Scott Bessent

Column: Trump loves to throw around taxpayers’ money

Donald Trump Jr. has a lot more in common with his dad than just a name, sharing the president’s penchant for shady dealings and for kleptocratic Russians. Sometimes the two proclivities go together. That was the case in May, we learned this week from ProPublica, when Don Jr. married his second wife during a three-day Bahamian bacchanal bankrolled partly with hundreds of thousands of dollars from a Putin-allied oligarch the Trump scion met only recently.

I had to wonder — recalling Don Jr.’s response in 2016 on learning Russia helpfully wanted to dump dirt on Hillary Clinton — whether he replied in kind when his new Russian friend, Umar Kremlev, offered the wedding grift, er, gift: “If it’s what you say I love it.”

My second thought was that Don Jr. is just like his dad in wanting to spend other people’s money, even as the Trump family has accrued billions since President Trump has been back in office. (Cue the continued silence from the sleuths of Hunter Biden’s laptop.)

Just days before ProPublica’s exposé, at last week’s midterm Republican convention in Dallas, the elder Trump proffered a gift of $5,000 to every one of the roughly 270 million adult Americans. But the eponymous “Trump dividend” would come only if Republicans keep their House and Senate majorities after the November midterm elections.

The tab? More than $1 trillion, roughly $1.3 trillion. How generous Trump is with the U.S. Treasury, despite the news just last month that rattled bond markets and raised interest rates: The United States’ gross debt has exceeded $40 trillion. As Trump told CNBC in 2016: “I love debt. I love playing with it.” We can’t say he didn’t warn us. Even before his proposed 5K giveaway, Trump was on track to break his first-term record for adding to the unsustainable U.S. debt ($8.4 trillion).

Trump’s unprecedented offer of a post-election payout provoked predictable cries of “bribery” from Democrats and other critics. But legality aside, even the appearance of a bribe isn’t what bothers me most about the proposal.

For one thing, it won’t happen. No one will be receiving a $5,000 Trump dividend, just like no one received the DOGE dividend or $2,000 tariff refund he previously promised. Even if Republicans pull off a miracle and retain control of Congress, those in power show no zeal for his budget-buster, not after their complicity in adding trillions to the debt since last year with tax cuts, war costs and this, that and the other Trump pet project. And Congress indeed would have to act, under the Constitution, despite suggestions from the obsequious Treasury secretary, Scott Bessent, that Trump could act alone. (But “I’m not ready to discuss it at present,” Bessent told a House committee on Tuesday.)

No, what bothers me most about Trump’s idea — what outrages me — is the damnable fiscal irresponsibility of it.

Trump has turned much of historical Republican orthodoxy on its head, including on immigration, trade and policy toward Russia. But his utter disregard for annual deficits — a record $2 trillion for this fiscal year that ends Sept. 30 — and his shameful profligacy with taxpayers’ money is something Americans haven’t seen in their lifetimes, in either party. Worse, Trump implies otherwise, that he is fiscally responsible, and he does it with lies that are so easily refuted, so often contradicted by his own words, that it’s a marvel that even such a chronic prevaricator as himself can utter them.

This week Trump is still claiming that the $5,000 dividend will be paid for because “we’re taking in trillions and trillions of dollars” in revenue from his inflationary tariffs on more than half of the goods imported into the country. The actual number isn’t even close to that, and he should know it: The data that nonpartisan analysts are crunching are from the government he supposedly runs.

In 2026, tariff revenue through August was just under $200 billion, but more than half of that already has been spent on refunds to big corporations including Amazon, Walmart and Home Depot, in keeping with a Supreme Court ruling against some of Trump’s tariffs. And as if Trump’s dividend proposal weren’t mendacious enough, in making it he seems to have forgotten his claim in his State of the Union address in February that he would use the tsunami of tariff revenue to abolish the federal income tax.

And one last thing: Even if each adult American got $5,000, subtract from that the nearly $2,000 that each household has paid, on average, because of higher tariffs since Trump took office, according to the nonpartisan Tax Foundation.

In this one dumb idea, in sum, the giveaway manifests just about all that is wrong with Trump as president: The lying, of course. Fiscal recklessness. The trashing of commendable Republican doctrines. The Trump bubble of sycophantic yay-sayers. And, in turn, the seat-of-his-pants policy idiocy, from war-making to White House demolishing.

The lack of any actual policy deliberation behind Trump’s $5,000 shocker was clear in his lackeys’ flailing and contradictory reactions — not just Bessent’s specious claim of presidential authority, but also Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick’s inane insistence the administration could somehow “earn the money that Donald Trump wants to pay out” and National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett’s comment, contrary to Bessent’s, that the White House is indeed looking to Congress for funds.

The good news? Americans get it. Recent polls have the percentage approving of Trump’s handling of the economy as low as 28%. Significant majorities say they are worse off since he became president again.

Such numbers portend an election result that isn’t likely to be changed by a promise of $5,000. Especially from a serial promise-breaker.

