Showing posts with label Philippine inflation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Philippine inflation. Show all posts

Sunday, November 8, 2026

Stagflation Part 19: Twin Deficits, a Third Inflation Wave, and the Bill for Free-Lunch Politics

 

deficit spending itself inhibits economic growth by causing the Federal Reserve to monetize the federal debt. The Fed lowering interest rates and increasing the money supply distorts the signal interest rates send to market actors. This distortion causes the boom-bust cycle that plagues the American economy—Ron Paul 

In this issue: 

Stagflation Part 19: Twin Deficits, a Third Inflation Wave, and the Bill for Free-Lunch Politics

I. One Imbalance, Two Record Deficits

II. The Debt That Slowed

III. The Export Boom That Imports Itself

IV. The Financial Repression Behind the Free-Lunch Politics

V. Three Markets, One Signal

VI. October: The Third Wave of the Inflation Cycle Affirmed

VII. Interventions Beget Interventions: From Minimum Wages to Struggling Labor Conditions

VIII. The Peso Rally is a Loan, Not a Fix

IX. Conclusion: The Bill Arrives 


Stagflation Part 19: Twin Deficits, a Third Inflation Wave, and the Bill for Free-Lunch Politics 

Record deficits, a peso under siege, a banking system steering credit to the favored, and 7.8% inflation. Free-lunch politics wrote the check. The economy is paying it. 

I. One Imbalance, Two Record Deficits 

A country can consume beyond what it produces, but only by drawing on savings, borrowing from abroad, or running down existing resources. Free-lunch (social democratic) politics makes this imbalance politically attractive: subsidies, welfare spending, price controls, transfers, public works, regulatory mandates such as minimum wages, and deficit spending deliver immediate benefits while postponing the costs. The political rewards are immediate; the economic bill arrives later. 


Figure 1

The nine-month fiscal deficit reached a record Php 1.303 trillion, with Q3 alone registering an unprecedented Php 516.4 billion. (Figure 1, topmost and middle windows) 

The nine-month merchandise trade deficit also reached a record $47.158 billion, exceeding the previous 2022 record of $46.207 billion. 

Both deficits are now at record levels. The coincidence is not the argument; the underlying savings-investment imbalance is. 

But the deeper imbalance lies between national saving and domestic investment. 

Government deficits reduce public saving. Unless private saving rises sufficiently to compensate, national saving falls relative to domestic investment. The resulting savings-investment gap must be financed from abroad. This is the underlying connection between the fiscal imbalance and the external imbalance: the economy is absorbing more resources than its national saving can finance. 

The merchandise trade gap is only one side of the external imbalance. Remittances and services offset part of the deficit, but not enough to eliminate the external financing pressure. The current-account balance captures the broader relationship between national saving and investment, while the balance-of-payments (BoP) position, examined in Section VII, reveals the resulting external financing pressures. 

Part 17 documented eight months of twin deficits. One month later, both had widened. The imbalance was no longer merely persistent. It was growing. 

II. The Debt That Slowed 

September's national debt hit a record Php 19.66 trillion, but increased by only Php 53.46 billion during the month. That looks oddly restrained alongside a record Q3 fiscal deficit of Php 516.4 billion. The apparent disconnect deserves closer examination. (Figure 1, lower image) 

The slower monthly increase should not obscure the cumulative borrowing. National debt had increased by Php 1.952 trillion over the first nine months, the second-largest increase since 2021's Php 2.122 trillion. The nine-month fiscal deficit of Php 1.303 trillion was also 14.4% higher than the comparable Php 1.139 trillion figure. Even so, September's debt stock remained slightly below the Development Budget Coordination Committee's (DBCC) Php 19.77 trillion full-year 2026 target. 

A deficit is a flow; debt is a stock. How much of the deficit translates into additional reported debt, and when, depends on the financing mix, cash balances, debt repayments, and valuation adjustments. A smaller monthly increase in debt after a record quarterly deficit is not evidence of fiscal consolidation. It raises a more important question: where did the financing go, and through which channels was the government's borrowing absorbed? 

One place to look is the banking system. Net claims on central government (NCoCG) have been rising for years, reaching a historic Php 6.499 trillion in September, according to BSP data. This growing exposure matters because government financing does not take place in isolation from the rest of the financial system. Banks' expanding claims on government reflect the increasing absorption of financial resources by the sovereign.


Figure 2

Nor is this exposure confined to banks. In Q2 2026, net claims on central government held by other financial corporations (OFC) reached a record Php 3.18 trillion. BSP holdings stood at Php 491 billion, while banks held Php 6.339 trillion. (Figure 2, topmost pane) 

Combined, these positions totaled Php 10.012 trillion. This represented roughly 78% of the Php 12.84 trillion domestic debt stock. The broader point is that sovereign financing increasingly draws on financial resources held across the domestic financial system. 

