Topic Request: The Philippines’ National Debt Story

The national debt of the Philippines didn’t explode overnight. It took decades of borrowing decisions—some necessary, others reckless—to bring us to where we are today. From modest loans in the 1960s to trillion-peso annual increases in recent years, our debt story reflects both crisis and recovery, reform and repeat.

This write-up looks back at the country’s borrowing history from 1965 to 2025. We’ll go through each administration, how much debt they added, what they did with it, and whether the country got anything useful in return. It’s not just about the numbers. It’s about what those numbers say about governance, priorities, and where the money really went.

Pero bago natin simulan ang lahat…

Let’s define some terms first — dahil hindi naman tayo ekonomista. Hindi natin agad naiintindihan kung ano bang ibig sabihin ng mga ‘yan. It’s easy to get lost in the numbers kapag hindi mo kabisado ang language ng mga policymaker at finance officials. Kaya ito muna: usapang simple.

• Debt-to-GDP Ratio

  When people say debt-to-GDP ratio, they’re comparing how much the country owes to how much the country earns in a year. Kung ₱100 ang kinikita ng Pilipinas, tapos may utang tayong ₱60, then our debt-to-GDP ratio is 60%. The higher the percentage, mas delikado — kasi mas kaunti ang natitirang pondo para sa ibang kailangan ng bansa.

• Debt Servicing

  Ito yung perang binabayad ng gobyerno every year para sa interes at mismong utang — parang monthly amortization, pero pambansa. It includes both interest and principal payments. So kapag malaki ang utang, malaki rin ang parte ng budget na napupunta sa pagbabayad nito instead of, say, public hospitals or education.

• Fiscal Deficit

  A fiscal deficit happens when the government spends more than it collects. Sa simpleng salita: kulang ang kita, kaya uutang. Parang sa bahay — kung mas mataas ang gastusin kaysa kita, you either cut spending or mangutang ka para mabuhay.

• Domestic vs. External Debt

  Domestic debt means umutang ang gobyerno sa loob ng bansa — gaya ng bonds or loans from local banks. External debt, on the other hand, comes from outside — mga utang sa foreign lenders, World Bank, or ibang bansa. Mas risky ang external dahil kapag humina ang piso, mas mahal bayaran.

• White Elephant Projects

  These are big-budget projects that end up useless. Sa Tagalog: malaki ang ginastos, pero walang silbi. Often, may corruption, o kaya pinilit kahit alam nang hindi practical — gaya ng Bataan Nuclear Power Plant na tinayuan sa fault line, tapos di man lang nagamit kahit piso ang kuryente.

• Budget Surplus vs. Budget Deficit

  Kapag mas malaki ang kinikita ng gobyerno kaysa sa ginagastos nito, that’s a budget surplus — good news ‘yan. Pero kapag mas malaki ang gastos kaysa kita, that’s a budget deficit. Hindi naman laging masama ang deficit — pero kung taon-taon kang kulang, it means may deeper problem sa income or priorities.

• Infrastructure Spending

  Ito yung gastusin para sa mga public projects — tulay, kalsada, airport, railway, broadband, etc. Sa ideal world, debt should go into this: infrastructure that creates jobs and boosts the economy. Pero kung nauwi lang sa overpricing o ghost projects, wala ring kwenta.

• Crony Capitalism

  Ito yung sistema kung saan ang mga malalapit sa kapangyarihan ang nabibigyan ng pabor — loans, contracts, bailouts — kahit hindi sila qualified. During Marcos Sr.’s time, this was a big problem. Public funds were used to enrich a few, while the rest of the country drowned in debt.

• Default

  When a country defaults, ibig sabihin hindi ito nakabayad ng utang sa takdang panahon. Parang sinabing “Sorry, wala kaming pambayad ngayon.” This ruins the country’s credibility, and makes future borrowing harder and more expensive.

