Germany's Debt Spiral Warning Ignored As Berlin Doubles Down On Spending
Submitted by Thomas Kolbe
Finance Minister Lars Klingbeil is a sensitive character. Such personalities tend to react irrationally and extremely defensively to criticism. They are prone to resentment and quick retaliatory reflexes.
So it was only a matter of time before the Federal Court of Auditors, too, felt the cold anger of the thin-skinned Social Democrat. Late last year, criticism from the auditors was promptly followed by a budget cut imposed by the Finance Ministry. The move was meant as a public warning shot across the bow of the recalcitrant watchdog, which traditionally plays the role of post-mortem critic. This comes with the unpleasant habit of describing the state of public finances as they actually are — not as Berlin prefers to imagine them.
The Court’s budget was subsequently reduced from €52 million to €47 million, officially on efficiency grounds. What Klingbeil failed to achieve, however, was to silence the auditors entirely.
It has become a bad tradition: as in every year, the Court again warned of an ever-accelerating debt spiral and a fiscal policy that appears to have lost all restraint. The state is living beyond its means, said President Kay Scheller. On the contrary, one might reply: this state is living beyond our means.
The current draft budget foresees total spending of €630 billion, with nearly every third euro financed through borrowing. By 2029, another €850 billion in new debt is planned — pushing visible public debt to €2.7 trillion, or roughly 67% of GDP.
Unfortunately, the Court’s analysis of debt dynamics remains superficial. In its assessment, however, it aligns with recent criticism from the Ifo Institute.
Both institutions criticize how the state handles new debt. We know from Ifo analysis that roughly 95% of the funds from special off-budget vehicles have been diverted to cover deficits across various layers of the welfare state. Germany is not investing — and the private sector is now running on negative net investment, effectively consuming its capital base.
Dig deeper into Germany’s debt swamp and it becomes clear why Berlin consistently avoids the issue.
A recent Ifo paper calculated non-contributory benefits in the statutory pension system. Economists concluded that these hidden costs could amount to as much as 50% of GDP in the long run. This explains why the overstretched state apparatus now acts merely as a firefighter, no longer capable of maintaining infrastructure. Even Scheller’s call to raise the public investment ratio from 8% to 10% is unlikely to materialize.
One can almost be grateful that the Court of Auditors is among the few institutions still attempting to describe the fiscal reality. Yet even it avoids addressing the root causes — deindustrialization, overstretched public finances, and structurally broken budgets at all levels of government. Unsurprisingly, Scheller and his team also steer clear of politically sensitive issues such as open-border policies, which are pushing the welfare state toward implosion.
There is no mention of the costs of the self-destructive Ukraine war, nor any call to halt funding for the sprawling NGO complex or dismantle the green subsidy machine.
The debate misses the core issue. The state is operating an unlimited welfare machine while committing itself to building eco-socialist economic structures. Under such conditions, a return to a lean state is impossible.
Those calling for a return to sound fiscal policy without naming the underlying causes only make it harder to reverse the ideological crash course. Their superficial criticism suggests that the current trajectory can be maintained with cosmetic reforms. The design of the state itself is not to be questioned.
Pressure for change will only arise when rising public debt — largely financed through new bond issuance — drives up refinancing costs. If bond markets eventually turn against Germany’s debt binge, the European Central Bank will likely step in as lender of last resort, pushing inflation sharply higher.
Already, around 8% of federal spending goes toward servicing interest on the growing debt pile.
Meanwhile, the government has outlined how it intends to deal with the incoming debt crisis — by targeting households. Family co-insurance in public health care will be scrapped, as will income splitting for married couples. Inheritance taxes will be broadly increased, and expect debate over a wealth tax alongside significantly higher social security contributions.
Extraction via the CO₂ mechanism will intensify, and wealthy individuals and capable businesses will leave the country. This is not a theoretical scenario but the result of a political relapse into socialist ideology. The spiral of impoverishment is accelerating.
About the author: Thomas Kolbe, a German graduate economist, has worked as a journalist and media producer for clients from various industries and business associations. As a publicist, he focuses on economic processes and observes geopolitical events from the perspective of the capital markets. His publications follow a philosophy that focuses on the individual and their right to self-determination
Tyler Durden Sat, 04/25/2026 - 09:20