This brings us to crowding out. As government borrowing competes with private borrowers—mostly elite owned corporations and banks—for domestic savings, it can push up borrowing costs, restrict private-sector access to credit, and divert financial resources from private investment toward government financing. The consequence extends beyond the immediate cost of borrowing: resources absorbed by the sovereign are resources that may otherwise have financed business expansion, productive investment, and capital formation. The government finances present spending demands while potentially constraining the productive capacity needed to support future growth. 

Financial repression can intensify this displacement. When political arrangements channeled through regulatory and monetary policies are redirected to favor sovereign financing or privileged borrowers, credit allocation becomes distorted. The issue is no longer simply how much the government borrows, but how institutional arrangements influence who gets access to credit, at what cost, and at whose expense. 

This concentration of financial-sector claims on the sovereign also creates the conditions for a sovereign-bank feedback loop. 

As financial institutions accumulate government exposure, their balance sheets become deeply intertwined with the government's fiscal position. 

As such, any deterioration in sovereign creditworthiness can transmit stress to financial institutions, potentially restricting private credit and increasing pressure for public support. Such support can further weaken public finances, reinforcing the original fiscal problem. The danger is not that this loop has necessarily reached its terminal stage, but that institutional arrangements are making the financial system have become chronically dependent on sovereign stability. 

Fiscal absorption, crowding out, and financial repression can therefore reinforce one another. The sovereign absorbs financial resources, institutional arrangements privilege its financing, and private capital formation becomes the residual claimant. 

The establishment blames peso depreciation for the record debt. That confuses an accounting consequence with the underlying economic problem. 

True, a weaker peso increases the domestic-currency value of foreign-currency-denominated debt, adding to the reported debt stock. But depreciation is a product of deeper external pressures, including the foreign-exchange demand generated by persistent financing requirements, capital-flow dynamics, and deteriorating confidence. Currency weakness is therefore not merely an accounting explanation of the debt problem. It is a symptom of the broader macroeconomic imbalance. 

III. The Export Boom That Imports Itself 

Philippine exports hit a record $9.87 billion in September, up 35.6% year on year. Electronics accounted for $6.92 billion, or 70.1% of total exports. Semiconductor exports likewise registered record year-on-year growth and a record share of total exports. (Figure 2, middle diagram) 

Much of this expansion rides the global AI boom, which has fueled demand for semiconductors, memory chips, and computing infrastructure. The Philippines is benefiting from this external investment cycle, but the concentration of export growth in electronics also exposes the economy to its reversals. 

But electronics were also the country's largest import category, at $5.80 billion, or 38.6% of total imports. The PSA's September tables show electronic exports increasing by $2.894 billion, against a $2.704 billion increase in electronic imports. (Figure 2, lowest tables) 

The export boom brings a substantial import bill with it. The relatively narrow difference between these incremental gross trade flows also underscores the importance of imported inputs in sustaining export expansion, although it should not be mistaken for a measure of domestic value added. 

The crux is: the concentration also creates and fosters vulnerability. If the AI investment cycle reverses, semiconductor orders and export momentum could drastically weaken. 

The current global technology selloff makes that risk harder to dismiss. 


Figure 3
 

Meanwhile, consumer goods imports fell 4.25%, suggesting weaker household demand. Manufacturing's S&P PMI fell to 49.1 in October, its second consecutive month of contraction, with output, new orders, and employment all declining. (Figure 3, topmost visual) 

Exports are booming while domestic manufacturing contracts. The economy is riding an externally driven technology boom while its broader domestic production base shows signs of weakness. 

IV. The Financial Repression Behind the Free-Lunch Politics 

The government's financing requirements do not operate independently of the private economy. Financial repression extends crowding out beyond competition for savings. Through captive savings, directed credit, regulatory accommodation, and suppressed financing costs, financial arrangements can steer resources toward government and politically favored borrowers. 

Bank lending grew 11.4% in September, while M3 expanded 9.3% to Php 20.7 trillion. Slower money growth does not mean monetary contraction. M3 is still expanding on an already enlarged base, adding to the outstanding stock of money. 

Bank lending is also a channel of money creation. When commercial banks extend loans, they generally create matching deposit liabilities, expanding deposit money in the economy. Loan repayments, conversely, extinguish deposit money. The resulting purchasing power does not enter every sector equally; it flows through the credit allocation decisions of banks and the institutional arrangements shaping those decisions. The issue is therefore not simply how much money and credit are created, but where the newly created purchasing power goes. 

