Regulatory: Thinking About the Unthinkable—Partial Default
On May 16, the federal government reached its statutory debt ceiling of $14.29 trillion. Treasury cannot borrow more until Congress provides new authority. Congressional Republicans are demanding substantial reductions in spending, without new taxes, in return for raising the debt ceiling. The two political parties have joined an enormous game...
May 25, 2011 at 11:05 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
On May 16, the federal government reached its statutory debt ceiling of $14.29 trillion. Treasury cannot borrow more until Congress provides new authority. Congressional Republicans are demanding substantial reductions in spending, without new taxes, in return for raising the debt ceiling. The two political parties have joined an enormous game of chicken—the hardest part will be knowing when to pull out. A mistake could have devastating effects on the country's single greatest asset: the willingness of others to do business in our money.
The plan for managing a debt-ceiling crisis was written by President Reagan and employed by President Clinton. The government can avoid default for several weeks through a series of one-time-only cash management tricks to defer payments and accelerate receipts. For example, Treasury has announced it will not make deposits into federal employee pension funds. It also can slow the payments of other obligations, such as tax refunds and contractor invoices, while offering debtors discounts for faster repayments.
These cash management techniques, plus the estimated tax payments Treasury will receive on June 15, should delay default until approximately August 2. After that, default is inevitable, given the sheer size of the deficit to be financed. This year, federal revenues will total approximately 60 percent of federal outlays, leaving a budgetary hole of 40 percent to be filled. The gap is too large to be filled by expedients such as selling the gold reserve or surplus federal property. The nature of the expenditures makes spending hard to cut. New York Times columnist Paul Krugman has described the federal government as an insurance company with an army. It has assumed risks that other Americans are unwilling or unable to bear, such as the costs of health care, pensions for senior citizens and the de facto nationalization of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The payments to make good on these guarantees, plus the costs of defense and servicing the national debt, constitute the vast proportion of federal spending. Even if politically feasible, abolishing many other federal programs would not make a substantial contribution toward closing the budgetary gap.
In a default scenario, Treasury would have to determine how to prioritize which debts to honor and jury-rig a payment system. Payment of principal and interest on the national debt would be the top priority and feasible to implement, given the relatively small number of accounts through which debt is presented for payment. Beyond that, the consequences of default and their magnitude are unknowable. To degrees that cannot now be estimated, interest rates that lenders would demand to hold our debt would rise, and the value of the dollar would drop, once our reputation as the safe haven for investments was compromised. Partial default also would accelerate efforts to develop synthetic assets to substitute for the dollar as the reserve currency.
In a default scenario, the greatest immediate risks to the financial system likely would arise from marketplace disruptions, as investors are forced to reposition their assets. When Lehman Brothers failed, no one could have predicted that money market funds would fail due to their overexposure to its paper, or that their failure would trigger a mass exodus calmed only by federal guarantees. No one has lived through a failure of the world's reserve currency, and no one knows if new guarantees offered by the federal government would be effective in halting hot money flows after its trustworthiness as the lender of last resort had been compromised.
It is important that the country never put itself in a position where we discover the answers to these questions.
John F. Cooney is a partner in the Washington, D.C., office of Venable.
Read John Cooney's previous column.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllWhy Seemingly Simple Off-Channel Communication Rules Still Vex Finance Industry
5 minute readSEC Enforcement Chief Grewal—Whose Hard Line on Crypto Tormented the Industry—Stepping Down
4 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Dechert partners Andrew J. Levander, Angela M. Liu and Neil A. Steiner have stepped in to defend Arbor Realty Trust and certain executives in a pending securities class action. The complaint, filed July 31 in New York Eastern District Court by Levi & Korsinsky, contends that the defendants concealed a 'toxic' mobile home portfolio, vastly overstated collateral in regards to the company's loans and failed to disclose an investigation of the company by the FBI. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Pamela K. Chen, is 1:24-cv-05347, Martin v. Arbor Realty Trust, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Arthur G. Jakoby, Ryan Feeney and Maxim M.L. Nowak from Herrick Feinstein have stepped in to defend Charles Dilluvio and Seacor Capital in a pending securities lawsuit. The complaint, filed Sept. 30 in New York Southern District Court by the Securities and Exchange Commission, accuses the defendants of using consulting agreements, attorney opinion letters and other mechanisms to skirt regulations limiting stock sales by affiliate companies and allowing the defendants to unlawfully profit from sales of Enzolytics stock. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Andrew L. Carter Jr., is 1:24-cv-07362, Securities and Exchange Commission v. Zhabilov et al.
Who Got The Work
Clark Hill members Vincent Roskovensky and Kevin B. Watson have entered appearances for Architectural Steel and Associated Products in a pending environmental lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 27 in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court by Brodsky & Smith on behalf of Hung Trinh, accuses the defendant of discharging polluted stormwater from its steel facility without a permit in violation of the Clean Water Act. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gerald J. Pappert, is 2:24-cv-04490, Trinh v. Architectural Steel And Associated Products, Inc.
Who Got The Work
Michael R. Yellin of Cole Schotz has entered an appearance for S2 d/b/a the Shoe Surgeon, Dominic Chambrone a/k/a Dominic Ciambrone and other defendants in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 15 in New York Southern District Court by DLA Piper on behalf of Nike, seeks to enjoin Ciambrone and the other defendants in their attempts to build an 'entire multifaceted' retail empire through their unauthorized use of Nike’s trademark rights. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald, is 1:24-cv-05307, Nike Inc. v. S2, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Sullivan & Cromwell partner Adam S. Paris has entered an appearance for Orthofix Medical in a pending securities class action arising from a proposed acquisition of SeaSpine by Orthofix. The suit, filed Sept. 6 in California Southern District Court, by Girard Sharp and the Hall Firm, contends that the offering materials and related oral communications contained untrue statements of material fact. According to the complaint, the defendants made a series of misrepresentations about Orthofix’s disclosure controls and internal controls over financial reporting and ethical compliance. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Linda Lopez, is 3:24-cv-01593, O'Hara v. Orthofix Medical Inc. et al.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250