President Donald Trump is once again at the center of a fierce economic debate, as concerns swirl around his ambitious package of tax cuts and fiscal reforms that critics say could add trillions to the national debt.
Despite his administration’s bullish rhetoric and promises of explosive economic growth, Trump finds himself in a tightening vise of criticism from Republican senators, leading economists, financial markets, and even some of his most high-profile allies, including tech mogul Elon Musk.
The plan to reduce taxes while refusing to implement equivalent spending cuts has sparked a wave of skepticism that is rippling through Washington and Wall Street alike, fueling new questions about whether Trump’s economic vision is financially viable or merely political theater.
At the heart of the issue lies the president’s determination to push through what he has called the “One, Big, Beautiful Bill” — a sweeping tax cut and spending proposal aimed at energizing the U.S. economy and consolidating support ahead of the 2026 midterms.
The bill passed the House last month and includes an array of tax reductions for individuals and corporations. But the legislative maneuvering that brought the bill to life has triggered alarm bells among economists, policy watchdogs, and lawmakers.
According to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, if all provisions of the package are extended, the plan could add more than $5,000,000,000,000 to the national debt over the next decade.
That number, already staggering, is made worse by the fact that the debt has already reached a record-breaking $36,100,000,000,000, up from just over $20,000,000,000,000 when Trump first entered office.
While the White House has attempted to paint a rosy picture, arguing that economic growth will outpace the increase in borrowing, investors are increasingly wary.
The interest rate on a 10-year Treasury Note now hovers around 4.5 percent, a significant spike from the 2.5 percent seen in 2017 when Trump’s first tax package was enacted.
This higher cost of borrowing means the government will be spending more just to service its debt, crowding out other fiscal priorities.
Meanwhile, markets have responded with skepticism rather than confidence, signaling that the president’s plan has yet to instill the faith needed to unlock a wave of private sector investment.
Within the administration, the message is one of defiance. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt began her Thursday press briefing by attacking the Congressional Budget Office, accusing it of using flawed models and making inaccurate forecasts.
She dismissed concerns about the bill increasing the deficit as “blatantly wrong” and accused the CBO and other analysts of perpetuating myths. House Speaker Mike Johnson echoed that sentiment on national television, claiming that the CBO consistently underestimates economic growth triggered by conservative fiscal policies.
However, despite these protests, Trump’s own statements have complicated the narrative.
He admitted last week that spending cuts were sacrificed to preserve fragile Republican unity in Congress, stating that “we have to get a lot of votes” and that “we can’t be cutting” — a remark that all but concedes the abandonment of fiscal restraint.
Among those expressing disappointment is Elon Musk, the billionaire entrepreneur who once led the Department of Government Efficiency under Trump.
Musk has been vocal in his dissatisfaction with the current budget trajectory, telling CBS News that the administration’s latest spending bill “undermines the work that the DOGE team is doing” and represents a step backward in efforts to streamline federal operations.
Musk’s criticisms carry weight not only because of his former role but also because of his reputation as a fiscal realist, someone who once championed Trump’s early economic agenda but is now backing away as the numbers stop adding up.
Economists have been nearly unanimous in their doubt. Experts from institutions ranging from Harvard to Wharton have publicly challenged the growth projections released by the White House Council of Economic Advisers.
The administration claims the economy will grow at an average of 3.2 percent annually over the next four years — far above the Congressional Budget Office’s projection of 1.9 percent.
The White House argues that this growth, coupled with increased revenues from tariffs, will shrink deficits and make the plan sustainable. Council Chair Stephen Miran has been front and center in defending the logic, saying that growth will be driven by increased supply of labor, investment capital, and domestic production, without triggering inflation.
He insists that “the deficit is a very significant concern for this administration,” even as the policies appear to contradict that concern.
White House budget director Russell Vought has also stepped in to defend the plan, rejecting the idea that it could be “in any way harmful to debt and deficits.”
Yet outside experts are not buying it. Kent Smetters, director of the Penn Wharton Budget Model, referred to the growth assumptions as “a work of fiction.”
Jason Furman, a Harvard professor and former adviser in the Obama administration, said that the plan’s tax cuts are “mostly not growth- and competitiveness-oriented” and warned that higher long-term interest rates would actually drag growth in the opposite direction.
As Senate debate looms, political resistance is mounting. Republican Senators Ron Johnson and Rand Paul have already expressed serious reservations, with Paul stating flatly that “the GOP will own the debt once they vote for this.”
He believes there are at least four Republican senators prepared to stall the bill unless changes are made to address the ballooning deficits. Such dissent within the president’s own party poses a serious threat to the legislation, especially in a Senate where Republicans hold only a narrow majority.
Meanwhile, Trump continues to tout tariffs as a potential revenue stream to offset the debt increases. His administration insists that the import taxes he has imposed — and hopes to expand — will bring in trillions over time.
When he rolled out his tariff plan in April, Trump claimed it would not only boost domestic industry but also generate enough money to pay down the national debt.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent echoed that view, saying the goal is to slash deficits by more than half in coming years through a combination of economic growth and tariff income.
But here too, the math is not convincing experts. Recent court rulings have cast doubt on Trump’s authority to impose such sweeping tariffs unilaterally, and economists are warning that tariffs function more like taxes on American consumers and businesses than free money from foreign competitors.
While tariffs can raise revenue in the short term, they often trigger retaliation, hurt exports, and raise costs throughout the economy.
New research from Douglas Elmendorf, Glenn Hubbard, and Zachary Liscow suggests that growth alone is not enough to close the fiscal gap.
According to Ernie Tedeschi of Yale University, the government would need at least $10,000,000,000,000 in deficit reduction over the next ten years just to stabilize the debt.
He notes that even if growth is somewhat higher than projected, most of the tax cut’s benefits go toward preserving existing breaks, not stimulating new economic activity. “It’s treading water,” Tedeschi said, encapsulating the view that the bill may ultimately do little to improve the country’s fiscal standing.
This disconnect between political aspiration and fiscal reality is becoming increasingly hard to ignore. The administration’s best hope rests on a gamble: that the economic engine will roar loudly enough to drown out the deficit warning bells.
But as interest payments rise, political opposition deepens, and allies express doubts, the path forward becomes more precarious.
Trump’s critics argue that the current approach represents a profound miscalculation — betting on future prosperity while increasing today’s obligations.
The president’s defenders insist that bold moves are necessary to reset the economy and that tax relief is essential for growth. But with the debt already sky-high and the promised offsetting growth still theoretical, the administration has yet to provide a convincing roadmap for how the numbers will work.
As the bill now moves to the Senate, the stakes could not be higher. The GOP finds itself at a fiscal crossroads, having spent years campaigning on reducing deficits only to now back a plan that could deepen them further.
The next few weeks will reveal whether Republican lawmakers are willing to fall in line with the president or demand a more credible strategy. For now, Trump remains defiant. But the chorus of concern is growing louder — and this time, it’s not just coming from the other side.