• Debt Moratorium

  This is a temporary pause sa pagbabayad ng utang. The Philippines declared one in 1983 — for 90 days — dahil hindi na kinaya ang bayarin. Hindi siya simpleng delay; it’s a red flag to global lenders that the country’s in serious financial trouble.

• Interest Rate

  Ito yung dagdag bayad sa principal na utang — parang tubo. The higher the interest rate, mas mahal ang utang. During the 1980s, global interest rates spiked, kaya kahit stable ang utang mo, bigla itong lumobo dahil sa interest alone.

Historical Overview and Timeline

Hindi naman ganito kalaki dati ang utang ng Pilipinas. Back in 1965, when Ferdinand Marcos Sr. stepped into Malacañang, our total external debt stood at around $600 million — maliit kung ikukumpara sa ngayon, pero para sa panahong ’yon, malaki na rin. Still, it was manageable (CADTM, Debt Justice, Wikipedia).

Pero hindi nagtagal, lumobo ito nang sobra.

By the time Marcos Sr. was ousted in 1986, the debt had ballooned to somewhere between $26 to $28 billion — depending on the source — but either way, that’s over a 4,000% increase in just two decades. Halos imposibleng ipaliwanag ’yan nang hindi gumamit ng salitang “crisis” (Philippine Daily Inquirer).

Sa loob ng 21 years, Marcos averaged an estimated ₱17.5 billion in added debt per year — though take that with caution. The peso-dollar exchange rate shifted so drastically during his term na mahirap talagang gawing eksakto ang conversion (SlideShare).

Ang mas mahalagang punto: from manageable, the debt became unmanageable.

From tool, it became burden.

Fast-forward to today: under Marcos Jr., the debt is still rising — but this time in trillions. Government data shows the average increase per year is around ₱2 to ₱2.7 trillion, not ₱5.64 trillion as sometimes misquoted (Philstar, GMA News). That ₱5.64 trillion figure reflects the total increase across multiple years, not annual growth.

Still — yes, trillion, taun-taon.

Kung iisipin mo, debt wasn’t always a monster. It started out as a tool — pangtustos sa mga proyekto, pampakilos ng ekonomiya. Pero habang tumatagal, naging vicious cycle siya.

Alam mo ’yung sitwasyon na nagipit ka bigla sa buhay dahil may emergency — kaya umutang ka. Pero dahil sa laki ng babayaran mo, kasama ang interes, tuwing sahod halos walang natitira.

So uutang ka ulit para maitawid ang labing-limang araw bago ang susunod na sweldo. Tapos ganun ulit. At ulit. Hanggang sa hindi mo na maalala kung kailan ka huling nakahinga. Yan ang ibig sabihin ng katagang “vicious cycle.”

Parang ganyan ang nangyari sa bansa. We borrowed to solve a problem, but the repayment terms became another problem. At kapag hindi mo na mabayaran nang buo, you borrow again. Every administration, hoping things would get better, ended up passing the burden to the next.

As of 2025, the national debt stands at around ₱16.7 to ₱16.9 trillion, with a debt-to-GDP ratio of 60.7% to 62% (Philstar, BusinessMirror, Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas). That’s already above the government’s ideal threshold of 60%.

Pero kahit mataas na ’yan, it’s still below the World Bank’s warning line of 70% for developing economies (BusinessWorld). That’s not exactly comforting — pero hindi pa rin tayo nasa red alert.

So here we are. What started out in the ’60s as a practical move — borrow a little to build a little — slowly became one of Southeast Asia’s most infamous debt stories. Hindi lang ito tungkol sa laki ng utang. Mas malalim pa: it tells us about priorities, politics, and promises made — and broken — over six decades.

The Great Debt Crisis: When and Why It Ballooned

The late ’70s to early ’80s — dito talaga nagsimulang mabigat ang pakiramdam. What used to be manageable borrowing turned into a full-blown debt trap.

