度是如此的不健全,从而导致实际上有可能出于政治原因而允许某些对经济非常不利的事情发生。”

即使债务上限僵局在近年来几乎已经成为一种常见现象,但目前尚不清楚有关各方愿意将这场辩论进行到什么程度,尽管长期僵局会加大风险。

智库城市研究所(Urban Institute)的研究员、美国财政部的税制改革负责人尤金·斯图尔勒对《财富》杂志表示:“这实际上是一场试图迫使对方让步的老鹰捉小鸡游戏。”

在两周前拜登和共和党人会面后,麦卡锡表示,他“没有看到任何新的进展”,随着X日期的迫近,这为潜在的长期僵局埋下了伏笔。同样在上周,据说拜登政府正在考虑自己采取非常措施来解决这一问题,即援引美国宪法第十四修正案(14th Amendment)。一些法律学者认为,该修正案中一项条款规定本可避免的违约行为违宪,从而让拜登政府有权单方面提高债务上限。

据报道,拜登政府考虑到这一法律基础不稳固,将其作为最后手段。虽然从长远来看,不断上升的债务水平是合理担忧,但也有人质疑债务上限是否还能够起到任何作用,或者是否会阻碍政府运作。在2021年,耶伦特别支持废除债务上限,称其具有“破坏性”。

但根据法律和经济政策专家的说法,短期内,需要解决债务上限僵局,而且越早解决越好。这种情况持续的时间越长,美国和世界经济面临的风险就越大。

“很多这些特殊类型的风险都是非常具有传染性的。人们通常甚至没有想过所有的传染情况,但其影响广泛而深远。”斯图尔勒说。“即使没有全球经济衰退,人们也会有这种风险。他们正在用一种没有实质性意义的方式来玩游戏。”(财富中文网)

译者:中慧言-王芳

白宫和国会正在就是否提高或限制美国的债务上限展开争论。债务上限是指政府可以借款来支付账单的金额上限。如果他们不能达成协议,可能就会对经济造成灾难性影响。这远不是近年来的第一次债务上限僵局,但专家表示,这次的不同之处在于,议员们正在接近今年6月的最后期限(最早可能引发违约的日期),这一局势非常危险。

债务上限是在106年前设立的,目的是简化政府融资,但现在它实际上已经被武器化。这种情况发生在2011年,当时共和党控制的众议院为了减少国家赤字,在债务上限问题上对白宫和参议院的民主党人采取了强硬态度。

由于众议院共和党人主张全面削减开支,一场如出一辙的僵局正在上演。美国在今年1月触及债务上限,迫使美国财政部部长珍妮特·耶伦开始采取“非常措施”以避免违约。

据智库两党政策中心(Bipartisan Policy Center)称,所谓“X日期”(即美国财政部现金耗尽的那一天)的确切时间尚不清楚,不过可能在今年6月初至8月初之间。但耶伦警告说,这也可能最早在6月1日发生,而共和党人正在玩火。

“在你开始看到因为等待过久而产生的真正后果之前,我们不知道这件事情是否紧急。我们已经等得太久了。我们应该在采取非常措施之前提高债务上限。”美国负责任联邦预算委员会(Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget)的主席玛雅·麦克金尼斯对《财富》杂志表示。该委员会是一家研究和沟通预算政策问题的温和派非营利组织。

美国总统乔·拜登和美国众议院议长凯文·麦卡锡原定于5月12日举行会议,以敲定一项妥协方案,但会议被推迟到本周,不过离X日期越近,风险就越大。

中间派货币和财政政策研究机构布鲁金斯学会(Brookings Institution)哈钦斯财政和货币政策中心(Hutchins Center on Fiscal and Monetary Policy)的政策主管路易斯·谢纳告诉《财富》杂志:“债务上限的力量来自于挟持经济作为杠杆。”她补充道,与以往的僵局不同,“这一次,我们似乎更有可能在债务上限生效之前不采取行动。”

违约将是一个未知的领域,没有人知道后果会是什么,但风险可能非常高。如果政府现金耗尽,它可能就不得不优先考虑不同的项目,影响军人工资和社保福利发放,并将不再能够履行对债券持有人的利息支付义务,从而增加违约风险。全球信贷市场可能受到冲击,不确定性可能削弱人们对美国金融体系的信心,加剧经济衰退的可能性。

