Haver Analytics
Haver Analytics

Viewpoints: July 2025

  • Is the US economy on the verge of entering a new phase of "American Exceptionalism," or is it approaching the edge of another financial crisis?These two perspectives represent the extreme ends of potential outcomes. Certainly, the economic outlook for 2025 is not grounded in strong fundamentals, as it was in 1995 when America embarked on a long period of "exceptionalism." However, there are some parallels to 2005 (excessive risk-taking and borrowing) that culminated in a significant financial crisis.

    Between 1995 and 1999, over a span of five years, the US experienced an average real GDP growth of 4% per year, a feat unmatched since the 1960s. However, even more remarkable than this growth performance was the fact that America settled its "current bills," concluding that period with a balanced budget, and didn't pass legislation that increased future deficits.

    In 2025, the US is experiencing minimal growth and facing a budget deficit projected at $2 trillion, suggesting it is not covering its "current bills." Furthermore, Congress's passage of the "Big Beautiful Bill" (BBB) adds an additional $4 trillion over the upcoming decade, leading to an anticipated cumulative annual deficit nearing $25 trillion for the next ten years, as reported by the Congressional Budget Office. When it comes to federal borrowing, 2025 is fundamentally different from 1995 and the years that followed.

    However, 2025 resembles 2005. In 2005, American households borrowed trillions to purchase primary and secondary homes and took out additional home equity loans to fund their spending. Likewise, in 2025, the US government is borrowing unprecedented amounts, not only for the present year but also increasingly for the next decade, to maintain and support the economy's growth trajectory.

    As house prices declined, the excessive risk-taking and leverage by households resulted in a series of adverse effects on the financial markets and the economy. While the federal government has more borrowing options and capacity compared to the private sector, it is not limitless.

    In 2009, Kevin Hassett, who is the White House Director of the National Economic Council, co-authored an article titled "The Deficit Endgame" for the American Enterprise Institute. In this article, the authors noted "countries most at risk of defaulting on their government debts were those heavily dependent on foreign capital flows to finance their government deficits." The authors also that high levels of domestic debt could and have led to defaults.

    The US fits both of these descriptions; it is heavily reliant on foreign capital and operates with a current debt-to-GDP ratio well above the thresholds that have led to previous sovereign defaults in other countries.

    Financial markets currently perceive a very small risk of the US entering the "default bucket," unlike with other countries with a similar debt profile. However, the potential for another credit downgrade might change this view or at least raise funding costs. In April, S&P Global Ratings, mentioned that "the outcome of forthcoming fiscal negotiations...will be a key factor in our assessment of the US fiscal profile." The approval of "BBB" by Congress represents "fiscal expansion" as opposed to the "fiscal consolidation" typically preferred by credit ratings, which increases the likelihood of a credit downgrade.

    Two decades ago, the notion that home prices might fall was unimaginable for households, as a nationwide decline had never happened, nor did they anticipate challenges in refinancing their debt. Similarly, it's difficult to envision the US government being unable to roll over its debt. However, this scenario can occur at any time, often triggered by factors like the financially reckless 'Big Beautiful Bill'.

  • Last month, we had the opportunity to travel to China as part of a high-level UK delegation of companies and policymakers.

    Over two weeks—starting in Beijing and traveling by bus, train, and plane—we visited Shandong and Zhejiang provinces. Along the way, we engaged with senior government officials and met with dozens of leading Chinese companies operating in energy, AI, robotics, healthcare, and biotech.

    Three Key Takeaways

    1. China Is Back in Business

    As we’ve written before, a primary concern post-COVID wasn’t just economic indicators—it was the deep sense of risk aversion that had taken root in the corporate sector. Years of regulatory crackdowns, state intervention, and surveillance had stifled the entrepreneurial energy that once propelled China’s meteoric growth. Even financially strong private enterprises were hesitant to act.

    The turning point came in February, with DeepSeek. President Xi Jinping—ever the pragmatist—appears to have recognised that revitalising the economy, pushing forward with “Industrial Revolution 4.0,” and achieving “common prosperity” were not possible without the private sector. DeepSeek, a symbol of private-sector innovation, marked a pivotal moment. The publicised meetings between Xi, senior officials, and industrial titans sent a clear message: the private sector is once again central to China’s economic vision.

    This shift was palpable during our visit. The government is stepping back from direct economic management and focusing instead on creating strong incentives for investment. Priority sectors include next-gen technology, biomedical innovation, EVs, advanced materials, smart equipment, and clean energy. The goal is to harness AI and digital tools to modernise manufacturing across all company sizes.

    2. Geopolitics and Trump’s Trade War Are Reshaping Alliances

    Europe is looking East. As we’ve previously argued, Europe stands to lose the most from a Trump 2.0 presidency. His aggressive trade policies, unilateral stance on Ukraine, and NATO funding demands have strained transatlantic ties. Europe can no longer rely on the U.S. for security or technological leadership.

    China, on the other hand, is indispensable—especially if Europe is to meet its net-zero goals. China leads the world in green technologies: from EVs and batteries to solar, wind, and energy optimisation. Chinese firms produce 70% of global EVs and 80% of batteries. A new EV rolls off the line every 76 minutes—built by just 100 people and robots. Xiaomi’s YU7 EV can charge from 10% to 80% in 12 minutes, delivering 620 km of range in just 15 minutes of charging.

    The AI gap with the U.S. is narrowing, and China’s expertise in applying AI to manufacturing and energy optimisation is advancing rapidly. China is also home to some of the most cost-competitive manufacturers in the world. One standout was Unitree, a robotics firm we met that sells factory-ready robots for as little as $16,000.

    Engagement is becoming essential. While national security concerns persist, economic cooperation with China is becoming a necessity for Europe. Meanwhile, China is actively courting new partners. Across dozens of business meetings, Chinese firms were eager to collaborate, expand overseas, and welcome UK investment.

    Foreign companies remain vital to China. We were told that foreign firms account for 13 million jobs, a third of tax revenues and exports. In Beijing alone, there are 49,000 foreign enterprises from 16 countries. New foreign-funded company registrations rose 16% year-on-year in 2024.

    Still, the data shows a recent cooling in inbound FDI. Post-pandemic uncertainty, domestic policy shifts, and geopolitical tensions—especially Trump’s trade war—have caused FDI flows to drop to $18 billion in 2024, their lowest since 2009 (Figure 1). It's no wonder China is accelerating reforms to attract foreign investors and level the playing field.

  • USA
    | Jul 01 2025

    The WSJ "Con" Job

    This is extremely embarrassing and a deceptive act by the WSJ editorial team. The current budget baseline relies on what is explicitly stated in the tax code, not on assumptions. According to the existing tax law, individual tax rates are set to return to pre-2017 levels in 2026. That is a fact. Where is written that "Congress was never going to allow" individual tax rates to revert back to pre 2017?

    If the "Big Beautiful Bill" (BBB) is projected to save $500 billion over the next ten years, as stated by the WSJ editorial team, then why does the BBB include a provision to raise the debt ceiling by $5 trillion? The WSJ editorial team, similar to members of Congress, is currently engaged in using deceptive "budget math".

    However, this will not fool global investors or credit rating agencies, who will soon confront a US debt approaching $50 trillion.