On the surface, tuloy lang ang projects. The government kept borrowing, kept building. Pero sa ilalim ng lahat ng ’yan, the numbers were spiraling. The system was bleeding, and no one was hitting the brakes. By the time the early ’80s rolled around, the country was overwhelmed. Debt was no longer a tool — it was the cage.

Crisis Milestones

• 1970 to 1980: External debt shot past $6 billion, and its share of GDP doubled from 10% to 20% (Debt Justice).

• 1979 to 1982: It surged again — from $17.2 billion to $24.7 billion (Wikipedia, NBER).

• October 1983: The Philippines declared a 90-day debt moratorium — a public admission na hindi na natin kayang magbayad. This rocked international lenders (GMA News).

• 1986: Debt-to-GDP ratio hit 95.2% — halos buong kita ng bansa, pambayad-utang na lang (NBER).

What Caused the Crisis?

It wasn’t just bad luck. It was a perfect storm — a cocktail of poor choices, global volatility, and a system rigged to reward a powerful few.

• Overspending on Big Projects: Maraming malalaking proyekto na pang-show, hindi pang-lutas. The money looked impressive on paper, pero kulang sa long-term value (Debt Justice).

• The Oil Shock: The 1979–1980 oil crisis wrecked import prices and doubled our debt servicing costs (NBER).

• Capital Flight: Habang naghihigpit ang sinturon ng bansa, an estimated $3.6 billion fled the country — mostly connected to the elite (Debt Justice).

• Crony Capitalism: Loans meant to uplift the country were funneled into businesses run by Marcos loyalists (Wikipedia).

• Interest Rate Spikes: Global rates rose sharply. Suddenly, what we borrowed cheaply was twice as expensive to repay (World Bank).
  
  

Parang sa buhay: umutang ka para maayos ang bahay, pero pinambili mo ng jetski. Nung naniningil na, wala ka nang pambayad — kaya umutang ka ulit, at ulit, at ulit. Paulit-ulit na kwento ng pagkabaon.

The Bataan Nuclear Power Plant: A Case Study in Failure

If there’s one symbol of everything that went wrong, it’s the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP) — the single most expensive energy project in our history… na hindi man lang nagbukas.

• Total Cost: $2.3 billion, with $600 million in overpricing baked in (VERA Files).

• Kickbacks: Around $80 million in bribes allegedly went to Marcos and his circle (Inquirer).

• Safety Issues: It was built near a fault line and a volcano (Global Energy Monitor).

• Zero Output: Not a single watt of electricity ever came out of it (METTS).

• Ongoing Debt: We kept paying for it until 2007 — long after it was mothballed (Philstar)

Pinagbayad tayo ng utang para sa isang planta na hindi man lang binuksan. Hindi lang ito bad investment — this was theft disguised as ambition.

This was the debt crisis in its ugliest form. Hindi lang ito tungkol sa utang. It was about broken public trust, abuse of power, and financial decisions that left scars lasting generations.

You can change presidents. You can shuffle cabinet members. But some consequences take decades to pay off. Literally.

We’re still living with it.

Administration-by-Administration Analysis

Hindi naman pantay-pantay ang naging papel ng bawat pangulo sa utang ng Pilipinas. Some made things worse. Others tried to fix what they inherited. But every administration left a mark — either by building the debt, misusing it, or managing it well.

Worst Performers in Debt Management

1. Ferdinand Marcos Sr. (1965–1986) – The Crisis Creator

• Debt Added: From $600 million to around $26–28 billion, triggering the country’s first major debt crisis (Wikipedia, Debt Justice, NBER)

• Legacy: Siya ang nagsimula ng debt spiral — the foundational crisis that haunted us for decades.

• Key Issues: Crony capitalism, massive corruption, and economically unproductive projects.

• Impact: By 1986, the debt-to-GDP ratio was at 95.2% — near financial collapse (World Bank).
  

2. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo (2001–2010) – The Aggressive Borrower

• Debt Added: ₱2.4 trillion in 9 years (DBM)

• Debt Servicing: At one point, 97.69% of government revenues went to paying off debt. Halos walang natirang fiscal space for health, education, or infrastructure.

• Criticism: She borrowed more than the combined total of three previous presidents — raising alarms about sustainability.

• Impact: There was growth, yes — but it came with a heavy cost.
  
  

3. Rodrigo Duterte (2016–2022) – The Pandemic Borrower

• Debt Added: ₱6.84 trillion — the largest absolute increase in history (Philstar)

• Average Annual Increase: Around ₱2.13 trillion

• Context: COVID-19 hit hard. The country had to borrow — and fast.

• Criticism: Mas malaki pa ang napunta sa infrastructure and debt servicing kaysa sa actual pandemic response (Philstar). Transparency and priority-setting became hot-button issues.

  • Note: Emergency borrowing was necessary. But execution and accountability? That’s another story.

Best Performers in Debt Management

1. Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino III (2010–2016) – The Fiscal Consolidator

• Achievement: Cut the debt-to-GDP ratio to a historic low of 39.6% by 2015 (World Bank)

• How:

  • Tax reforms and aggressive revenue collection

  • Zero-based budgeting

  • Elimination of pork barrel

  • Disciplined spending
    

• GDP Growth: Averaged 6% annually

• Debt Service Ratio: Just 26.6%, the best since Ramos’ 1997 record (Asian Development Bank)

• Legacy: Discipline, transparency, and reform — proof that debt doesn’t have to be a trap.
  
  

2. Fidel V. Ramos (1992–1998) – The Surplus Generator

• Achievement: Generated budget surpluses in most years

• GDP Growth: Hit as high as 9% in some quarters

• Reforms:
  
  

  • Privatized bloated state-owned enterprises

  • Deregulated key industries

  • Liberalized trade
    
    

• Strategy: Invested in infrastructure without breaking the bank

• Impact: Growth with responsibility. A rare combo.
  
  

3. Corazon Aquino (1986–1992) – The Crisis Manager

• What She Inherited: A shattered economy and 95.2% debt-to-GDP ratio

• Achievement: Brought it down to 67.8% through reform and global cooperation

• Approach:
  

  • Honored debts, even those she didn’t create

  • Restored trust from lenders

  • Entered into structural adjustment programs and debt rescheduling (NBER)
    

• Legacy: Hindi siya miracle worker. But she stabilized the economy enough for the next presidents to have a fighting chance.
  

Every president had different tools, different challenges, and different political climates. Pero at the end of the day, the numbers don’t lie.

Some added weight. Some lifted it. Most just passed it along.

The real challenge? Not just who borrowed — but who used it wisely, and who made sure we’d have something to show for it.

Current Debt Situation and Sustainability

As of mid-2025, the Philippines’ total outstanding debt is now between ₱16.7 to ₱16.9 trillion — a record high, based on official numbers from the Bureau of the Treasury and confirmed by Philstar, GMA News, and BusinessWorld.

Our debt-to-GDP ratio is floating between 60.7% and 62% — lagpas na sa 60% ceiling set by the government, but still below the 70% danger line flagged by the World Bank.

In short: mataas, pero hindi pa bagsak. We’re somewhere in the middle — the gray zone.

Where’s the Debt Coming From?

Under President Marcos Jr., borrowing continues — but not at the runaway pace some headlines make it seem.

The ₱5.64 trillion figure often quoted refers to the total increase since 2022, not the yearly average.

Based on recent data, the actual annual increase is closer to ₱2 to ₱2.7 trillion per year (Philstar, MB).

The government’s borrowing mix is about 80% domestic and 20% external — a strategy that minimizes our exposure to global currency shocks (Malaya, DOF). Most of our loans are peso-denominated — safer, more predictable, and less likely to spike just because the dollar gets stronger.

What’s Driving the Debt?