“我们已经很脆弱了。我们担心的是银行业危机,美联储(Federal Reserve)加息——这不是我们需要给经济施加的东西。”谢纳说。“事情比你想象的更不稳定,更脆弱,而且以一种难以预测的方式实现互联。”

美国国会最喜欢的“谈判筹码”

自2001年以来,美国政府一直处于年度赤字状态。在通常情况下,这不是问题,但这确实意味着政府的大部分支出来自信贷。

根据美国宪法,任何借款都必须首先得到国会的批准,自1917年以来,债务上限一直是衡量政府借款额度的标志。根据美国财政部的数据,在1939年国会重组美国债务后,提高债务上限就或多或少地成为标准做法。自1960年以来,国会已经78次提高债务上限。

但近年来,随着赤字不断扩大,美国债务已经引发共和党人的不满。多年来,美国政府的借款一直在快速增长,唐纳德·特朗普政府和拜登政府在新冠疫情期间都借了数万亿美元用于纾困案计划。美国债务总额在2022年首次达到30万亿美元,目前的债务上限为31.4万亿美元。今年1月,美国债务上限已经被突破。

鉴于美国债务在未来10年将增加多达19万亿美元,共和党人呼吁大幅削减开支,作为提高债务上限的交换条件,尽管这对经济构成巨大威胁。

无党派研究机构美国预算与政策优先中心(Center on Budget and Policy Priorities)的高级研究员保罗·范德沃特对《财富》杂志表示:“确实不应该使用这一谈判筹码,因为它会产生有害影响。”

今年4月,共和党控制的众议院通过了一项法案,该法案将提高债务上限,条件是设定未来支出增长上限、取消免除学生贷款债务的计划、削减美国国税局(Internal Revenue Service)的新资金,以及在支持新的石油和天然气项目的同时取消能源和气候信贷。

白宫和民主党控制的参议院都明确表示,该提案已经夭折,但这一过程凸显了债务上限现在通常被用来引导反对党在政策目标上作出妥协。

“(共和党)正在试图利用这种威胁来获得立法杠杆,并将其作为战略的焦点。”纽约大学(New York University)的法学教授大卫·卡明曾经在贝拉克·奥巴马政府和拜登政府中担任高级经济和政策顾问,他告诉《财富》杂志:“这显然会带来非常真实的危险。”

不确定性的代价

虽然债务违约的后果可能是灾难性的,但随着离X日期越来越近,美国面临着另一种风险,因为围绕政府债务偿付能力的不确定性可能会削弱人们对金融体系的信心。

预算和政策优先权中心的范德沃特称:“尽早采取行动将是明智之举”,因为如果我们在接近X日期时没有达成协议,美国财政部的借款成本可能会上升,联邦支出也会削减。离X日期越近,美国债务危机的许多未知因素也可能使市场更加动荡,他说:“不确定性是有代价的,我们越接近违约(可能引发),代价就越大。”

对于已经受到高利率和银行业危机打击的金融市场而言,违约,甚至是合理的违约风险,都可能是灾难性的。到目前为止,股市表现良好,标准普尔500指数(S&P 500)今年以来上涨了近8%,但有初步迹象表明,投资者开始对冲他们的赌注。

美国负责任联邦预算委员会的麦克金尼斯表示:“我们每多等一天,就会增加市场动荡的可能性,并由此产生不必要的成本。”

随着投资者纷纷买入,美国信用违约掉期的成本在上周触及纪录高位,甚至比墨西哥和希腊等违约相对普遍的国家还要昂贵。(购买信用违约掉期旨在防止违约造成的损失。)

哈钦斯中心的谢纳说:“我认为,不确定性造成了一些损害。人们认识到我们的政治制度是如此的不健全,从而导致实际上有可能出于政治原因而允许某些对经济非常不利的事情发生。”

即使债务上限僵局在近年来几乎已经成为一种常见现象,但目前尚不清楚有关各方愿意将这场辩论进行到什么程度,尽管长期僵局会加大风险。

智库城市研究所(Urban Institute)的研究员、美国财政部的税制改革负责人尤金·斯图尔勒对《财富》杂志表示:“这实际上是一场试图迫使对方让步的老鹰捉小鸡游戏。”

