The Federal Government Debt: Its Size and 
Economic Significance 
Brian W. Cashell 
Specialist in Macroeconomic Policy 
February 3, 2010 
Congressional Research Service
7-5700 
www.crs.gov 
RL31590 
CRS Report for Congress
P
  repared for Members and Committees of Congress        
The Federal Government Debt: Its Size and Economic Significance 
 
Summary 
After several years of surpluses in the late 1990s, the federal budget has been in deficit since 
FY2001. Deficits represent the additional borrowing required in each year to bridge the gap 
between tax revenues and spending outlays. Each deficit adds to the already existing stock of 
outstanding federal debt. 
Some of those deficits may have seemed large at the time, but the budget deficit for FY2009 was 
unprecedented, in dollar terms, and the FY2010 deficit is also expected to be much larger than 
those of past years. The prospect of such rapid growth in the federal debt may seem alarming, and 
some might wonder how much the debt can grow before it poses significant economic risks. 
In a slack economy, federal borrowing and spending can stimulate growth in output in the short 
run. As the economy approaches full employment, federal government borrowing adds to total 
credit demand and tends to push up interest rates. Higher interest rates increase the cost of 
financing new investment in plant and equipment and thus may tend to reduce the stock of 
productive capital below what it might otherwise have been. That would tend to reduce the long-
run rate of growth. 
In the long run, the relationship between the growth rate of the federal debt and the overall rate of 
economic growth is critical to economic stability. As long as the debt grows more rapidly than 
output, the ratio of debt to gross domestic product (GDP) will rise. Debt growth in excess of 
economic growth is ultimately unsustainable. Whether the debt-to-GDP ratio is on such a path 
depends on the size of the budget deficit, the rate of interest, and the rate of growth in GDP. 
What matters most, as far as economic stability is concerned, is what investors believe to be the 
long-run outlook for the debt-to-GDP ratio. If large deficits are expected to persist, or if the 
interest rate on the debt is expected to exceed the growth rate indefinitely, then at some point the 
federal government may begin to find it more difficult to sell new securities. 
Should the federal government be unable to find private sector buyers, the Federal Reserve might 
buy Treasury securities in order to sustain their marketability. Should it decide to do so, then the 
threat is no longer one of government insolvency, but rather of inflation.  
 
Congressional Research Service 
The Federal Government Debt: Its Size and Economic Significance 
 
Contents 
Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 
Measuring the Federal Debt ........................................................................................................ 1 
Recent History of the Federal Debt.............................................................................................. 2 
The Short- and Long-Run Effects of Federal Borrowing.............................................................. 3 
Who Owns the Federal Debt?...................................................................................................... 4 
The Relationship Between Federal Debt and GDP....................................................................... 6 
What are the Risks of Rising Federal Debt?................................................................................. 7 
Government Debt in Other Industrialized Countries .................................................................... 9 
Conclusion................................................................................................................................ 10 
 
Figures 
Figure 1. Federal Debt Held by the Public ................................................................................... 3 
Figure 2. Ownership of the Gross Federal Debt, June 2009.......................................................... 5 
Figure 3. Economic Growth and Interest on the Federal Debt ...................................................... 6 
Figure 4. The Budget Deficit and Net Interest Outlays................................................................. 7 
 
Tables 
Table 1. Major Foreign Holders of Treasury Securities as of November 2009 .............................. 5 
Table 2. Gross General Government Debt as a Percentage of GDP ............................................ 10 
 
Contacts 
Author Contact Information ...................................................................................................... 11 
 
Congressional Research Service 
The Federal Government Debt: Its Size and Economic Significance 
 
