The debt limit deal struck by Congress earlier this week was not enough to stave off a debt downgrade on Friday night by Standard & Poors, as S&P announced it was classifying U.S. Government debt as "AA+" instead of "AAA."
Here is the press release from S&P explaining the decision:
=
-- We have lowered our long-term sovereign credit rating on the United States of America to 'AA+' from 'AAA' and affirmed the 'A-1+' short-term rating.
-- We have also removed both the short- and long-term ratings from CreditWatch negative.
-- The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government's medium-term debt dynamics.
-- More broadly, the downgrade reflects our view that the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic challenges to a degree more than we envisioned when we assigned a negative outlook to the rating on April 18, 2011.
-- Since then, we have changed our view of the difficulties in bridging the gulf between the political parties over fiscal policy, which makes us pessimistic about the capacity of Congress and the Administration to be able to leverage their agreement this week into a broader fiscal consolidation plan that stabilizes the government's debt dynamics any time soon.
-- The outlook on the long-term rating is negative. We could lower the long-term rating to 'AA' within the next two years if we see that less reduction in spending than agreed to, higher interest rates, or new fiscal pressures during the period result in a higher general government debt trajectory than we currently assume in our base case. TORONTO (Standard & Poor's) Aug. 5, 2011--Standard & Poor's Ratings Services said today that it lowered its long-term sovereign credit rating on the United States of America to 'AA+' from 'AAA'. Standard & Poor's also said that the outlook on the long-term rating is negative. At the same time, Standard & Poor's affirmed its 'A-1+' short-term rating on the U.S. In addition, Standard & Poor's removed both ratings from CreditWatch, where they were placed on July 14, 2011, with negative implications.
The transfer and convertibility (T&C) assessment of the U.S.--our assessment of the likelihood of official interference in the ability of U.S.-based public- and private-sector issuers to secure foreign exchange for debt service--remains 'AAA'.
We lowered our long-term rating on the U.S. because we believe that the prolonged controversy over raising the statutory debt ceiling and the related fiscal policy debate indicate that further near-term progress containing the growth in public spending, especially on entitlements, or on reaching an agreement on raising revenues is less likely than we previously assumed and will remain a contentious and fitful process. We also believe that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration agreed to this week falls short of the amount that we believe is necessary to stabilize the general government debt burden by the middle of the decade.
Our lowering of the rating was prompted by our view on the rising public debt burden and our perception of greater policymaking uncertainty, consistent with our criteria (see "Sovereign Government Rating Methodology and Assumptions," June 30, 2011, especially Paragraphs 36-41). Nevertheless, we view the U.S. federal government's other economic, external, and monetary credit attributes, which form the basis for the sovereign rating, as broadly unchanged.
We have taken the ratings off CreditWatch because the Aug. 2 passage of the Budget Control Act Amendment of 2011 has removed any perceived immediate threat of payment default posed by delays to raising the government's debt ceiling. In addition, we believe that the act provides sufficient clarity to allow us to evaluate the likely course of U.S. fiscal policy for the next few years.
The political brinksmanship of recent months highlights what we see as America's governance and policymaking becoming less stable, less effective, and less predictable than what we previously believed. The statutory debt ceiling and the threat of default have become political bargaining chips in the debate over fiscal policy. Despite this year's wide-ranging debate, in our view, the differences between political parties have proven to be extraordinarily difficult to bridge, and, as we see it, the resulting agreement fell well short of the comprehensive fiscal consolidation program that some proponents had envisaged until quite recently. Republicans and Democrats have only been able to agree to relatively modest savings on discretionary spending while delegating to the Select Committee decisions on more comprehensive measures. It appears that for now, new revenues have dropped down on the menu of policy options. In addition, the plan envisions only minor policy changes on Medicare and little change in other entitlements, the containment of which we and most other independent observers regard as key to long-term fiscal sustainability.
Our opinion is that elected officials remain wary of tackling the structural issues required to effectively address the rising U.S. public debt burden in a manner consistent with a 'AAA' rating and with 'AAA' rated sovereign peers (see Sovereign Government Rating Methodology and Assumptions," June 30, 2011, especially Paragraphs 36-41). In our view, the difficulty in framing a consensus on fiscal policy weakens the government's ability to manage public finances and diverts attention from the debate over how to achieve more balanced and dynamic economic growth in an era of fiscal stringency and private-sector deleveraging (ibid). A new political consensus might (or might not) emerge after the 2012 elections, but we believe that by then, the government debt burden will likely be higher, the needed medium-term fiscal adjustment potentially greater, and the inflection point on the U.S. population's demographics and other age-related spending drivers closer at hand (see "Global Aging 2011: In The U.S., Going Gray Will Likely Cost Even More Green, Now," June 21, 2011).