在两周前拜登和共和党人会面后,麦卡锡表示,他“没有看到任何新的进展”,随着X日期的迫近,这为潜在的长期僵局埋下了伏笔。同样在上周,据说拜登政府正在考虑自己采取非常措施来解决这一问题,即援引美国宪法第十四修正案(14th Amendment)。一些法律学者认为,该修正案中一项条款规定本可避免的违约行为违宪,从而让拜登政府有权单方面提高债务上限。

据报道,拜登政府考虑到这一法律基础不稳固,将其作为最后手段。虽然从长远来看,不断上升的债务水平是合理担忧,但也有人质疑债务上限是否还能够起到任何作用,或者是否会阻碍政府运作。在2021年,耶伦特别支持废除债务上限,称其具有“破坏性”。

但根据法律和经济政策专家的说法,短期内,需要解决债务上限僵局,而且越早解决越好。这种情况持续的时间越长,美国和世界经济面临的风险就越大。

“很多这些特殊类型的风险都是非常具有传染性的。人们通常甚至没有想过所有的传染情况,但其影响广泛而深远。”斯图尔勒说。“即使没有全球经济衰退,人们也会有这种风险。他们正在用一种没有实质性意义的方式来玩游戏。”(财富中文网)

译者:中慧言-王芳

The White House and Congress are fighting over whether to raise or cap the nation’s debt limit, the amount the government can borrow to pay its bills. If they can’t reach an agreement, it could be catastrophic for the economy. This is far from the first debt ceiling standoff in recent years, but the difference this time, experts say, is that lawmakers are dangerously close to a deadline of as early as June that would trigger a default.

The debt ceiling was created 106 years ago to simplify the government’s financing, but it is now effectively weaponized. It happened in 2011, when the Republican-controlled House played hardball with the Democrats in the White House and Senate over the debt ceiling in a bid to reduce the nation’s deficit.

A near-carbon copy standoff is playing out now as House Republicans argue for sweeping spending cuts. The U.S. hit the debt ceiling in January, forcing Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen to start “extraordinary measures” to avoid a default.

The exact timing of the so-called X-date is unknown, although it is likely to be between early June and early August, according to the Bipartisan Policy Center, a think tank. But it also could happen as soon as June 1, Yellen has warned, and Republicans are playing with fire.

“We don’t know if it’s urgent until you start to see some real fallout from waiting too long. We’ve already waited too long. We should have increased the debt ceiling before we hit extraordinary measures,” Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB), a moderate-leaning non-profit organization that researches and communicates budget policy issues, told Fortune.

A May 12 meeting between President Joe Biden and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy to hash out a compromise was delayed to this week, but the closer the country gets to the X-date, the bigger the risk.

“The power of the debt ceiling comes from holding the economy hostage to use as leverage,” Louise Sheiner, policy director of the Brookings Institution’s Hutchins Center on Fiscal and Monetary Policy, a centrist monetary and fiscal policy research organization, told Fortune, adding that unlike previous standoffs, “this time, it seems more likely that we’re going to actually not act before the debt ceiling binds.”

A default would be uncharted territory and nobody knows what the consequences would be, but the stakes could be very high. If the government runs out of cash, it might have to prioritize different programs affecting payroll for military members and benefits recipients, and would no longer be able to fulfill interest payments and obligations to bondholders, raising the risk of a default. Credit markets worldwide could be rocked, and uncertainty might undermine confidence in the U.S. financial system, exacerbating the chances of a recession.

“We’re already vulnerable. We’re worried about the banking crisis, the Fed raising rates—this is not something that we need to add on to this economy,” Sheiner said. “Things are shaky and more vulnerable than you might guess, and kind of interconnected in ways that are hard to know beforehand.”

Congress’ favorite “bargaining chip”

The U.S. government has been running on an annual deficit since 2001. Normally, that isn’t a problem, but it does mean a large amount of the government’s spending is from credit.

Any borrowing must first be approved by Congress, according to the Constitution, and the debt ceiling has been a marker for how much the government can borrow since 1917. Raising the debt ceiling became more or less standard practice after 1939 when Congress restructured U.S. debt, and since 1960, Congress has raised the limit 78 times, according to the Treasury.