Introduction 
After several years of surpluses in the late 1990s, the federal budget has been in deficit since 
FY2001. Deficits represent new borrowing required in each year to bridge the gap between tax 
revenues and spending outlays. Each deficit adds to the already existing stock of outstanding 
federal debt. 
Some of the deficits in recent years may have seemed large at the time, but the budget deficit for 
FY2009 was unprecedented, in dollar terms, and the deficit in FY2010 is expected to be 
considerably larger than in past years as well. The prospect of such rapid growth in the federal 
debt may seem alarming, and some might wonder how large, or how rapidly, the debt might grow 
before it poses significant economic risks. 
One way in which policymakers have expressed their concerns over the level of federal 
government debt is in the form of a statutory debt limit.1 Although the debt limit tends to rise as 
necessary, those increases serve as occasions to consider the debt itself separately from the 
policies that account for it. 
There is more than one measure of federal debt, and that may be a source of confusion. This 
report explains the different measures of the U.S. government debt, discusses the historical 
growth in the debt, identifies the current owners of the debt, presents comparisons with 
government debt in other countries, and examines the potential economic risks associated with a 
growing federal debt. 
Measuring the Federal Debt 
The statutory debt limit is a ceiling set by Congress restricting the total amount of federal debt 
outstanding. Gross federal debt, with some minor adjustments, is the measure that is subject to the 
limit. 
Although gross federal debt is the broadest measure of the debt, it may not be the most important 
one. Not all of the gross debt actually represents past borrowing in credit markets. Some of the 
debt is held by the so-called trust funds, primarily the one for Social Security, but also others such 
as unemployment insurance, the highway trust fund, and one for federal employee pensions. 
Relatively small amounts of debt are also held by selected federal agencies. 
The assets held by the trust funds consist entirely of non-marketable federal debt. That debt exists 
only as a bookkeeping entry, and does not reflect past borrowing in credit markets. The trust fund 
balances represent the cumulative amount that the government has not had to borrow in credit 
markets since they were simply credited to the trust fund accounts.2 
The debt measure that is relevant in an economic sense is debt held by the public. This is the 
measure of debt that has actually been sold in credit markets, and which has influenced interest 
                                                
1 CRS Report RL31967, The Debt Limit: History and Recent Increases, by D. Andrew Austin and Mindy R. Levit. 
2 Interest paid on the trust fund accounts is also strictly a bookkeeping entry and does not constitute an actual outlay of 
the federal government. 
Congressional Research Service 
1 
The Federal Government Debt: Its Size and Economic Significance 
 
rates and private investment decisions. At the beginning of calendar 2010, the debt held by the 
public was $7.8 trillion, whereas total gross federal debt was $12.3 trillion. 
The dollar amount of the debt, however large it may seem to be, is not the best measure of its 
burden on the economy. Just as an individual with a larger income can afford to take on more 
debt, the importance of the debt can only be measured relative to the overall size of the economy.3 
For a given amount of debt, the larger the potential tax base is, the less of a burden on the 
economy the interest payments on that debt will be. The most common way of putting the size of 
the debt in perspective is to express it as a percentage of total gross domestic product (GDP). 
Recent History of the Federal Debt 
Prior to World War II, the federal budget was in surplus about as often as it was in deficit. Some 
of the largest increases in the debt resulted from wartime spending. There were large increases in 
the debt held by the public related to the Civil War and also to World War I. Since World War II, 
the federal budget has been in deficit most of the time and the debt has steadily grown. Since 
1940, revenues exceeded outlays in only 12 years.4 
Figure 1 shows gross federal debt held by the public since 1940. The red line plots the dollar 
value of the debt held by the public since 1940. These are nominal amounts (i.e., they have not 
been adjusted for inflation). The black line shows the debt held by the public as a percentage of 
GDP. 
The dollar value of the debt rose gradually until the late 1970s and early 1980s, at which time its 
growth accelerated. It peaked in 1997, fell through 2001, but since then has reached a new high 
each year. Measuring the debt relative to GDP tells a different story. The surge in debt to finance 
the costs of World War II is much more pronounced and indicates that recent debt levels are far 
from unprecedented, in terms of the burden to the economy. Following that surge and until the 
late 1970s, however, debt grew much less rapidly than did the overall economy and so the ratio 
fell steadily. Between 1980 and 1995, the debt grew more rapidly than the economy so the ratio 
rose. Between 1995 and 2001, with the decline in debt levels, the ratio fell. Between 2002 and 
2005, it rose again, but then fell in 2006 and 2007 even with significant deficits. It is above the 
recent peak reached in 1993 but, for now, it is below what it was in 1955. Given current 
projections the debt-to-GDP ratio seems likely to continue to rise over the next few years. 
                                                
3 Prospects for economic growth may also affect perceptions about the advisability of taking on more debt. 
4 See also CRS Report RL34712, Ebbs and Flows of Federal Debt, by Mindy R. Levit. 
Congressional Research Service 
2 
The Federal Government Debt: Its Size and Economic Significance 
 
