Muslim World Report

Extending Tax Cuts Risks Unsustainable Debt and Deepening Inequality

Dr. Anthony Lindsay | Mar 24, 2025 11:02 AM | 14 min read | 2775 words

TL;DR: The CBO report indicates that extending the 2017 tax cuts could lead to unsustainable public debt and exacerbate inequality in the U.S. The potential scenarios presented show that failing to address these tax cuts may significantly reduce funding for essential public services, further entrenching socio-economic disparities. Responsible fiscal policies that prioritize equity and sustainability are urgently needed.

The Fiscal Reckoning: Why Extending Tax Cuts is a Path to Ruin

On March 21, 2025, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released a sobering report that should alarm every American. It lays bare the dire implications of extending the 2017 tax act provisions, particularly in light of projected increases in federal deficits and public debt. The findings reveal not just a troubling trajectory for fiscal health but also underscore the relentless cycle of inequality perpetuated by current economic policies that serve the elite rather than the broader public (Furno, 2022; Auerbach et al., 1991).

Consider the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, where immediate tax cuts and bailouts for financial institutions resulted not in widespread economic recovery, but in sharp increases in wealth concentration. As the rich became richer, the middle class and low-income families struggled to regain their footing. If history teaches us anything, it is that policies favoring the wealthy can create a precarious system where the average citizen is left to bear the burden of fiscal mismanagement. Are we prepared to repeat this cycle of inequity, risking our economic future for short-term gains?

A Bleak Fiscal Landscape

According to the CBO, under baseline projections from 2024 to 2054:

  • Primary deficits are set to average 2.2% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
  • Total deficits are projected to rise from an average of 6.7% to an alarming 8.5% by 2054.
  • Public debt is estimated to escalate dramatically from 99% to an unprecedented 166% of GDP.

These figures raise critical questions about the sustainability of America’s fiscal future (Elmendorf, 2024). As historical precedent has shown, such fiscal imbalance often leads to public disinvestment in social programs, further entrenching structural inequalities (Reinhart & Sack, 2000). Just as the Roman Empire faced severe economic strife when its expenditures on military campaigns eclipsed its revenues, leading to societal instability, so too might America find itself at a crossroads. Will we continue to prioritize short-term gains at the expense of long-term stability, or can we learn from history to forge a more equitable and sustainable path forward?

The Scenarios: A Cautionary Tale

The CBO report details two troubling scenarios that forecast the consequences of extending tax cuts:

Scenario 1: Permanent Tax Cuts
Should the 2017 tax act provisions be made permanent without any offsetting fiscal policies, the primary deficit would balloon to 3.7% of GDP by 2054. Total deficits would soar to 12.3%, with public debt exceeding a staggering 214% of GDP—47 percentage points above baseline projections. This scenario highlights a clear and present danger: extending these tax cuts does not create the promised economic growth; rather, it exacerbates the gap between revenue and spending, deepening fiscal irresponsibility and shifting burdens onto lower-income populations (Clausing & Lovely, 2024; Baker et al., 2016). Historically, we may look to the fiscal crises of the 1980s, where similar tax cuts without corresponding spending controls led to ballooning deficits and economic instability, illustrating the perilous consequences of ignoring the balance between revenue and expenditure.

Scenario 2: Tax Cuts Plus Rising Interest Rates
Incorporating a modest increase in interest rates into the analysis predicts a total deficit of 16.6% of GDP by 2052. Public debt is projected to exceed 250% of GDP by 2054. With interest payments consuming an increasing portion of the federal budget, the implications for essential social programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security become dire. This situation resembles a household overwhelmed by debt; as monthly payments rise, less money is available for essentials, leading to tough choices between food, healthcare, and housing. Such trends further indicate a national financial system gravely imperiled by poor policy choices and widening inequality (Engen & Hubbard, 2004).

These scenarios raise critical questions:

  • What if the primary deficit increases to 3.7% of GDP?
    A rise in the primary deficit would indicate an unsustainable fiscal policy, necessitating an urgent review of spending strategies and revenue generation mechanisms. If tax cuts are extended without offsetting measures, the government may face increasing pressure to cut vital social services. Public disinvestment in programs that support low-income families, education, and healthcare could become the norm, trapping a significant segment of the population in a cycle of poverty.

  • What if public debt exceeds 250% of GDP?
    Such a significant rise in public debt could lead to skyrocketing interest rates as investors demand higher yields for lending to a seemingly unstable fiscal environment. Higher interest rates would further constrain consumer spending and business investment, stifling economic growth and perpetuating a cycle of debt dependency. Can we afford to allow history to repeat itself, sacrificing vital services for the sake of short-term fiscal gains?