But U.S. debt has become a grievance for Republicans in recent years as the deficit grew larger. U.S. borrowing has been rising fast for years, and both the Trump and Biden administrations borrowed trillions during the COVID-19 pandemic for relief programs. Total U.S. debt hit $30 trillion for the first time last year, and the current debt ceiling, which was surpassed in January, is set at $31.4 trillion.

With U.S. debt to rise by as much as $19 trillion over the next decade, Republicans are calling for deep spending cuts as a tradeoff for raising the debt limit, despite big risks to the economy.

“It's a bargaining chip that really shouldn't be used because of the harmful effects that it would produce,” Paul Van de Water, a senior fellow at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a nonpartisan research institute, told Fortune.

In April, the Republican-controlled House approved a bill that would raise the debt ceiling in exchange for caps on future spending growth and rescind plans to cancel student loan debt, cut new funding for the Internal Revenue Service, and erase energy and climate credits while supporting new oil and gas projects.

Both the White House and the Democrat-controlled Senate made clear the proposal was dead on arrival, but the process highlights how the debt ceiling is now commonly used to steer the opposing party towards compromising on policy goals.

“[The Republican Party] is trying to use that threat to gain legislative leverage and use it really as a sort of a focal point for a strategy. That obviously comes with very real dangers,” David Kamin, a New York University law professor who has held senior economic and policy advisory roles in the Obama and Biden administrations, told Fortune.

The cost of uncertainty

While the consequences of a debt default would likely be disastrous, the U.S. runs another risk the closer it gets to the X-date, as uncertainty over the government’s ability to pay its bills threaten to undermine confidence in the financial system.

“Acting sooner rather than later would be a wise move,” the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities’ Van de Water said, because of likely higher Treasury borrowing costs and cutbacks in federal spending if we near the X-date without an agreement. The many unknowns of a U.S. debt crisis could also make markets shakier the closer the government gets to the date, he added: “There is a cost to uncertainty, and it grows the closer we get to a possible default.”

A default, or even the legitimate risk of one, could be disastrous for financial markets, which have already been battered by high interest rates and a banking crisis. The stock market is so far holding up well, with the S&P 500 up nearly 8% this year, but there are early signs that investors are starting to hedge their bets.

“With every day that we wait, it increases the chance that it will make the market skittish and that there'll be unnecessary costs associated with this,” the CRFB’s MacGuineas said.

The cost of U.S. credit default swaps, which are purchased to insure against losses from a default, hit a record high last week as investors piled into them, becoming even more expensive than in countries where defaults are relatively common, like Mexico and Greece.

“I think that there is some damage being done by the uncertainty, and some damage being done by the fact that people recognize our political system is so dysfunctional there is actually a possibility something very bad for the economy will be allowed to happen for political reasons,” Sheiner, from the Hutchins Center, said.

Even if debt ceiling standoffs have almost become a common occurrence in recent years, it’s unclear how far the parties involved are willing to take this debate, although a prolonged standoff would magnify the risk.

“It’s essentially a game of chicken trying to force the other one to give in,” Eugene Steuerle, a fellow at the Urban Institute, a think tank, who directed tax reform efforts at the Treasury, told Fortune.

After a meeting between Biden and Republicans two weeks ago, McCarthy said he “didn’t see any new movement,” setting the stage for a potentially lengthy standoff with the X-date looming. Also last week, Biden was said to be considering extraordinary measures of his own to resolve the issue, namely invoking the 14th Amendment, which has a clause some legal scholars say makes an avoidable default unconstitutional, giving Biden the right to unilaterally raise the limit.

Biden is reportedly considering that option as a last resort given its shaky legal ground. And while rising debt levels are a reasonable concern over the long run, questions have also been raised as to whether the debt limit serves any function at all anymore or if it hinders functional government, with Yellen notably supporting the debt ceiling’s abolishment in 2021, calling it “destructive.”

But in the short term, the debt limit standoff needs to be resolved, and the earlier the better, according to legal and economic policy experts. The longer it goes on, the greater the risk to both the U.S. and world economy.

“A lot of these particular types of risks are very contagious. One often doesn't even think through what all the contagions are, but they can be vast and quite extensive,” Steuerle said. “Even if you don't get a worldwide recession you have this danger that people are playing with. And they’re playing with it in ways that just don't make a lot of sense.”

0条Plus
精彩评论
评论

撰写或查看更多评论

请打开财富Plus APP

前往打开