Electricity, water supply, and transportation and storage continued to register strong credit growth, while household borrowing continues to weaken.(Figure 3, middle chart)  Credit expansion was therefore far from uniform. 

This sectoral concentration becomes more interesting when viewed against the institutional landscape. Electricity and transport are not simply market sectors operating independently of political decisions. Their economics are heavily shaped by regulatory decisions, concessions, pricing arrangements, public policy, and government intervention. 

From power-sector tax relief and corporate deals (e.g., SMC-AEV-MER, Prime Infra-FGEN) to renewable-energy payment arrangements (discussed last year) and transport fare adjustments, political decisions influence the distribution of costs, revenues, and financial risks. The resulting credit expansion deserves examination not just as lending growth, but in terms of the activities and institutional arrangements it finances. 

Consumer lending continues to reveal sustained softening. Growth peaked at 25.63% in May 2024, reached another peak of 23.91% in August 2025, and then decelerated for 13 consecutive months to 16.17% in September 2026. Consumer credit is still expanding, but its growth impulse is weakening. (Figure 3, lowest image) 

The contrast exposes the uneven transmission of liquidity: aggregate credit continues to grow, but household credit is losing momentum while selected politically favored sectors maintain stronger expansion. 

Credit creation is not capital formation. A growing financial system does not automatically mean a growing productive economy. 

V. Three Markets, One Signal 

Emergency policies did not abolish adjustment. They displaced it. EO 110's price suppression, BSP relief measures, and the managed foreign-exchange regime shifted costs among government, corporate, bank, and household balance sheets. 

Those costs are now surfacing in three markets.


Figure 4

The peso repeatedly set new lows, breaking Php 64 to the dollar at the end of October.

BVAL Treasury yields across the 1-to-25-year curve climbed to multi-year highs.

Meanwhile, the PSEi remained within a managed range even as market breadth narrowed. (Figure 4, topmost and middle diagrams) 

The signals differ, but point toward the same underlying pressure: the growing cost of sustaining an economy whose imbalances remain unresolved. 

The BSP raised its policy rate by 50 basis points to 5.5%, an increase described by the media as ‘jumbo’ or ‘aggressive’. Yet with headline inflation at 7.8%, the policy rate remained deeply negative in real terms, at approximately -2.3%. 

The 2022–2023 experience offers a revealing precedent. Despite 350 basis points of rate increases between July 2022 and February 2023, lending growth slowed to 6.65% by September 2023, while M3 growth remained around 6–8%. Lending subsequently resumed its upward trajectory. Higher rates slowed credit expansion but did not reverse the underlying monetary and credit dynamics. (Figure 4, lowest graph) 

Higher interest rates cannot manufacture electricity, fuel, food, or productive capacity. They raise financing costs precisely when manufacturing demand and household credit momentum are weakening. 

The BSP was already behind the inflation curve in 2023. The same question confronts it now: does monetary tightening lead price adjustment, or merely follow it? A central bank reacting to already-established price movements can raise the price of credit, but it cannot retroactively create the goods whose scarcity helped drive inflation. 

The price of credit moved. The supply constraints did not. 

VI. October: The Third Wave of the Inflation Cycle Affirmed 

The monetary expansion examined earlier provides the financial backdrop to this inflation wave. Deficit spending sustains nominal demand, while the twin deficits and peso depreciation raise the domestic cost of imported goods and production inputs. The 2026 oil shock compounds these existing pressures.


Figure 5

October headline inflation reached 7.8%, the highest since February 2023, against just 1.7% a year earlier. Core inflation climbed to 5.4%, its fastest since September 2023, while inflation for the bottom 30% of households reached 9.5%. (Figure 5, topmost chart) 

Transport inflation surged to 20.1%, and rice inflation reached 20.7%, despite the price cap. (Figure 5, middle and lowest graphs) 

The oil shock lit the fuse; accumulated monetary expansion and continued credit creation provided the conditions for broader price pressures to persist. This is no longer simply an energy-price disturbance. The rise in core inflation points to a wider deterioration in purchasing power, extending beyond the immediate effects of higher fuel and food prices. 

The third wave has already surpassed the first wave's 6.7% peak in 2018 and stands just 0.9 percentage points below the second wave's 8.7% peak in January 2023. 

And 7.8% is not the entirety of the household experience. CPI tracks the prices of a defined basket, but cannot fully capture every deterioration in product quantity, quality, or value and even stealth charges. 