Standard & Poor's takes no position on the mix of spending and revenue measures that Congress and the Administration might conclude is appropriate for putting the U.S.'s finances on a sustainable footing. The act calls for as much as $2.4 trillion of reductions in expenditure growth over the 10 years through 2021. These cuts will be implemented in two steps: the $917 billion agreed to initially, followed by an additional $1.5 trillion that the newly formed Congressional Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction is supposed to recommend by November 2011. The act contains no measures to raise taxes or otherwise enhance revenues, though the committee could recommend them.
The act further provides that if Congress does not enact the committee's recommendations, cuts of $1.2 trillion will be implemented over the same time period. The reductions would mainly affect outlays for civilian discretionary spending, defense, and Medicare. We understand that this fall-back mechanism is designed to encourage Congress to embrace a more balanced mix of expenditure savings, as the committee might recommend.
We note that in a letter to Congress on Aug. 1, 2011, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated total budgetary savings under the act to be at least $2.1 trillion over the next 10 years relative to its baseline assumptions. In updating our own fiscal projections, with certain modifications outlined below, we have relied on the CBO's latest "Alternate Fiscal Scenario" of June 2011, updated to include the CBO assumptions contained in its Aug. 1 letter to Congress. In general, the CBO's "Alternate Fiscal Scenario" assumes a continuation of recent Congressional action overriding existing law.
We view the act's measures as a step toward fiscal consolidation. However, this is within the framework of a legislative mechanism that leaves open the details of what is finally agreed to until the end of 2011, and Congress and the Administration could modify any agreement in the future. Even assuming that at least $2.1 trillion of the spending reductions the act envisages are implemented, we maintain our view that the U.S. net general government debt burden (all levels of government combined, excluding liquid financial assets) will likely continue to grow. Under our revised base case fiscal scenario--which we consider to be consistent with a 'AA+' long-term rating and a negative outlook--we now project that net general government debt would rise from an estimated 74% of GDP by the end of 2011 to 79% in 2015 and 85% by 2021. Even the projected 2015 ratio of sovereign indebtedness is high in relation to those of peer credits and, as noted, would continue to rise under the act's revised policy settings.
Compared with previous projections, our revised base case scenario now assumes that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, due to expire by the end of 2012, remain in place. We have changed our assumption on this because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues, a position we believe Congress reinforced by passing the act. Key macroeconomic assumptions in the base case scenario include trend real GDP growth of 3% and consumer price inflation near 2% annually over the decade.
Our revised upside scenario--which, other things being equal, we view as consistent with the outlook on the 'AA+' long-term rating being revised to stable--retains these same macroeconomic assumptions. In addition, it incorporates $950 billion of new revenues on the assumption that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for high earners lapse from 2013 onwards, as the Administration is advocating. In this scenario, we project that the net general government debt would rise from an estimated 74% of GDP by the end of 2011 to 77% in 2015 and to 78% by 2021.
Our revised downside scenario--which, other things being equal, we view as being consistent with a possible further downgrade to a 'AA' long-term rating--features less-favorable macroeconomic assumptions, as outlined below and also assumes that the second round of spending cuts (at least $1.2 trillion) that the act calls for does not occur. This scenario also assumes somewhat higher nominal interest rates for U.S. Treasuries. We still believe that the role of the U.S. dollar as the key reserve currency confers a government funding advantage, one that could change only slowly over time, and that Fed policy might lean toward continued loose monetary policy at a time of fiscal tightening. Nonetheless, it is possible that interest rates could rise if investors re-price relative risks. As a result, our alternate scenario factors in a 50 basis point (bp)-75 bp rise in 10-year bond yields relative to the base and upside cases from 2013 onwards. In this scenario, we project the net public debt burden would rise from 74% of GDP in 2011 to 90% in 2015 and to 101% by 2021.
