The fiscal trajectory is not sustainable. Based on a recent article in the Star Tribune “Federal Debt to Balloon to Record Levels in the February 12, 2026, this is the verdict from the non-partisan CBO.

The latest projections from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office make something unmistakably clear: the federal government’s debt path is unsustainable. And while recent policy changes under Donald Trump have influenced the numbers at the margins, this is not a single-administration problem. It is the result of decades of structural imbalance—one that has become especially pronounced since the early 2000s.

According to the CBO’s updated forecast, the federal government is expected to run a $23.1 trillion deficit over the next nine years, slightly wider than projections made before Trump returned to office. Debt held by the public is now projected to reach 120% of gross domestic product by 2036—exceeding levels seen in the aftermath of World War II. CBO Director Phillip Swagel summarized it plainly: the current fiscal trajectory is “not sustainable.”

The key point is that recent policy shifts—tax cuts, tariffs, spending reductions, immigration changes—have largely offset one another in budgetary terms. The 2024 tax law is estimated to cost roughly $4.7 trillion over nine years. Tariffs, if maintained, are projected to raise about $3 trillion. While there is debate about the wisdom or long-term durability of those policies, they do not fundamentally change the overall debt path. Even before these changes, the United States was on track for historically high deficits.

The deeper issue is structural. For decades, the federal government has promised more in benefits than it collects in revenue. Demographics are central to the problem. As the population ages, programs such as Social Security consume a larger share of the budget. The Social Security trust fund is now projected to be depleted by 2032, forcing Congress to either cut benefits, raise taxes, or both. This imbalance between incoming payroll taxes and outgoing benefits has been building for years and reflects demographic trends, not partisan ideology.

At the same time, interest costs are exploding. Last fiscal year, the federal government spent nearly $1 trillion just servicing its debt—more than it spends on national defense. As debt grows and interest rates remain elevated, interest payments compound the problem. By 2036, interest costs alone could approach the size of total discretionary spending. This creates a dangerous feedback loop: higher debt leads to higher interest payments, which in turn require more borrowing.

Immigration policy also plays a fiscal role. A slower-growing population means fewer workers paying into the system, weakening tax revenues and intensifying the strain on entitlement programs. But again, this is part of a broader demographic and economic challenge.

The ultimate check on Washington is not political rhetoric—it is the bond market. If investors begin to doubt America’s fiscal discipline, they may demand higher interest rates, raising borrowing costs across the economy. That would squeeze households, businesses, and the federal government simultaneously.

This is not a Trump problem. It is not a Biden problem. It is not a Republican or Democrat problem alone. It is a decades-long pattern of spending commitments outpacing sustainable revenue growth, exacerbated by aging demographics and rising interest costs.

Absent meaningful structural reform—on entitlements, taxation, spending priorities, or some combination thereof—the United States is heading toward a fiscal reckoning. The numbers are not political. They are mathematical. And the math, increasingly, does not work.