Not all debt is bad. The real issue is: para saan ba talaga ang inuutang?

According to NEDA, DBM, and the Department of Finance, here’s where the government says the money is going:

• Infrastructure: Railways, highways, airports, seaports

• Digital transformation: Broadband access, government automation

• Renewable energy: Solar and wind investments

• Health and education: Facilities and expanded public services

• Debt refinancing: Replacing older, more expensive loans with better terms

On paper, productive lahat. The problem is, we’ve seen this kind of list before.

What Are the Risks?

Hindi lang ito tungkol sa laki ng utang — kundi sa direksyon ng trend at sa bilis ng pagtaas.

• Debt service is rising: In 2025, the government allocated ₱877 billion for debt payments — ₱848 billion of that is just interest (Philstar, GMA News). That’s 13.8% of the national budget. Not 30–35%, as some figures claim — but still a significant drain.

• Tax revenue is improving, but not fast enough to match the spending pace (DOF, CEIC).

• More for debt = less for services: The more we put into paying loans, the less we can put into jobs, education, food security, and climate programs.

Parang suweldo mo na halos buong buwan napupunta pambayad utang. May kita, oo — pero walang natitira.

Corruption: The Hidden Drain

Malaking problema na nga ang utang — mas lalong bumibigat kapag may korapsyon.

• During the pandemic, at least ₱11.5 billion in supply contracts were awarded to suspicious companies, according to the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee.

• The Commission on Audit regularly flags “ghost projects,” overpriced equipment, and shady procurement practices.

• Economists say corruption doesn’t just waste money — it weakens our ability to pay debt. Every peso stolen is a peso na sana pampaayos ng paaralan, ospital, o kalsada — or pambayad ng utang mismo (Inquirer).

So kahit maganda ang plano, kung may magnanakaw sa gitna, wala ring saysay. We borrow, but we don’t build.

Can We Still Manage This?

Yes — but that window is narrowing.

It all depends on three things:

1. Saan talaga napupunta ang inuutang?

2. Kumikita ba ang gobyerno nang sapat para magbayad?

3. May matinong long-term plan ba — or pa-pogi lang ’to?

Debt, by itself, isn’t evil. But misused debt? That’s the beginning of collapse.

Ang masaklap, hindi agad ramdam ang epekto. Minsan, tahimik siyang pumapatay. And when the bill finally comes due — it’s not just the economy that suffers. It’s the people.

Debt Utilization: Real Infrastructure or White Elephants?

May utang, may proyekto. Pero ang tanong: sulit ba?

Governments often defend borrowing by pointing to big-ticket infrastructure: bridges, roads, airports, power plants. These are supposed to drive growth, create jobs, and improve quality of life. Pero hindi lahat ng proyekto ay equal — at lalong hindi lahat ay kailangan.

The Good: Projects That (Mostly) Worked

Let’s give credit where it’s due. Some major projects funded by debt have delivered real value:

• MRT-3 (Metro Manila, early 2000s): Despite flaws and maintenance issues, it helped decongest EDSA and moved millions of commuters. The MRT-3 was financed through a build-lease-transfer agreement involving significant foreign loans, and, despite operational controversies, it has been a backbone of Metro Manila’s public transport (Rappler).

• Tarlac-Pangasinan-La Union Expressway (TPLEX): Boosted connectivity in Northern Luzon, supported tourism and local economies. TPLEX was funded through a mix of government and private loans and is widely credited for reducing travel time and spurring regional growth (BusinessWorld).

• New Clark City and Clark Airport Expansion: Aimed at decongesting Metro Manila and creating a viable economic hub outside NCR. These projects have drawn praise for their long-term vision and for attracting both local and foreign investment, though some aspects (like New Clark City’s full development) are still ongoing (Philippine Daily Inquirer).

