Sweden's 2026 budget introduced unfunded reforms worth 1.2% of GDP, far exceeding expectations. This large fiscal injection surprised markets, pushed interest rates higher, and shows how expansionary government spending can counteract a central bank's monetary policy signals.
Related Insights
While the Swedish market prices in an extended "on hold" policy from the Riksbank, a downside risk premium could build in the curve. This creates an asymmetric opportunity in long duration positions targeting mid-2026, where the possibility of hikes is negligible but the potential for lower yields offers attractive upside.
When national debt grows too large, an economy enters "fiscal dominance." The central bank loses its ability to manage the economy, as raising rates causes hyperinflation to cover debt payments while lowering them creates massive asset bubbles, leaving no good options.
The Riksbank cut rates, but its forward guidance and a dissenter's vote signal a very high bar for future easing. The move, based on forward-looking inflation expectations rather than current data, effectively marks the end of the easing cycle and creates opportunities for carry trades.
Due to massive government debt, the Fed's tools work paradoxically. Raising rates increases the deficit via higher interest payments, which is stimulative. Cutting rates is also inherently stimulative. The Fed is no longer controlling inflation but merely choosing the path through which it occurs.
Japan's Takahichi administration has adopted a surprisingly expansionary fiscal stance. Instead of allowing the Bank of Japan to hike rates, the government is using fiscal spending to offset inflation's impact on purchasing power. This "high pressure" economic policy is a key driver of the yen's ongoing weakness.
The market is pricing 50 basis points of easing from Norges Bank by the end of 2026. However, strong growth, a solid labor market, and high inflation suggest the central bank will not deliver these cuts, implying that front-end Norwegian yields are biased higher.
'Fiscal dominance' occurs when government spending, not central bank policy, dictates the economy. In this state, the Federal Reserve's actions, like interest rate cuts, become largely ineffective for long-term stability. They can create short-term sentiment shifts but cannot overcome the overwhelming force of massive government deficit spending.
When government spending is massive ("fiscal dominance"), the Federal Reserve's ability to manage the economy via interest rates is neutralized. The government's deficit spending is so large that it dictates economic conditions, rendering rate cuts ineffective at solving structural problems.
The U.S. government's debt is so large that the Federal Reserve is trapped. Raising interest rates would trigger a government default, while cutting them would further inflate the 'everything bubble.' Either path leads to a systemic crisis, a situation economists call 'fiscal dominance.'
In periods of 'fiscal dominance,' where government debt and deficits are high, a central bank's independence inevitably erodes. Its primary function shifts from controlling inflation to ensuring the government can finance its spending, often through financial repression like yield curve control.