Shrinkflation, skimpflation, and sneakflation can erode purchasing power beyond what headline inflation communicates. Nor does the official index necessarily capture unrecorded transactions in informal and black markets. As an aside, authorities deny shrinkflation on some of commodities. 

Here is the thing: the problem extends beyond measurement. 

Official statistics influence monetary policy, government financing costs, indexed liabilities, wage adjustments, and collateral valuations. Governments therefore have powerful incentives to influence not only inflation itself, but also how inflation is measured, represented, and communicated. 

Benchmarkism is not merely about the numbers published nor the market’s headline output, it concerns the institutional incentives surrounding numerical representation and the economic decisions anchored to those benchmarks. Lower reported inflation can ease pressure on interest rates, government financing costs, and collateral valuations. 

Governments therefore have incentives to influence or even ‘manage’ not only economic and market outcomes, but also how those outcomes are measured and communicated. Argentina's statistical manipulation under the Kirchners illustrates that these incentives are not merely theoretical. 

We have been warning about this trajectory for years. 

In 2023, we argued that the slowdown in the second inflation wave would be a transition toward a more potent third wave, anchored in deficit spending and the BSP's priority of maintaining ample liquidity. 

"And yes, we may be seeing peak inflation for this second wave.  The first wave was in 2015-2018.  The cracks in bank lending have emerged while Treasury markets exhibit a sharp tightening.   

Furthermore, both banks and the BSP have scaled down their liquidity interventions.  The BSP has reversed most of the December injections.   

But the coming CPI slowdown may be a transition to a more potent third wave—all of which will be anchored on the path dependency politics of deficit spending by the executive branch and the priority of maintaining and expanding liquidity by the BSP. (Prudent Investor, 2023)" 

In 2025, before the infrastructure scandal and the 2026 oil shock, we warned of a fiscal shock and its stagflationary consequences. 

"As fiscal risks mount, so too does the potential for cross-sectoral contagion and cascading effects. The banking system—already struggling with liquidity depletion—faces heightened exposure due to its expanding claims on sovereign securities (implicit quantitative easing). 

Again, though partially obscured, stagflationary pressures, deteriorating credit quality, and rising funding costs may converge, amplifying broader macro-financial instability. 

In short, the fiscal storm is no longer a distant threat—it is approaching fast, and its first casualties may already be visible in the cracks forming across the financial system. " 

The third wave is no longer a forecast. It is showing up in the price data. 

VII. Interventions Beget Interventions: From Minimum Wages to Struggling Labor Conditions 

Price suppression postpones price adjustment. Subsidies shift the burden. Cheap credit props up claims, while currency defense consumes reserves. Each intervention creates pressures that invite another intervention. The adjustment is displaced, not eliminated. 

Western Visayas is the latest example. A Php 40–45 daily minimum-wage increase takes effect on November 19, following increases in Central Visayas and NCR. It cannot explain October's inflation, which has already been recorded. But it adds another cost to firms already facing dearer inputs, weaker orders, and tighter financing. Wages can be raised by decree; productivity cannot. Businesses absorb the difference through thinner margins, higher prices, reduced investment, or fewer jobs. Consumers ultimately pay part of the bill.


Figure 6

September's labor data reveal the deterioration beneath the employment headlines. (Figure 6, upper image) 

The labor force expanded by 629,000 month on month (MoM) to 53.19 million, but employment increased by only 543,000, while unemployment rose by 96,000 to 2.86 million. The employment rate slipped from 94.7% to 94.6%, while unemployment increased from 5.3% to 5.4%. Year on year, unemployment surged from 1.96 million to 2.86 million, and the employment rate fell from 96.2% to 94.6%. 

Part-time employment, despite retreating in September, has also followed a rising trend since January. (Figure 6, lowest graph) 

Fishing presents another revealing contradiction. Employment expanded by 303,000 in the quarterly comparison, while fisheries production value contracted 8.5% to Php 50.86 billion in Q3. Labor is entering an activity whose economic output is declining. This raises a more important question than the employment headcount: are labor and financial resources being sustained in activities that cannot generate adequate returns? 

These developments expose the deeper problem of capital allocation. Government can sustain economic activity through subsidies, transfers, and credit accommodation, but sustaining activity is not the same as generating wealth. Real savings finance productive investment; productive investment expands the capital base and creates sustainable employment via productivity. 

Hiring depends on expected profitability, precisely what stagflation undermines. Inflation erodes household purchasing power and real savings, while higher financing and operating costs raise the hurdle every new project must clear. Firms facing weaker demand and rising costs postpone investment and hiring. Add minimum wages to this pressure. 

The labor market is not simply adding workers; it is revealing the economy's declining capacity to absorb them productively. 