The Implications: A Structural Imbalance

The CBO report serves as a critical reminder that the structural imbalance in the U.S. economy is deepening. With tax cuts failing to pay for themselves, the widening gap between government revenue and spending threatens to undermine essential public services (Al-Fattah & Startzman, 2000). The proposed cuts to the workforce, touted as a means to offset these tax cuts, will only create a more inflationary environment that disproportionately impacts working-class Americans (Dharmapala, 2023). While the wealthy may continue to benefit from tax breaks, the average American worker’s salary is unlikely to keep pace with inflation, further entrenching inequality (Hickel & Hallegatte, 2021).

As we delve deeper into the implications of these fiscal policies, let’s consider:

  • What if social services are cut due to rising deficits?
    If the government chooses to slash funding for programs like Medicare and Social Security to address rising deficits, millions may find themselves without critical support programs that ensure basic health and security. The impact on public health could be catastrophic, leading to an increase in preventable diseases and a decline in the overall standard of living for many, reminiscent of the economic hardships during the Great Depression when inadequate social safety nets left countless families vulnerable.

  • What if the wealth gap widens further?
    The continued extension of tax cuts that disproportionately benefit the wealthy will exacerbate the existing wealth gap in the U.S. This disparity may lead to increased social unrest as a growing number of citizens feel marginalized and disconnected from the economic prosperity enjoyed at the top. A society increasingly divided by wealth can foster resentment and political instability, much like the tensions that fueled major upheavals in history, from the French Revolution to the Occupy Wall Street movement.

As we reflect on these potential futures, we must ask ourselves: At what point does the imbalance become untenable, and what sacrifices are we willing to make to restore equity in our economic system?

Interest Rate Sensitivity and Investor Confidence

A modest increase in interest rates—even just one percentage point—can exponentially worsen the deficit and debt situation. As interest payments on the national debt consume a larger portion of the federal budget, the implications for social programs become increasingly dire. Historical analysis shows that significant increases in government debt tend to drive up interest rates, leading to reduced public investment (Carlson & Spencer, 1975).

What if interest rates rise higher than expected?
Should rates increase significantly due to inflationary pressures or loss of investor confidence, the cost of servicing the national debt could become untenable. Increased rates would limit the federal government’s ability to borrow new funds for essential services and investments in infrastructure, education, and healthcare. A higher interest burden could result in an economic stagnation reminiscent of past debt crises, such as the 1980s, when soaring interest rates led to severe cuts in social programs and sparked widespread economic hardship, particularly among low-income families.

Moreover, the deteriorating fiscal landscape may also erode investor confidence, driving up borrowing costs and destabilizing financial markets (Manage & Marlow, 1986; Wibbels, 2000). Should investors begin to view U.S. Treasury bonds as high-risk assets, the cost of borrowing for the federal government might rapidly escalate. Imagine a tightrope walker precariously balancing with a growing weight on their shoulders; as interest rates rise, the government’s fiscal balance becomes increasingly difficult to maintain. Each step taken to service the debt risks tipping them into an abyss of further borrowing and reduced public services.

The Way Forward: A Call for Responsible Policy

To avert economic collapse, it is crucial that policymakers reject the extension of the Trump-era tax cuts in their current form. Instead, a dual approach is necessary: increasing revenues through fair taxation while implementing sensible spending reductions. Historical precedents set by both Republican and Democratic administrations show that tax cuts do not lead to sustainable economic growth (Auerbach, 1994). Consider the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts during President George W. Bush’s administration, which promised to invigorate the economy but ultimately contributed to a growing national debt and the 2008 financial crisis. Republicans have often relied on tax reductions without corresponding revenue increases, while Democrats have tended to increase spending without comprehensive reforms. Just as a tree needs both healthy roots and branches to thrive, our economy requires a balanced approach that nurtures both revenue and responsible spending. This cycle must end.

The Policy Approach: A Holistic Vision

What if we re-evaluated our tax structure?
A comprehensive revision of the U.S. tax system could include reintroducing progressive tax rates that ensure the wealthy contribute their fair share. This approach echoes historical reforms like the Revenue Act of 1935, which introduced a progressive tax structure to address the inequalities exacerbated by the Great Depression. Just as that pivotal change helped to alleviate fiscal pressures and funded essential public services, modern reforms could similarly address rising inequality and create a more equitable financial landscape.

