Is Balancing the Budget Actually Achievable?

Every election cycle eventually returns to the same debate. Governments promise “fiscal discipline”, opposition parties warn about irresponsible borrowing, and economists argue over whether spending cuts or tax rises are necessary. In the UK, the discussion has intensified as public sector net debt has climbed close to £2.9 trillion and annual debt interest payments have risen to roughly £110 billion. 

The instinctive response seems simple. If deficits are expensive and debt interest is consuming more public money every year, why not just balance the budget and stop borrowing? Yet despite decades of political promises, modern economies rarely manage it for long. So why is balancing the budget so difficult in practice?

Governments today are expected to play a far larger economic role than they did several decades ago. Public spending no longer focuses narrowly on defence, policing, and basic infrastructure. Modern states fund healthcare systems, pensions, welfare support, education, transport networks, housing programmes, industrial subsidies, and crisis support during recessions or emergencies. Many of these obligations expand automatically as populations age or economic conditions weaken, meaning spending pressures continue rising even when governments attempt restraint elsewhere.

Demographics are one of the clearest structural pressures. An ageing population raises healthcare and pension costs while the share of working-age taxpayers gradually declines. This creates a long-term fiscal imbalance that is difficult to reverse because pension systems and healthcare services affect millions of people directly, making reductions politically contentious.

Economic shocks have also reshaped how governments operate. During the 2008 financial crisis, states intervened to stabilise banking systems and support collapsing economies. Borrowing rose sharply to prevent deeper recessions, while interest rates remained historically low for more than a decade, reducing pressure on public finances. At very low borrowing costs, governments can sustain deficits more easily because debt servicing remains manageable.

The pandemic reinforced this pattern. Governments borrowed heavily to fund furlough schemes, healthcare systems, and emergency support. In the UK, borrowing exceeded £300 billion at the peak, as the state absorbed much of the economic shock. These interventions were widely seen as necessary to prevent deeper collapse.

Repeated crises have changed expectations of fiscal policy. Governments are now expected to intervene during downturns, energy shocks, or sector instability. Deficits therefore become embedded in how modern states respond to economic volatility.

Political incentives also make balanced budgets difficult to sustain. Spending cuts create visible costs, while tax rises are unpopular. Borrowing becomes the path of least resistance because it delays trade-offs between competing priorities.

As a result, persistent deficits are less unusual than many assume. The more relevant question is whether they remain manageable relative to growth and borrowing costs.

The UK has carried large public debts before, so the existence of debt alone does not explain why fiscal concerns have intensified. The key change is the cost of servicing that debt.

For much of the 2010s, exceptionally low interest rates made borrowing relatively cheap, allowing debt to rise without a proportional increase in debt interest payments. That environment has now shifted. Higher inflation forced central banks, including the Bank of England, to raise interest rates, increasing government borrowing costs.

UK debt interest spending is now around £110 billion in 2025/26, equivalent to roughly 8% of public spending. In April 2026 alone, debt interest reached £10.3 billion, the highest April figure on record. 

Debt interest does not fund services. It reflects the cost of past borrowing. As these payments rise, governments face harder choices between maintaining spending, raising taxes, or increasing borrowing.

Weak productivity growth has added to the pressure by limiting tax revenue growth. Strong growth eases fiscal strain by raising incomes and profits, while weak growth reduces revenue and often increases demand for public support.

At the same time, structural spending pressures continue to rise. Ageing populations increase healthcare and pension costs, while defence and welfare spending remain sensitive to geopolitical and economic conditions.

These pressures explain why fiscal debates have become more contested. Some argue for tighter control of borrowing to restore fiscal credibility. Others warn that excessive cuts or tax rises could weaken growth and worsen long-term debt dynamics. The UK’s experience during the austerity period reflects this unresolved tension between fiscal restraint and economic performance.

Balancing the budget is straightforward in theory. Governments can reduce spending, increase taxes, grow the economy faster, or combine these approaches. The difficulty lies in implementation.

Spending reductions inevitably affect major areas such as healthcare, pensions, welfare, and debt interest itself. These are politically sensitive and economically significant, making large cuts difficult without broader consequences. Even reductions in investment spending can have long-term costs if they weaken infrastructure or public services.

Tax increases also face constraints. Governments can raise revenue through income tax, corporation tax, VAT, or capital gains tax, but sustained increases affect household spending, business investment, and political support. The UK tax burden is already high by historical standards, limiting room for further increases.

Growth is often seen as the most sustainable solution because it naturally increases tax revenue. However, governments cannot directly control productivity, investment, or global economic conditions. Growth depends on long-term structural factors that evolve slowly.

A key distinction often overlooked is between reducing the deficit and eliminating debt. The deficit is the annual gap between spending and revenue, while debt is the cumulative result of past borrowing. Governments can reduce deficits significantly while still carrying high debt levels for decades.

Most advanced economies therefore focus on whether debt remains sustainable relative to GDP rather than eliminating it entirely. If growth is strong enough and borrowing costs remain stable, higher debt levels can be maintained without immediate fiscal crisis.

Problems arise when debt grows faster than economic output or when interest payments consume a rising share of public spending. This reduces fiscal flexibility and limits governments’ ability to respond to future shocks.

Balancing the budget is technically possible, but far more difficult in practice than political debate suggests. Modern governments face persistent spending pressures, while weaker growth and higher borrowing costs have made debt more expensive to sustain.

This does not mean deficits are irrelevant. Rising debt interest payments reduce fiscal flexibility and constrain future budgets, forcing trade-offs between spending, taxation, and borrowing.

However, the issue is not simply whether balancing the budget is mathematically achievable, but whether it can be done without damaging growth, public services, and long-term economic stability. The challenge is therefore one of trade-offs rather than arithmetic.

Budget deficit

The gap between what a government spends and what it receives in revenue over a single year. If spending is higher than income, the government runs a deficit and typically finances it through borrowing.

National debt

The total accumulated amount a government owes from past borrowing. It builds over time as annual deficits are added together, minus any repayments or surpluses.

Debt interest

The cost of servicing government borrowing. It is the interest paid to lenders who hold government bonds. Higher debt or higher interest rates increase this cost, reducing funds available for other public spending.

Structural deficit

A persistent shortfall between government spending and revenue that exists even when the economy is performing normally. It reflects long-term imbalances in tax and spending rather than temporary downturns or crises. Structural deficits are common in several advanced Western economies.

If you found this insightful, consider sharing with friends or colleagues. For weekly economics-led takes on markets, policy, and macro trends, subscribe to The Fiscal Compass.

Follow along on social media for concise updates throughout the week:

Instagram: @thefiscalcompassofficial

X: @FiscalCompass.

LinkedIn: Vinay Meisuria

What are government debt and debt interest?

Source: House of Commons Library
House of Commons Library briefing

Public sector finances, UK: April 2026

Source: Office for National Statistics
ONS statistical bulletin

Public sector finances, UK: February 2026

Source: Office for National Statistics
ONS statistical bulletin

Debt Management Report 2026-27

Source: UK Government
UK Government report

UK borrows more than forecast in April as inflation adds to benefits bill

Source: The Guardian
Guardian article

Featured Image: Pexels