How did federal spending change during Trump's presidency compared to Obama?
Executive summary
Federal spending rose faster in dollar terms during Donald Trump’s presidency than it did in the comparable pre‑COVID years of Barack Obama’s second term, driven by a mix of the 2017 tax cuts, higher defense and discretionary outlays, and massive COVID‑era relief that Trump signed into law in 2020 [1] [2] [3]. Over the full sweeps of their tenures, Obama presided over larger total debt accumulation because he served eight years that included recession‑era stimulus, while Trump’s shorter term produced larger debt increases per year and sharp deficit spikes tied to tax policy and emergency pandemic spending [4] [3] [5].
1. Obama’s spending context: recovery, stimulus, and an eight‑year footprint
Barack Obama took office amid the Great Recession and enacted large stimulus and bailout measures that drove up federal debt early in his presidency, resulting in about $9.3 trillion in nominal debt growth over two terms and an elevated deficit during the recovery years [6] [4]. Analysts note that many of Obama’s increases were tied to crisis response and extensions of previous tax policies, and that his two full terms naturally produced more cumulative dollar change than a single four‑year term [7].
2. Trump before COVID: tax cuts, higher defense, and rising deficits
From 2017 through 2019, federal spending grew faster than revenues under Trump, in part because the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act reduced revenue while Congress and the White House increased defense and other discretionary spending—defense rose from roughly $593 billion in 2016 to about $686 billion by 2019 [1] [2]. The result was a widening deficit trajectory: the deficit rose to $666 billion in FY2017 and to roughly $804 billion in FY2018, reflecting both the tax law’s near‑term revenue loss and higher spending [1] [5].
3. The COVID inflection: emergency spending that dwarfed regular policy effects
The single largest driver of federal spending and deficit growth on Trump’s watch was the pandemic response in 2020, when massive bipartisan relief packages—signed by Trump—produced the biggest year‑to‑year spike in debt addition during his term and make simple year‑by‑year comparisons with peacetime Obama years misleading without that context [3] [8]. Commentators and budget analysts uniformly emphasize that pandemic emergency spending is an exceptional factor that must be separated from normal fiscal policy debates [3].
4. Measuring totals versus rates: who “added more” depends on metric
Strict dollar totals favor Obama (more total debt added across eight years) while annualized rates favor Trump: Trump accumulated more debt per year served than Obama, and several sources show Trump’s deficits racing past Obama’s in comparable later years of their presidencies prior to the pandemic [3] [5]. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget and other analysts also observe that Trump inherited a healthier expansionary economy—meaning deficits under Trump were driven more by policy choices (tax cuts and spending increases) than by recessionary rescue [4] [5].
5. Political narratives, overlaps, and accountability
Advocates on both sides stress different drivers: defenders of Trump point to necessary COVID relief and the economic context of Obama’s crisis inheritance, while critics highlight that the 2017 tax cuts and post‑2016 spending choices materially increased deficits and debt trajectory even before the pandemic [3] [1] [8]. Independent budget groups show some policy overlap—Trump adopted a few Obama budget ideas and many of the administration’s claimed savings were technical or interest‑rate driven—underscoring that both administrations operated inside congressional choices and longer economic forces [9] [7].