Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: How do budget deficit and debt trends compare between 2017-2021 (Trump) and 2021-2025 (Biden)?
Executive Summary
Federal deficits and debt rose substantially across both administrations: deficits fell from pandemic peaks but remained large under President Biden, while long-term CBO projections show debt continuing to climb as a share of GDP. Independent tallies attribute roughly $8.4 trillion in new borrowing to Trump-era policies and $4.3 trillion to Biden-era actions, but the CBO projects larger future deficits that will push public debt well above postwar norms [1] [2] [3] [4].
1. What people are claiming — a quick inventory of competing tallies
Multiple analyses claim different headline figures for deficits and debt: the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reports near-term deficits of $1.9 trillion in 2025 and warns debt held by the public will rise to 116–118% of GDP within a decade under current law [4] [3]. Independent summaries and media retrospectives contrast cumulative borrowing attributed to policy choices: one set of calculations assigns $8.4 trillion of new borrowing to Trump-era measures and $4.3 trillion to Biden-era measures, while other pieces emphasize both presidents presided over large pandemic-era and post-pandemic spending increases [1] [2]. These claims mix government accounting projections with retrospective policy tallies, producing different impressions about which administration “caused” more debt.
2. CBO’s forward-looking picture — debt headed higher even after 2025
The CBO’s budget outlooks are consistent across reports: deficits remain elevated in the near term and project to grow over the coming decade absent policy changes, with debt held by the public climbing into the range of 116–118% of GDP by the mid-2030s and long-term projections showing even larger fiscal imbalances out to 2054 [3] [4] [5]. These CBO publications emphasize structural drivers — aging, health care, and rising interest costs — rather than short-term cyclical spikes alone, implying that the contrast between 2017–2021 and 2021–2025 is less about a single year’s budget and more about a persistent upward trend in debt ratios that both administrations influenced [3] [4] [5].
3. The retrospective tallies — arithmetic vs. context in attributing borrowing
Retrospective tallies attributing dollar amounts to presidents compress complex budget dynamics into headline numbers: the cited $8.4 trillion for Trump and $4.3 trillion for Biden come from policy-tracking exercises that sum projected costs and borrowing tied to major laws, including tax cuts, pandemic relief, and discretionary packages [2] [1]. Those tallies illuminate policy contributions but can overstate direct presidential control, because budget outcomes also reflect recessions, automatic spending, and Congress’s role. Some analyses present those sums to argue political responsibility; others stress pandemic rescue and economic stabilization as justified borrowing, reflecting differing agendas in the sources [1] [6].
4. What the reports leave out — the drivers behind the numbers
The CBO and policy tallies each identify drivers but do not assign sole blame: COVID-era emergency spending, the 2017 tax cuts, continuing discretionary growth, demographic pressures, and rising interest costs all push deficits higher [3] [4] [5] [2]. The pandemic caused a sharp, front-loaded surge in borrowing under both administrations; subsequent policy decisions — such as stimulus, infrastructure, and tax law choices — affected the medium-term path. The CBO’s long-term outlook stresses that even without new major legislation fiscal pressures would still increase deficits, which weakens narratives that present a single administration as uniquely responsible [5].
5. Bottom line — how the two periods compare and why it matters
Comparing 2017–2021 and 2021–2025 shows that both periods saw major increases in federal borrowing, but the composition differs: the Trump-era increases include the 2017 tax cuts plus pandemic response, while the Biden-era totals reflect pandemic tail spending plus new domestic and economic initiatives; cumulative retrospective tallies place more nominal borrowing in the Trump window but CBO projections show a sustained and rising debt trajectory under current-law policies during Biden’s term and beyond [2] [1] [4]. The practical takeaway is not a neat “who did more” verdict but a convergence of facts: debt is on an unsustainable upward path per the CBO, and both administrations significantly contributed, leaving future policymakers with constrained fiscal options unless revenues, spending, or both are changed [3] [4] [6].