Figure 1. Federal Debt Held by the Public 
120.0
8
7
100.0
Left scale
6
P
Right scale
rs
D
80.0
la
5
f G
 dol
t o
60.0
4
 of
rcen
3
ons
e
40.0
li
P
il
2
Tr
20.0
1
0.0
0
1940
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
 
Source: Congressional Budget Office. 
The Short- and Long-Run Effects of Federal 
Borrowing 
In the short run, growth in the public debt (i.e., budget deficits) affects the composition of 
economic output. When there is considerable slack in the economy, the main effect of an increase 
in the deficit may be to stimulate demand and raise output. That’s the reasoning behind the fiscal 
stimulus in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5). 
Eventually, however, as the economy approaches full employment, and credit markets tighten, 
federal government borrowing tends to push up interest rates. Higher interest rates increase the 
cost of financing new investment in plant and equipment and thus may tend to reduce the stock of 
productive capital below what it might otherwise have been. Thus, there may be a shift in the 
composition of output towards consumption and away from investment. Consumption that might 
otherwise have been deferred (i.e., saving) is reduced and current consumption rises. 
The higher interest rates may also have an effect on international capital flows, and thus on the 
trade balance. Other things being equal, they make dollar-denominated assets more attractive to 
foreign investors because of the relatively higher yield. Foreign investors, in order to buy U.S. 
securities, must first buy dollars with which to pay for them. The increased demand for dollars in 
exchange markets tends to push up the price of the dollar in terms of other currencies.5 
                                                
5 In the current international economic environment a desire for quality investments may also affect capital flows. See 
CRS Report R40007, Financial Market Turmoil and U.S. Macroeconomic Performance, by Craig K. Elwell. 
Congressional Research Service 
3 
The Federal Government Debt: Its Size and Economic Significance 
 
The increase in the exchange value of the dollar has two mutually reinforcing effects. First, the 
price of imported goods falls because it takes fewer dollars to buy the same quantity of goods and 
services abroad. Lower prices for imported goods means, other things being equal, that U.S. 
consumers spend more on goods and services produced abroad. Second, the price of U.S.-
produced goods and services rises for foreigners because the amount of foreign currency required 
to buy a given quantity of U.S. exports rises. Because U.S. exports are more expensive, they tend 
to decline. 
Both the rise in imports and the drop in exports contribute to a larger trade deficit. Because of the 
increased domestic borrowing associated with the rising federal debt, firms that sell a significant 
share of their production abroad, and those that compete directly with foreign firms selling in the 
United States, experience a drop in the demand for their goods and services. The increased capital 
inflow, however, may offset to some extent the reduction in investment that might otherwise 
result from the increase in domestic credit demand.6 
Who Owns the Federal Debt? 
Because Treasury securities are seen as relatively safe, they are held by a wide range of investors. 
Next to cash they are the most liquid asset, meaning they can easily be converted to cash when 
necessary, on short notice. Because of that, investors hold them as a way of managing the overall 
risk associated with their portfolios. 
Figure 2 shows a breakdown of the holders of the outstanding gross federal debt. The U.S. 
government is itself the largest holder of the debt, mainly in the trust funds. Included in the 
“other” category are financial institutions, including banks, insurance companies, and mutual 
funds, as well as private pension funds. The Federal Reserve holds a significant share of the debt. 
The Federal Reserve buys and sells Treasury securities in its open market operations in order to 
manage short-term interest rates.7 State and local governments hold Treasury securities as well, 
mainly in pension funds for their employees. Foreign investors hold 29.3% of the debt. 
The Treasury Department publishes estimates of major foreign holdings of Treasury securities. 
Mainland China, Japan, and the United Kingdom are the three largest holders. Table 1 presents 
recent data for countries with the largest holdings of Treasury securities. 
                                                
6In the longer run, as the amount of foreign holdings of U.S. assets increases, an increasing share of U.S. income will 
flow abroad in the form of interest, dividend, and rent payments. While this outflow does not necessarily mean a 
decline in U.S. living standards, it may mean that future living standards will not be as high as they would have been if 
a greater share of domestic investment had been financed by borrowing at home instead of abroad. 
7 Recently the share of Treasury securities held by the Federal Reserve has fallen. In an effort to add liquidity to credit 
markets, the Federal Reserve has swapped substantial amounts of Treasury securities for relatively riskier assets that 
were held by other financial institutions. See CRS Report RL34427, Financial Turmoil: Federal Reserve Policy 
Responses, by Marc Labonte. 
Congressional Research Service 
4 
The Federal Government Debt: Its Size and Economic Significance 
 
Figure 2. Ownership of the Gross Federal Debt, June 2009 
Federal 
Reserve
6.5%
U.S. 
Other privately 
Government
held
37.8%
21.8%
State and local 
Foreign 
government
investors
4.6%
29.3%
 
Source: Department of the Treasury. 
 
