A recent analysis comparing the tax and spending proposals of Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump has revealed that both plans could significantly increase the national debt over the next decade. The nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) conducted the analysis and disclosed updated figures reflecting current policies advocated by both candidates.
According to CRFB’s findings, Harris’s plan is projected to add approximately $3.95 trillion in additional debt from 2026 to 2035 based on the central estimate. However, if assumptions vary, this could rise to $8.3 trillion. In contrast, Trump’s plan is estimated to add $7.75 trillion over the same period, with potential variations from $1.65 trillion to $15.55 trillion. Marc Goldwein, Senior Vice President and Senior Policy Director at CRFB, highlighted that without intervention, the national debt could reach unprecedented levels relative to the economy, and both candidates’ proposals could exacerbate this fiscal situation.
CRFB’s report suggests that the debt-to-GDP ratio, which measures the national debt against the size of the U.S. economy, could increase from the current 99% to 125% by 2035 based on current law projections by the Congressional Budget Office. Harris’s plan, in a central estimation, might increase this ratio to 134% by 2035, while Trump’s plan could push it to 143%.
Neither Trump nor Harris has provided extensive strategies to curb the rapid spending growth on major programs like Social Security and Medicare, which are primary contributors to the increasing debt. Additionally, Trump’s proposition to eliminate taxes on Social Security benefits for higher-income retirees would potentially worsen the financial state of entitlement programs by removing crucial tax revenue.
Brian Riedl, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, noted that both candidates’ fiscal plans seem focused on attracting voter support rather than addressing debt issues, potentially leading to massive 10-year deficits between $25 trillion and $30 trillion. He remarked that attempts to balance increased spending with higher taxes on wealthier Americans are unrealistic and unlikely to be pursued earnestly.
Riedl also indicated that Trump’s proposal heavily depends on tariffs as a revenue source, although actual implementation remains uncertain. Should tariffs be enacted, they could generate between $2 trillion and $4.3 trillion over a decade, according to CRFB’s analysis. However, reliance solely on tariffs could potentially accelerate a debt crisis.