• Subic-Clark-Tarlac Expressway (SCTEX): Funded through Japanese loans, SCTEX improved logistics and travel across Luzon’s major growth corridors and remains one of the more successful examples of debt-backed infrastructure (Manila Bulletin).

These are the kinds of debt-backed investments that make sense if they’re managed well and built for public good — not just for political legacy or kickbacks.

The Bad: White Elephants and Missed Promises

Then there are the infamous ones — the projects that drained billions but gave back little to nothing. Mga proyektong pinangutang pero naging pabigat, hindi tulong.

• Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP):

  • Total cost: $2.3 billion, including $600 million in documented overpricing.

  • Never produced a single watt.

  • Built near a fault line.

  • Filipino taxpayers paid it off until 2007 — a long, painful reminder of misused loans (Vera Files, Rappler).

• Telepono sa Barangay Program (1990s):

  • A project to place public phones in far-flung barangays. Most units never worked or were stolen. Billions were wasted; the Commission on Audit and media reports flagged the program as a failure, with little to show for the investment (Philippine Star).

• Nayong Pilipino Clark Project (cancelled):

  • Allocated funds, broken ground, no finished output. This project was cancelled after initial spending, with government audit reports citing unclear planning and lack of follow-through (ABS-CBN News).

• Northrail Project (early 2000s):

  • Intended to modernize rail travel from Manila to northern provinces, the project was funded by a $503-million loan from China.

  • It was cancelled due to irregularities and corruption allegations.

  • The government later paid over $150 million in arbitration settlement, with no finished railway to show for it (GMA News).

Ang masakit: kahit hindi natin pinakinabangan, binabayaran natin hanggang ngayon.

Between Investment and Utang Na Loob

Infrastructure can be a powerful equalizer — but only if done with purpose and integrity. Otherwise, it becomes another tool for utang na loob politics — a ribbon-cutting ceremony before the elections, a photo-op disguised as nation-building.

Borrowing for the right reasons isn’t wrong. But when debt is used for optics, corruption, or projects with no long-term value, the country pays twice: once for the loan, and again for the lost opportunity.

How Debt Affects You — Even If You’re Not an Economist

Hindi mo kailangan maging ekonomista para maramdaman ang epekto ng utang ng gobyerno. Bawat kita ng gobyerno na napupunta sa pambayad-utang ay pera na hindi na napupunta sa’yo — sa serbisyo, ayuda, o infrastructure na dapat sana’y para sa lahat.

Buhay-Sweldo: Taxed More, Served Less

Kapag malaki ang utang ng bansa, kailangan ng gobyerno ng mas maraming kita. Saan ba sila kumukuha ng kita? Sa buwis:

• Excise taxes sa langis, sigarilyo, at alak — tumaas ang rates nitong mga nakaraang taon para mapunan ang revenue gap (Department of Finance).

• TRAIN Law at VAT — mas ramdam ng masa kaysa mayayaman, dahil sa indirect taxes na apektado ang basic goods at services (Philippine Institute for Development Studies).

• Online sellers, freelancers, at small businesses — sumasailalim na rin sa mas mahigpit na tax compliance, dahil lumalaki ang pressure na palawakin ang revenue base (Bureau of Internal Revenue).

Habang tumataas ang taxes, kulang pa rin ang public services. Mas mataas ang singil, pero di mo naman ramdam sa ospital, eskwelahan, o ayuda.

Parang sweldo mong dumaan lang sa ATM: buo sa payslip, pero butas na bulsa pagkahapon.

Edukasyon, Kalusugan, at Serbisyong Pinilit Tipirin

Pag malaki ang utang at interest payments, lumiliit ang natitirang budget para sa mahahalagang serbisyo:

• Education: Budget per student sa public schools hasn’t kept up with inflation, resulting in shortages of teachers, overcrowded classrooms, at outdated modules (Department of Education).

• Health: DOH budget cuts, delayed benefits sa health workers, at underfunded rural clinics ay paulit-ulit na isyu tuwing budget season (Commission on Audit).