Our revised scenarios also take into account the significant negative revisions to historical GDP data that the Bureau of Economic Analysis announced on July 29. From our perspective, the effect of these revisions underscores two related points when evaluating the likely debt trajectory of the U.S. government. First, the revisions show that the recent recession was deeper than previously assumed, so the GDP this year is lower than previously thought in both nominal and real terms. Consequently, the debt burden is slightly higher. Second, the revised data highlight the sub-par path of the current economic recovery when compared with rebounds following previous post-war recessions. We believe the sluggish pace of the current economic recovery could be consistent with the experiences of countries that have had financial crises in which the slow process of debt deleveraging in the private sector leads to a persistent drag on demand. As a result, our downside case scenario assumes relatively modest real trend GDP growth of 2.5% and inflation of near 1.5% annually going forward.
When comparing the U.S. to sovereigns with 'AAA' long-term ratings that we view as relevant peers--Canada, France, Germany, and the U.K.--we also observe, based on our base case scenarios for each, that the trajectory of the U.S.'s net public debt is diverging from the others. Including the U.S., we estimate that these five sovereigns will have net general government debt to GDP ratios this year ranging from 34% (Canada) to 80% (the U.K.), with the U.S. debt burden at 74%. By 2015, we project that their net public debt to GDP ratios will range between 30% (lowest, Canada) and 83% (highest, France), with the U.S. debt burden at 79%. However, in contrast with the U.S., we project that the net public debt burdens of these other sovereigns will begin to decline, either before or by 2015.
Standard & Poor's transfer T&C assessment of the U.S. remains 'AAA'. Our T&C assessment reflects our view of the likelihood of the sovereign restricting other public and private issuers' access to foreign exchange needed to meet debt service. Although in our view the credit standing of the U.S. government has deteriorated modestly, we see little indication that official interference of this kind is entering onto the policy agenda of either Congress or the Administration. Consequently, we continue to view this risk as being highly remote.
The outlook on the long-term rating is negative. As our downside alternate fiscal scenario illustrates, a higher public debt trajectory than we currently assume could lead us to lower the long-term rating again. On the other hand, as our upside scenario highlights, if the recommendations of the Congressional Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction--independently or coupled with other initiatives, such as the lapsing of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for high earners--lead to fiscal consolidation measures beyond the minimum mandated, and we believe they are likely to slow the deterioration of the government's debt dynamics, the long-term rating could stabilize at 'AA+'.
On Monday, we will issue separate releases concerning affected ratings in the funds, government-related entities, financial institutions, insurance, public finance, and structured finance sectors. This unsolicited rating(s) was initiated by Standard & Poor's. It may be based solely on publicly available information and may or may not involve the participation of the issuer. Standard & Poor's has used information from sources believed to be reliable based on standards established in our Credit Ratings Information and Data Policy but does not guarantee the accuracy, adequacy, or completeness of any information used. Complete ratings information is available to subscribers of RatingsDirect on the Global Credit Portal at www.globalcreditportal.com. All ratings affected by this rating action can be found on Standard & Poor's public Web site at www.standardandpoors.com. Use the Ratings search box located in the left column.
15 comments Add your comment
obama
August 5th, 2011
9:54 pm
Change you can believe in…Is this the you wanted. God please do something to remove this fu k.
whatdoiknoww
August 5th, 2011
11:26 pm
Boy has Obama screwed me. The 401k will disappear on Monday. Plus, I live in DeKalb County. CEO Ellis has the same philosophy as Obama. I hear CEO Ellis, when he visits Obama, meets him in the darkened back hallway . . . Kind of like when Clinton used to meet . . .
Johns Creek resident
August 5th, 2011
11:35 pm
As an investor, I would say that the downgrade is not unexpected. The correct rating for US securities should be AA, given the debt load that already exists and the low growth rate in the economy. US securities are not a wise investment at this time because yields do not even cover inflation. The dollar is being devalued and the plan is to pay the debt off with cheaper dollars. I expect to see a decrease by foreign investors in US securities as this realization starts to hit home.
nc interpreter
August 6th, 2011
12:04 am
Thank you Tea party. Anyone who would sign a pledge not to raise taxes before they know the score should not be in office. Grover Norquist was not elected and yet has been handed tremendous power by the wet behind the ears tea party fools.
