Last week, financial markets worldwide were briefly rattled by Fitch Ratings’ unexpected downgrading of US government debt, but analysts generally agreed that a significant, long-term effect on the US bond markets is unlikely, as US debt is still the safest and most liquid asset in the world, while the US economy is still recovering strongly.
On Tuesday, Fitch lowered the US federal government’s credit rating to “AA+” from “AAA”, citing concerns about a growing debt burden and the governance challenges tied to a debt-ceiling showdown on Capitol Hill. Fitch stripping the US of the highest rating to reflect its debt repayment capacity was the first time since 2011 that a major ratings agency has changed its assessment of Washington’s economic and financial health, when S&P removed its “AAA” rating of the US.
Fitch’s move immediately sparked criticism from Washington and Wall Street, despite the market’s lingering unease over potential repeats of a standoff between the Republicans and Democrats on raising the US government’s debt ceiling early this year. Even though a compromise was eventually reached in late May, the damage to Washington’s reputation took shape, as a historic US default almost became reality.
While the timing of Fitch’s downgrade was genuinely unexpected, the reasons the agency gave for its action — such as “expected fiscal deterioration,” “a growing debt burden” and “the erosion of governance” — were nothing new, with some even saying that it was a belated move and that Fitch should have done so when the White House and Congress were struggling to resolve a standoff on whether to raise the US government’s borrowing limit months ago.
After all, the US’ loss of a “AAA” rating appeared symbolic and the downgrade would likely cause few immediate consequences for its economy, as the market is still confident in the US dollar and the demand for US bonds remains strong, given a rise in the yield on the benchmark 10-year US Treasury note and a fall in gold prices by the end of last week. Even Fitch said in its downgrade report that “the US dollar is the world’s pre-eminent reserve currency, which gives the government extraordinary financing flexibility.”
In Taiwan, the financial situation of the central government has continued to improve in the past few years and the nation’s debt problem is not as serious as what is going on in Europe or the US. That is because borrowing by the central government remains below the legal limit stipulated in the Public Debt Act (公共債務法) at 40.6 percent of average GDP over the past three years, while Taiwan has hardly any external debt.
According to Ministry of Finance data, the central government’s long-term debt — outstanding debt with a maturity of more than one year — stood at NT$5.83 trillion (US$183.96 billion) at the end of June, an amount equivalent to 27.2 percent of average GDP over the past three years and remaining NT$2.87 trillion below the legal debt limit. The debt ratio dropped from 29.3 percent at the end of last year, from 33 percent at the end of 2016 when President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) took office in May of that year.
While the central government’s outstanding balance of long-term debt has increased from NT$5.398 trillion in 2016, the good news is that the debt ratio has been maintained within an appropriate range over the past few years.
Yet what is important for the nation is not the debt per se, but whether the money borrowed is used to drive economic growth and further national development effectively, which in turn would generate more tax revenue and put the government in a better position to repay its debt. In other words, Taiwan’s debt problem might be less serious than that of a lot of other countries, but the government needs to closely observe fiscal discipline and always keep enough revenue to cover expenditures.
A failure by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to respond to Israel’s brilliant 12-day (June 12-23) bombing and special operations war against Iran, topped by US President Donald Trump’s ordering the June 21 bombing of Iranian deep underground nuclear weapons fuel processing sites, has been noted by some as demonstrating a profound lack of resolve, even “impotence,” by China. However, this would be a dangerous underestimation of CCP ambitions and its broader and more profound military response to the Trump Administration — a challenge that includes an acceleration of its strategies to assist nuclear proxy states, and developing a wide array
Eating at a breakfast shop the other day, I turned to an old man sitting at the table next to mine. “Hey, did you hear that the Legislative Yuan passed a bill to give everyone NT$10,000 [US$340]?” I said, pointing to a newspaper headline. The old man cursed, then said: “Yeah, the Chinese Nationalist Party [KMT] canceled the NT$100 billion subsidy for Taiwan Power Co and announced they would give everyone NT$10,000 instead. “Nice. Now they are saying that if electricity prices go up, we can just use that cash to pay for it,” he said. “I have no time for drivel like
Young supporters of former Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) were detained for posting the names and photographs of judges and prosecutors believed to be overseeing the Core Pacific City redevelopment corruption case. The supporters should be held responsible for their actions. As for Ko’s successor, TPP Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌), he should reflect on whether his own comments are provocative and whether his statements might be misunderstood. Huang needs to apologize to the public and the judiciary. In the article, “Why does sorry seem to be the hardest word?” the late political commentator Nan Fang Shuo (南方朔) wrote
Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) reportedly told the EU’s top diplomat that China does not want Russia to lose in Ukraine, because the US could shift its focus to countering Beijing. Wang made the comment while meeting with EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas on July 2 at the 13th China-EU High-Level Strategic Dialogue in Brussels, the South China Morning Post and CNN reported. Although contrary to China’s claim of neutrality in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, such a frank remark suggests Beijing might prefer a protracted war to keep the US from focusing on
RSS