Additionally, diversifying revenue sources could be instrumental. This could involve implementing taxes on wealth, capital gains, or financial transactions. By broadening the tax base, the government can create a more stable revenue stream that is less susceptible to economic fluctuations—much like diversifying a portfolio protects against market volatility.

Moreover, a critical step must include reducing unnecessary spending and ensuring that investments made in infrastructure, education, and healthcare yield tangible outcomes for the broader population. Think of it as pruning a tree: by removing the excess, the remaining branches can grow stronger and healthier, ultimately benefiting the whole.

What if we invested in the future?
By focusing on growth sectors, such as green energy, technology, and infrastructure, the government can stimulate job creation and economic expansion. Investing in these areas resembles planting seeds in fertile soil; with time and care, they can yield abundant returns that not only mitigate the adverse effects of current fiscal policies but also tackle pressing societal needs.

As we grapple with these challenges, let us not forget the importance of accountability in policymaking. Ensuring that decisions reflect the best interests of the populace, rather than special interests, is vital. Are we truly crafting policies for the health of our nation, or are we merely patching up the symptoms of deeper systemic issues? The potential for short-term political gains must not supersede the long-term economic health of the nation and the well-being of its citizens. Addressing these structural challenges requires not only courage and vision but also a commitment to a fairer, more responsible economic framework that prioritizes the greater good.

The Global Context: Lessons from Other Nations

In contemplating the future of U.S. fiscal policy, it is insightful to examine other countries that have faced similar challenges. Nations that have successfully navigated through periods of high debt and fiscal imbalance often did so through a combination of prudent fiscal management and inclusive economic policies.

What if we looked internationally for guidance?
Countries like Canada and Germany have implemented fiscal reforms that have allowed them to maintain robust social programs while also keeping deficits in check. By analyzing their approaches to taxation, spending, and social welfare, U.S. policymakers can extract valuable lessons that might be adapted to the American context.

For instance, Canada has made concerted efforts to close tax loopholes while enhancing tax compliance among high earners. Such measures not only increased revenue but also reduced the burden on lower-income households, addressing inequality head-on. This approach can be likened to a gardener pruning a tree; by trimming away the excess, the tree can grow stronger and bear more fruit, ensuring that resources are equitably distributed and that each branch—representing different economic sectors—can thrive.

Germany’s focus on fiscal discipline, coupled with investment in workforce development and infrastructure, has engendered a strong economy and low unemployment rates. The German economic model can serve as a beacon, illuminating the path toward a balanced budget without sacrificing the well-being of its citizens. These examples illustrate the potential for successful economic models predicated on inclusivity and fiscal responsibility. What might the U.S. achieve if it embraced a similar spirit of balanced growth that prioritizes both fiscal health and social equity?

The Civil Society Role: Engaging the Public

The involvement of civil society in shaping fiscal policy cannot be overstated. What if community voices were prioritized in fiscal discussions? Much like the early 20th-century Progressive Era, when grassroots movements significantly influenced public policy, engaging citizens through town halls, forums, and online platforms can foster greater awareness of fiscal issues while also generating innovative solutions to complex challenges.

Encouraging active participation from diverse communities ensures that a wide array of perspectives are considered in policy formulation. This approach can lead to a more representative government that aligns fiscal policies with the needs and aspirations of its populace, ultimately creating a more resilient society capable of withstanding economic shocks. Historical examples, such as the formation of the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977, illustrate how citizen engagement can lead to policies that address the needs of underserved communities.

Furthermore, educational initiatives aimed at increasing financial literacy can empower citizens to better understand the implications of fiscal policies. An informed electorate is more likely to advocate for responsible governance and hold policymakers accountable for their actions. After all, if we think of fiscal policy as the budgetary blueprint of a society, shouldn’t the architects—our citizens—play a central role in its design?

Conclusion: A Call to Action

As the CBO’s findings underscore the urgent need for responsible fiscal policies, the time for action is now. The sustainability of America’s financial future hinges on the decisions made today. Historical examples abound of nations that faltered when the urgency of fiscal responsibility was ignored; for instance, Greece’s debt crisis serves as a cautionary tale of how fiscal mismanagement can unravel economies and lead to widespread hardship. The potential ‘What If’ scenarios illustrate the grave consequences of inaction—a path that could lead to deteriorating public services, widening inequality, and destabilized financial markets.

To foster a more equitable and prosperous future, it is essential for policymakers to chart a course that prioritizes not just economic growth but the welfare of all citizens. Will we heed history’s warnings, or will we allow ourselves to stumble down a similar path? The stakes are high, and the future of the nation demands bold, informed, and inclusive decision-making.

References

← Prev Next →