BigBob
August 6th, 2011
12:13 am
this downgrade will bring about higher interest rates because they will be pushed by treasuries’ need to be a more attractive to investors. however, cd rates will remain in the toilet, as banks can hardly give loans away right now.
independent
August 6th, 2011
7:55 am
We would not be in this situation if we were not 14 trillion in the hole. I love it how everyone wants to blame the tea party, when the problem was there long before they showed up. We need to stop spending into oblivion, help businesses hire, and stop over regulating. We need business profit, capital gains, and a spike in payroll to bring in revenue. I wonder how much the Boeing plant in SC would have brought in, if they were not stopped from hiring there.
John
August 6th, 2011
8:55 am
Wake up Obama. Issue drilling permits, push for free trade, quit kowtowing to unions, environmentalists, and the academics in your administration. Find some experienced business professionals that will not tell you what you want to hear, and turn them loose. You have a chance to make a difference. It is up to you if you want to emulate Clinton and moderate your views or emulate Carter and go down as the worst president.
Nick N.
August 6th, 2011
9:27 am
It seems silly to blame Obama for this mess when the budgeting process is in the hands of the House lead by the Republicans and their masters – the Tea Party. He does deserve blame for caving in last December and extending the Bush tax cuts.
Jill
August 6th, 2011
9:39 am
Come back Mr. Trump! We need you!
whatdoiknoww
August 6th, 2011
11:34 am
nc interpreter & Nick N. –
If you took a moment to read the article you would have found that S&P pretty much agreed with Tea Party folks such as cut spending, rein in entitlements. Historically, when has spending your way out of a recession worked? Does raising taxes and threatening the “rich” and businesses encourage entrepreneurship?
Knowing that people with your thought process is extremely disconcerting.
Independent60
August 6th, 2011
12:23 pm
We got what we deserved. Big Government is living beyond our grandchildren’s ability to pay the bills they rack up.
mountain man
August 6th, 2011
6:28 pm
S&P has downgraded the US Debt???? Is this the same S&P that gave AAA ratings to securities backed by toxic loans just before the company that issued them went bankrupt (3 days before)???
The increase in the debt ceiling has always been a regular item. What has changed this time? Oh yes, Republicans were elected and formed a majority in the House. The Republicans who voted against the debt ceiling increase were the same ones that approved the spending for the 2011 budget just a few months ago. Why vote for a budget and then not vote for the money to fund it??? For political posturing.
The Republicans are driving out economy into a hole and I hope people remember next November.
Jamtonio
August 6th, 2011
8:48 pm
The U.S. got the credit rating it deserves. S&P was just the someone who finally had the cajones to call out the Emperor’s new clothes.
We’ve all known that the fiscal trajectory our nation is on is unsustainable, but we dreamed that we could keep it up forever by printing fiat money.
The S&P Downgrade : Back Alley Media
August 7th, 2011
2:02 pm
[...] a $2 trillion error, a fundamental misreading of US politics, and a laughably open-ended and fluffy report justifying their decision, it’s hard to believe that the agencies are not only taken [...]
MrLiberty
August 7th, 2011
9:25 pm
15+ Trillion dollar debt. Nearly 115 Trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities – YES, THAT MUCH just for SS, Medicare and Medicare Part D. 6 wars with no end in sight. Bases in over 150 countries and over 1000 bases worldwide. A Federal Reserve that is printing money as fast as they can make the paper. The value of the dollar that is plummetting – 98% since the founding of the Federal Reserve. Unbelievable hatred among most of the population for “the other side” of this debate (although there are clearly many sides). Over 50% of the population either working for government or living off the monies government steals on their behalf. A diminishing productive sector (you know, the ones that are stolen from). A baby boomer population that has done nothing to prepare for its retirement but certainly will overburden the system when they retire. SS, Medicare, and Medicare Part D that are ALL completely unworkable systems of wealth transfer from current workers to current retirees (no, no lock box – just another government lie).
We should be thankful for an A+ rating. If it were up to me, I would give us an F. Of course the government can continue to steal from us to pay back these loans, but remember, that is the ONLY way they get their money. They are not producing anything and maybe, just maybe the rating folks have figured out that those of us on the receiving end of this constant theft are finally waking up and demanding an end.
The end is coming, one way or the other. The worst case will be the complete collapse of the dollar and a complete breakdown of the economy.
It certainly won’t be the fault of the Tea Party when that happens. It will be the fault of the Democrats, the Republicans, and every voter who refused to listen to the libertarians and folks like Ron Paul when they push for alternatives that would have prevented this mess. Ron Paul has been speaking out with warnings since the mid 1970s. Why has nobody been listening? He has been right about everything.