Bluesky: @jackiecalmes
Threads: @jkcalmes
X: @jackiekcalmes

Source link

High-Yield Reality: CFOs Rethink Corporate Debt Strategies

With high rates here to stay, CFOs rely on internal cash and working capital for stability.

In August, U.S. Treasury yields reached multi-decade highs. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent responded by doubling the size of buyback operations for 10- to 20-year and 20- to 30-year securities to a floor of $4 billion each, effective Sept. 9 — a stopgap lasting through November 4, when the Treasury releases its next official policy statement.

Yet while Washington intervenes to stabilize government debt, finance chiefs must reckon with higher costs of capital.

“Higher rates have changed the math and, more importantly, reduced the margin for error,” Thomas DeFabrizio, CFO, Americas at Impellam Group, said in an email. “The hurdle rate should move when the cost of capital moves. Otherwise, you are pretending the financing environment has not changed.”

This reality is forcing companies to look inward, turning operational efficiency into a primary source of funding. “Every dollar released from receivables or inventory is a dollar you do not have to borrow at today’s rate,” DeFabrizio said — a meaningful gap when investment-grade credit is yielding around 5.5% and broad high-yield debt is near 7%, with lower-rated credit running considerably higher.

“That makes working capital much more than a finance housekeeping exercise,” DeFabrizio added. “It becomes a capital-allocation decision.”

Era of Cheap Capital Ends

Elevated borrowing costs directly filter down into corporate balance sheets and consumer demand, sparking broader concerns over whether public and private debt issuance has reached a tipping point. Rather than waiting for a rate relief cycle that may never materialize, finance leaders are taking direct defensive action.

Duncan Young, principal at San Francisco-based consulting firm Saorsa Growth Partners, specializes in providing fractional CFO services to companies. Businesses, he told Global Finance via email, are now prioritizing balance sheet durability over aggressive expansion.

To hedge against benchmark rate risks, companies are restructuring their short-term obligations and shifting benchmark exposure.

Portrait photo of Duncan Young,
Saorsa Growth Partners
Duncan Young,
Saorsa Growth Partners

“This is likely a function of risk-off bondholders and bank balance sheets, shifting away from Treasuries towards corporates. We’re pricing off SOFR when possible, to avoid the Treasury rate risk,” he said.

Instead of speculating on interest rate cuts, companies with near-term debt maturities are moving quickly to lock in fixed terms to insulate themselves from further upside volatility in yields.

“Our ‘current debt’ revolvers are being paid back [or] termed out to give us more resilience, heading into uncertainty. We aren’t expecting yields to ease,” Young said.

That posture is showing up across the broader CFO community.

Companies Are ‘Stretched Thin’

Middle-market companies, firms that typically generate less than $1 billion in annual revenue, have even less room to maneuver. Nick Araco, CEO of CFO Alliance, hears that many CFOs “are stretched thinner on what their current options are.”

As a result, they’re watching the Federal Reserve more closely, he added. “They don’t have the same flexibility to just refinance on their own timeline.”

“The ones sitting on debt maturing in the next 12 to 24 months are largely not betting on yields easing meaningfully,” Araco said, describing conversations across the group’s roughly 9,000 members.

This conservative stance is fundamentally altering capital allocation strategies. Rather than relying on leverage to fuel aggressive top-line targets, firms are relying on internal cash generation. They’re scaling back capital expenditures and holding cash as a strategic buffer.

“Return on cash gives us some benefit — for example, it softens the opportunity cost of us paying off debt. Terming out on a fixed rate and sitting on the cash so we can stay liquid in the next liquidity crisis is insurance worth paying,” Young added. “Given the AI outlook and the consequences of a bubble pop, we’re prioritizing resilience over growth rate, and this means less leverage and a more liquid balance sheet.”

Preparing for Double Shock

Government debt continues to test the limits of market capacity. An August 30-year Treasury auction drew below-average demand and record dealer absorption as yields hit 5.2% — the highest since 2001. Meanwhile, foreign investors’ share of U.S. debt has slid to about 30% from a 2008 peak of 49%, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget and the Bipartisan Policy Center.

That combination — elevated base yields sitting alongside historically tight credit spreads — is unsettling CFOs more than the headline numbers suggest.

“Tight spreads feel almost like a false sense of calm,” Araco said. CFOs aren’t treating today’s all-in cost of debt as the new normal, he added. They’re stress-testing what happens if spreads normalize on top of already-elevated base rates.

“It’s less about action today and more about scenario planning,” Araco said, “and making sure that their capital structure isn’t fragile if that spread compression reverses.”

Corporate leaders are taking matters into their own hands. By prioritizing liquidity, extending duration, and managing leverage, CFOs are ensuring their organizations remain resilient regardless of where government bond yields head next.

“If Treasury yields remain elevated and spreads widen at the same time, the all-in borrowing cost can change quickly. I would model that combined shock now,” DeFabrizio warns. “Once you need the capital, your negotiating position has already changed.”

Anthony Noto covers corporate finance and private credit. Contact him at anoto@gfmag.com

Source link