• Transport: Laging sira ang tren, walang matinong bus system, pero may pambayad ng interes. Infrastructure maintenance suffers kapag nauuna ang debt servicing sa budget priorities.

Hindi lahat ng kakulangan ay dahil sa utang, pero marami sa mga ito ay lumalala dahil sa debt servicing priorities na inuuna kaysa sa social services.

Future Generations Will Pay

Ang mga bata ngayon — kasama na ang mga anak mo — ay magbabayad sa mga utang na hindi naman sila ang nangutang. Interest pa lang, burden na.

At kung hindi rin mapapakinabangan ng susunod na henerasyon ang pinaggamitan ng utang, nagiging intergenerational injustice ito.

We’re not just borrowing money. We’re borrowing from our children’s future.

Inflation at Peso Devaluation

Higher public debt can hurt the peso’s value, especially if confidence in fiscal management drops (Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas):

• Mas mahal ang imported goods kapag humina ang piso.

• Tumataas ang presyo ng bilihin, lalo na ang fuel at food.

• Lalong bumababa ang halaga ng sweldo — real wages erode as inflation rises.
  
  

At kapag kailangan pa ng gobyerno ng bagong utang para bayaran ang dating utang (debt rollover), the cycle continues — and everyday Filipinos carry the weight.

Why the Debt Problem Needs to Be a Campaign Issue in 2025

Sa dami ng isyung kinakaharap ng bansa — inflation, edukasyon, kahirapan, trabaho — madaling isantabi ang utang ng gobyerno. Pero sa totoo lang, lahat ng ’yan ay konektado sa utang. Kaya kung may boboto kang kandidato sa 2025, tanungin mo: Ano ang plano niya sa utang ng Pilipinas?

Hindi Lang Ito Issue ng Nakaraan — Patuloy Ito

Every new administration inherits the debts of the previous one. Pero hindi sapat ang “Kasalanan ng nauna.” The real question is:

Anong ginagawa mo ngayon, at anong iiwan mo sa susunod?

• Marcos Jr. inherited a record-high ₱12.79 trillion debt from Duterte in 2022 (Philippine Star).

• That figure is now projected to hit ₱17 trillion by end-2025 (Philippine Star, Manila Bulletin).

• At this pace, the next administration will face tougher trade-offs: more borrowing, new taxes, or severe service cuts.

Recent context: During the May 2025 midterm elections, fiscal transparency was a key concern. Groups like Social Watch Philippines urged voters to support candidates with track records in responsible budget use, especially after the controversial ₱89.9 billion PhilHealth fund transfer.

Hindi Pwedeng Puro Platitudes

• “Ipaglalaban ko ang edukasyon!”

• “Walang Pilipinong magugutom!”

• “Aayusin natin ang serbisyo publiko!”

Maganda pakinggan — pero tanongin mo:

Saan manggagaling ang pondo kung malaking bahagi ng budget ay napupunta sa pambayad-utang?

The reality: In 2025, a combined ₱876.7 billion will go to debt servicing — ₱848 billion for interest payments and ₱28.7 billion for net lending (Philippine Star). That’s 13.8% of the entire national budget. Hindi man kalahati, malaki pa rin — at malinaw na may epekto ito sa serbisyong publiko.

What Voters Should Demand

Huwag kang bumoto base lang sa feel-good slogans. These are the questions worth asking:

• May plano ba siya para palakasin ang kita ng gobyerno nang hindi dinadagdag ang pasanin ng mahihirap?

• Ano ang konkretong strategy niya sa utang? Restructure? Refinance? Reprioritize spending?

• Paano niya titiyakin na hindi mawawaldas ang inutang?

• Ano ang track record niya pagdating sa transparency?
  

Additional questions to watch for:

• Ano ang posisyon niya sa bagong 70% debt-to-GDP benchmark na ginagamit ng gobyerno ngayon (BusinessWorld)?