Table 1. Major Foreign Holders of Treasury Securities as of November 2009 
Country 
Holdings (billions of dollars) 
Percentage of Foreign Held Debt 
Total Foreign Held 
3,597.5 
100.0 
Mainland China 
789.6 
21.9 
Japan 757.3 21.1 
United Kingdom 
277.5 
7.7 
Oil Exporters 
187.7 
5.2 
Caribbean Banking Centers 
179.8 
5.0 
Brazil 157.1  4.4 
Hong Kong 
146.2 
4.1 
Russia 128.1  3.6 
Luxembourg 91.7 
2.5 
Taiwan 78.4  2.2 
Switzerland 63.0 
1.8 
Germany 53.6 
1.5 
Source: Department of the Treasury; Federal Reserve Board. 
Notes: Oil Exporters include Ecuador; Venezuela; Indonesia; Bahrain; Iran; Iraq; Kuwait; Oman; Qatar; Saudi 
Arabia; the United Arab Emirates; Algeria; Gabon; Libya; and Nigeria. 
Congressional Research Service 
5 
The Federal Government Debt: Its Size and Economic Significance 
 
The Relationship Between Federal Debt and GDP 
In the long run, the relationship between the growth rate of the federal debt and the overall rate of 
economic growth is critical to economic stability. As long as the debt grows more rapidly than 
output, the ratio of debt to GDP will rise. Perpetual debt growth in excess of economic growth is 
inherently unsustainable. 
Whether the debt-to-GDP ratio is on such a path depends on the budget deficit, of course, but also 
on the rate of interest and the rate of growth in GDP.8 To illustrate, consider the case where the 
budget is balanced except for the interest payment on the debt. In other words, the budget deficit 
is equal to the interest payment. In this case, the debt would grow each year by an amount equal 
to the interest cost of financing the debt. Thus, the growth rate of the debt would equal the interest 
rate. If the interest rate were higher than the growth rate of GDP, then the debt would grow faster 
than GDP and the ratio of debt to GDP would rise. If, instead, the interest rate stays below the 
economic growth rate, then the ratio of debt to GDP would fall. 
Figure 3 compares the average interest rate on the federal debt with the growth rate of nominal 
GDP. This measure of economic growth reflects changes in both real output and inflation. The 
green line shows the annual growth rate of nominal GDP, and the red line shows the average 
interest rate on the outstanding federal debt held by the public. 
Figure 3. Economic Growth and Interest on the Federal Debt 
30
25
Growth rate
20
t
n 15
e
c
10
Per
5
0
Interest rate
-5
1940
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
 
Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis; Congressional Budget Office. 
For most of the period between 1940 and 1980, the interest rate remained well below the growth 
rate of the economy. For much of the past 25 years, however, the interest rate has been above the 
growth rate, which through the mid-1990s contributed to the rising debt-to-GDP ratio. If the 
                                                
8 In the current discussion, both the growth rate and the interest rate are nominal (i.e., not adjusted for inflation). 
Congressional Research Service 
6 
The Federal Government Debt: Its Size and Economic Significance 
 
interest rate is less than the growth rate, it is possible for the debt ratio to fall even with a modest 
budget deficit. When the interest rate is above the growth rate, a surplus is required to keep the 
debt-to-GDP ratio from rising. 
Consider the case where the budget deficit is larger than the interest payment on the debt. When 
the budget deficit is larger than the interest payment, the difference between the two is sometimes 
referred to as the “primary” deficit. In that case, the growth rate of the debt would be larger than 
the interest rate, and so, even with an interest rate below the GDP growth rate, the debt-to-GDP 
ratio could still rise. Figure 4 shows the relationship between the budget deficit and the interest 
payment on the debt from 1940 through 2009. The black line shows the deficit (which in some 
cases is negative, i.e., a surplus), and the red line shows the interest payment. 
Figure 4. The Budget Deficit and Net Interest Outlays 
1600
1400
1200
rs 1000
a
800
 Doll
600
Interest
 of
payment
400
lions
200
Bil
0
-200
Budget 
deficit
-400
1940
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
 
