The Philippine national government debt reached P17 trillion in 2025, marking a continued increase from the previous year by 1.6 percent. The Bureau of the Treasury claimed that the debt remains manageable, partly because the debt-to-gross domestic product ratio remains below the critical threshold of 70 percent. But, when this debt is divided among the population of a million Filipinos, this translates to about P142,000 debt per person, an amount that embodies significant financial obligation for every citizen, considering the cumulative burden of interest payments and potential future taxes.
Beyond that, the Department of Finance Secretary Ralph Recto uttered how “one man’s liability is one man’s asset,” describing the Philippines’ growing debt as an “asset.” However, this felt like less of an economic analysis and more of a deliberate attempt to soften the harsh realities of public debt. To frame escalating debt in such an optimistic light struck a discordant note amid growing public concerns about fiscal responsibility and transparency.
National debt is far more than simply a financial figure recorded in government ledgers; it has a profound and wide-ranging impact on the livelihood and social welfare of the population. When the debt level rises, it places pressure on the government’s budget, forcing it to allocate a larger share of resources to debt repayment. To gloss over its implication risks eroding public trust and undermining calls for prudent fiscal governance.
It felt surreal to hear such a statement from a government official who should be deeply aware of the weight that debt carries for an entire nation. This statement disregarded what Filipinos went through, from the rising prices of commodities to reduced access to essential services while paying higher taxes. For those of us who have been watching the national debt climb year after year, their statements that gave reassurance rang hollow.
Debt, by its very nature, is a liability representing an obligation that a person must pay. Meanwhile, an asset is something that an individual owns and can benefit from, without obligations outweighing the benefits. So how come a debt be an asset when their nature and definition contradicts?
By rebranding debt as an asset, for Recto, it can be viewed differently, like how those debts now will result in improvement of the different sectors of the Philippines in the future. This very statement is deeply misleading, an attempt to distort reality and shift public perception away from the truths of fiscal mismanagement. In fact, when government debt balloons, it signals a growing fiscal hole that taxpayers will have to fill, and this statement normalizes and justifies the unsustainable borrowing spree that is happening in the country. Government officials seek to pacify public concern, deflect criticism, and mask the true cost of fiscal irresponsibility.
The problem is, in this narrative, it also ignores ongoing issues in the country. Every peso borrowed today translates into more interest tomorrow, squeezing the government’s budget and reducing funds available for essential services like education, healthcare, and social welfare. Public funds and the borrowings often get siphoned off through patronage, overpriced contracts, and ghost projects. When corruption eats away public investments, the country is left with debts but little to show for it—no assets, just liabilities.
Public officials must stop sugarcoating economic realities. Labelling debt as an asset is a form of gaslighting that Filipinos get from the government, shielding those responsible for fiscal mismanagement from scrutiny. Honest governance, transparency, accountability, and a commitment to build a future that doesn’t saddle the next generation with crippling obligations are the real assets the Philippines needs.