• Paano niya babalansehin ang build-build-build projects versus debt control?

• May political will ba siyang ipatigil ang mga white elephant projects or at least review them?

Why This Matters More Than Ever

The economic pressure is rising:

• Global interest rates are up — making new loans more expensive

• Peso depreciation adds to foreign debt burden

• Growth projections are being downgraded

• Credit agencies are watching — and might downgrade the country’s rating

That’s why economists are urging a mix of fiscal discipline, expanded tax collection, and project efficiency. The 2025 midterms may have passed, but the public still has a voice in demanding accountability — from senators, congressmen, and local leaders.

Because public debt isn’t just a number.

It’s a daily reality.

It’s your taxes.

It’s your future.

It’s your vote.

The Bottomline: Utang, Buhay, Boto

Hindi mo kailangang maging ekonomista para maintindihan kung bakit mahalagang pag-usapan ang utang ng gobyerno.

Kung nagbabayad ka ng buwis pero walang matinong ospital sa bayan mo,

kung nagtitiis ang anak mo sa sirang upuan sa eskwela,

kung kapos ang ayuda habang tuloy ang ribbon-cutting para sa overpriced na proyekto —

may kinalaman ’yan sa utang.

Ang pambansang utang ay hindi lang numero sa spreadsheet. Isa itong salamin ng mga prayoridad ng gobyerno. At kung hindi tayo makikisali sa usapan, tuloy-tuloy lang ang pangungutang — habang tayo ang nagbabayad, at sila ang nagbubunyi sa “legacy projects” nila.

What the Numbers Tell Us Today

As of July 2025, the national debt has climbed to ₱16.92 trillion, or nearly 62% of our GDP. That means ₱876.7 billion — about 13.8% of the 2025 national budget — is earmarked just for debt service. That’s money that could’ve gone to better hospitals, better roads, and better pay for teachers and nurses.

Lessons from the May 2025 Elections

The historic 82.2% voter turnout during the 2025 midterm elections — the highest ever for a midterm — proved that Filipinos are paying attention. In pre-election surveys, economic concerns ranked #1, with 94% of voters supporting candidates who focused on job creation and food security.

The results reflected a growing demand for fiscal discipline. While administration allies held onto several seats, they lost key strongholds in both the Senate and House — a signal that voters are starting to connect national debt with daily hardship.

What We Can Still Do

The elections may be over, but we’re not done.

• Tanungin ang mga nakaupo — Hindi lang “anong plano mo sa edukasyon,” kundi “saan manggagaling ang pondo?”

• Magbasa at makialam — Fiscal transparency exists, but it’s rarely handed to us. We need to search, understand, and share.

• Bantayan ang susunod na halalan — The next election is 2028. Ang boto ay hindi lang para sa plataporma — dapat din ito ay para sa integridad, maayos na paggasta, at kinabukasan.

• Suportahan ang debt transparency initiatives — The Philippines now ranks #1 globally in debt transparency (Institute of International Finance). That’s good, but transparency is only useful if we act on the information.

The Reality Check

Recent developments made it even clearer:

• During the pandemic, more money was spent on debt service than on actual COVID-19 response

• The ₱89.9 billion PhilHealth fund transfer scandal showed how bad budgeting hurts public health

• Inflation remains sticky, and food prices continue to rise despite GDP growth

The Stakes Are Higher Now

Kung hindi ngayon sisimulan ang mas matalinong usapan tungkol sa utang, kailan pa?

At kung hindi tayo kikilos, sino ang magbabayad?

Hindi sila.

Tayo.

At ang mga anak natin.

The 2025 elections showed us one thing: Filipinos are ready to hold leaders accountable. The record turnout, largely driven by young voters, is proof that the next generation refuses to inherit this burden quietly.

Our democracy only works if we work it.

Ang utang ay hindi lang isyu ng pera — ito ay isyu ng kinabukasan.