Source: Congressional Budget Office. 
Although there were clearly exceptions, the overall pattern until recently was for the budget 
deficit and the interest payment to rise in tandem, which is not surprising since the deficits 
represents additional debt which requires a larger interest payment. In the late 1990s, when the 
budget was in surplus (i.e., a negative deficit), the budget deficit was clearly substantially less 
than the interest payment which contributed to the decline in the debt-GDP ratio. Since FY2003 
that situation has reversed, and except for FY2007 the deficit has been larger than the interest 
payment. 
What are the Risks of Rising Federal Debt? 
The federal government usually has little difficulty in marketing securities when revenues fall 
short of outlays. As long as there is a ready market for federal debt, the risks are small. 
Congressional Research Service 
7 
The Federal Government Debt: Its Size and Economic Significance 
 
What matters most, as far as economic stability is concerned, is what investors believe the long-
run trend in the debt-GDP ratio to be. If large primary deficits (deficits in excess of the net 
interest payment) are expected to persist, or if the interest rate on the debt is expected to exceed 
the growth rate indefinitely, then at some point the federal government may find it more and more 
difficult to sell new securities. In other words, it may become harder for the federal government 
to find willing lenders to finance its deficits. At worst, private investors might come to doubt the 
federal government’s ability even to meet its interest payments, and would be reluctant, if not 
completely unwilling, to hold government bonds. 
Inability to borrow money in credit markets can be fatal to private businesses. Firms that are 
losing money and cannot find willing lenders are on the road to bankruptcy. The federal 
government, however, has a source of credit not available to individual businesses, the Federal 
Reserve Bank. 
There are two possible outcomes should the federal government be unable to find private sector 
buyers, either domestic or foreign, for its securities. First, the federal government could simply 
find itself unable to meet all of its obligations. In that case outlays would have to fall unless taxes 
were increased enough to eliminate the shortfall. Second, rather than allow the government to 
default, the Federal Reserve might buy sufficient Treasury securities in order to sustain their 
marketability.9 
Although subject to congressional oversight, the Federal Reserve is independent and under no 
legal obligation to ensure the sale of government securities. But should it decide to do so, then the 
threat is no longer one of government insolvency, but rather of inflation. 
When the Federal Reserve buys Treasury securities, it increases the stock of reserves to 
commercial banks. Those increased reserves, in turn, increase the banks’ capacity to lend money 
and create demand deposits, increasing the stock of money in circulation. The historical record 
demonstrates that continued financing of large government budget deficits by “printing money” 
runs a substantial risk of rapidly accelerating inflation. 
Current and projected federal debt, however, are both short of the levels thought to be associated 
with this risk. For the moment, federal debt remains well below the level it reached following 
World War II. 
History provides a number of examples where large public sector debt led to serious economic 
consequences. In the aftermath of World War I, four countries experienced episodes of rapid 
inflation directly attributable to the central bank financing of very large budget deficits through 
money creation: Germany, Poland, Austria, and Hungary. In each of these cases, more than one-
half of the total central government expenditures was deficit financed. As a result, the public lost 
confidence in the governments’ ability to bring growth in public sector debt under control by 
either raising taxes or cutting expenditures.10 
                                                
9 By law (section 14(b) of the Federal Reserve Act), the Federal Reserve can only buy Treasury securities in the open 
market. It cannot buy them directly from the Treasury. 
10Thomas J. Sargent, “The Ends of Four Big Inflations,” in Robert Hall, ed., Inflation: Causes and Effects (National 
Bureau of Economic Research, 1982), pp. 41-97. 
Congressional Research Service 
8 
The Federal Government Debt: Its Size and Economic Significance 
 
Immediately following World War II, Hungary experienced the most extreme episode of inflation 
on record. Between July 1945 and August 1946, the price level in Hungary rose by a factor of 3 x 
1025. As is characteristic of instances of very rapid inflation, tax revenues fell far short of public 
expenditures during this time. For much of the period, revenues covered less than 10% of total 
expenditures.11 
During the mid-1980s, Bolivia experienced an episode of very rapid inflation. In 1984, general 
government revenues represented less than 20% of total government expenditures, and the budget 
deficit surpassed 20% of GDP. Annual inflation in 1984 was over 1,000%, and in 1985 the 
inflation rate topped 11,000%.12 
These are all examples of extreme cases, but they serve to put the U.S. experience in perspective. 
Even in instances of much more modest federal government credit demand, there remains the 
possibility that the Federal Reserve might seek to mitigate any upward pressure on interest rates 
due to the Treasury’s borrowing needs at the risk of pushing up the inflation rate. But as long as 
the Treasury can find buyers for its securities in private credit markets, the Federal Reserve will 
likely find it easier to pursue an anti-inflationary policy. 
In any country with a large government debt there may be temptation to reduce the real value of 
that debt with inflation. In cases where that is perceived to be a real possibility, nominal interest 
rates may be higher than they otherwise would be because investors demand a higher rate of 
return to protect themselves from the possible decline in the value of their assets. The 
independence of the Federal Reserve is generally believed to reduce the possibility that will 
happen.13 
Government Debt in Other Industrialized Countries 
Short of the extreme examples cited in the previous section, it is useful to compare the federal 
government debt in the United States with that of other developed countries. The United States is 
not the only country whose central government has issued a significant amount of debt. 
Among the countries shown in Table 2 are all those participating in the European Economic and 
Monetary Union (EMU). These are the countries who now use the Euro as their currency. The 
Maastricht Treaty established conditions for European Union countries’ participation in the EMU. 
Among them was the condition that a member country’s public sector financial condition must be 
“sustainable.” In particular, the standards for assessing the sustainability of public sector finances 
were that the public sector deficit not exceed 3% of GDP, and that the public sector debt not 
exceed 60% of GDP. More than half of the Euro countries now have debt-to-GDP ratios above 
60%. 
                                                
11 William A. Bomberger and Gail E. Makinen, “The Hungarian Hyperinflation and Stabilization of 1945-1946,” 
Journal of Political Economy, vol. 91, no. 5 (1983), pp. 801-824. 
12 Juan-Antonio Morales, “Inflation Stabilization in Bolivia,” in Michael Bruno et. al., eds., Inflation Stabilization (MIT 
Press, 1988), pp. 307-346. 
13 See CRS Report RL31056, Economics of Federal Reserve Independence, by Marc Labonte. 
Congressional Research Service 
9 
The Federal Government Debt: Its Size and Economic Significance 
 
As the figures in Table 2 indicate, the United States is far from having the largest government 
debt. Of the 17 countries shown, five had a higher debt-to-GDP ratio in 2009 than did the United 
States. Twelve countries increased their debt ratio between 2000 and 2009. Four of the countries 
had public debt larger than their GDP in 2009. 
Table 2. Gross General Government Debt as a Percentage of GDP 
Country 2000 
2009 
Austriaa 71.1 
72.9 
Belgiuma 113.8 
101.2 
Canada 82.1 
82.8 
Finlanda 52.3 
43.7 
Francea 65.6 
84.5 
Germanya 60.4 
77.4 
Greecea 114.9 
114.9 
Irelanda 40.2 
65.8 
Italya 121.0 
123.6 
Japan 135.4 
189.3 
Luxembourga 9.2 
18.2 
Netherlandsa 63.9 
71.4 
Portugala 62.0 
83.8 
Spaina 66.5 
59.3 
Switzerland 52.5 
44.4 
United Kingdom 
45.1 
71.0 
United States 
54.4 
83.9 
Source: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. 
a.  Member of the European Economic and Monetary Union (Euro country).  
Conclusion 
It appears that the federal debt is likely to rise significantly in the near future. The Congressional 
Budget Office now projects the budget to be in deficit through 2020. In the current economy, 
however, there is significant slack and debt growth is likely to affect aggregate demand much 
more than prices or interest rates. 
At current and even at projected levels, most economists would agree the debt poses little 
immediate risk to economic stability. But continued deficits on the order of 10% of GDP 
eventually might, and are likely unsustainable. Ultimately the risk of a very large, and rapidly 
growing, government debt is extremely high rates of inflation, as pressure would mount on the 
Federal Reserve to monetize the debt. 
 
Congressional Research Service 
10 
The Federal Government Debt: Its Size and Economic Significance 
 
Author Contact Information 
 
Brian W. Cashell 
   
Specialist in Macroeconomic Policy 
bcashell@crs.loc.gov, 7-7816 
 
 
Congressional Research Service 
11