Employment headcounts cannot substitute for capital formation, and government-supported activity cannot substitute for wealth creation. 

VIII. The Peso Rally is a Loan, Not a Fix 

In response to the peso's record Php 64.17 close on October 27, President Marcos urged Filipinos not to panic. The peso subsequently returned to the Php 63 range, closing the week at Php 63.055. But the exchange-rate rally does not change the underlying balance sheet.


Figure 7

The September balance-of-payments deficit (BoP) reached $3.144 billion, bringing the cumulative January–September deficit to a record $9.087 billion, almost the BSP's entire $9.2 billion full-year projection. (Figure 7, upper chart) 

Meanwhile, Gross international reserves (GIR) fell further from $99.494 billion in September to $97.350 billion in October, a decline of $2.143 billion and a three-year low. (Figure 7, lowest visual) 

The record external deficit echoes the domestic financing imbalance examined earlier: net claims on central government have reached historic highs, reflecting the growing absorption of financial resources by the sovereign. 

A currency rally does not erase a record external financing deficit or replenish depleted reserves. The peso may recover temporarily, but the demand for dollars generated by the underlying imbalance remains. 

Defending the peso has costs. The BSP can supply dollars from reserves, but that depletes its external buffer. It can rely on foreign borrowing, but that adds liabilities. Foreign-exchange swaps and derivatives can provide temporary liquidity, but creates future obligations. The latter two adds to the “dollar shorts.” 

Alternatively, genuine monetary tightening would attack the debt financed savings-investment imbalance by withdrawing the liquidity that sustains excessive domestic absorption and demand for foreign currency. 

But this is where the debt trap becomes apparent. In an economy dependent on deficit spending, cheap credit, and continued liquidity to sustain politically protected claims, genuine monetary tightening would expose the accumulated malinvestments and debt dependency. Higher financing costs and shrinking liquidity would undermine debt servicing, force spending and investment contractions, and trigger recession or financial crisis. 

This is precisely why free-lunch politics resists genuine monetary restraint: it would expose the savings-investment gap that continued intervention has concealed. Yet postponing adjustment through further borrowing and monetary accommodation only deepens the dependency and increases the eventual cost. 

The country cannot indefinitely defend its currency while ignoring the fiscal, monetary, and external forces generating the demand for dollars. 

A peso rally can buy time. It cannot buy an external adjustment. 

IX. Conclusion: The Bill Arrives 

The third inflation wave is not an isolated statistical event. It is the cumulative outcome of fiscal expansion, monetary accommodation, financial repression, and the suppression of economic price signals. 

The oil shock intensified the process. The corruption scandal exposed its political costs. Neither created the underlying vulnerability. 

We warned of the fiscal shock before either event. 

The bill has arrived. The question is no longer whether the economy must adjust, but how much more real savings, purchasing power, and productive capacity will be sacrificed in the attempt to postpone that adjustment. 


 

References: 

Stagflation Part 17: Eight Months of Twin Deficits, Record Debt, and the Bill for Deferred Adjustment, October 4, 2026 

Predictions on 

Fiscal shock… 

Liquidity Under Pressure: Philippine Banks Struggle in Q1 2025 Amid a Looming Fiscal Storm, May 18, 2025 

Third wave of the inflation cycle…

Philippine Core CPI Forged a New 22-year High! Signs of Peak 2nd Wave Inflation: Pullback in Bank Lending and BSP Injections, March 12, 2023


Sunday, September 13, 2026

Stagflation Part 16: The Peso's 24th Record Low — When the Pressure Valve Widens

  

Modern democracy and bureaucracy progressively separate decision-makers from the costs and feedback generated by their decisions. Democracy separates voters from decisive responsibility, bureaucracy separates administrators from profit and loss, inflation separates spending from visible taxation, transferism separates consumption from production, and media and intellectuals separate narratives from empirical accountability. All this tends toward and encourages living in unreality which might be called mental moral hazard—Joshua Mawhorter 

In this issue: 

Stagflation Part 16: The Peso's 24th Record Low — When the Pressure Valve Widens

I. The Peso is Not Falling, It is Clearing

II. The Peso’s Travails Didn't Start Last Week

III. It Isn't the Dollar: The Peso Is Losing Ground to Frontier-Market Currencies

IV. The Peso’s Gold Test

V. The Soft Peg BSP Denies

VI. What the GIR Data Actually Shows

VII. The Central Argument: This Is a Savings-Investment Gap, Not an Oil Shock

VIII. Eight Barometers of the Savings-Investment Gap

IX. The Strawman Defense

X. Conclusion: The Pressure Valve, Again 

Stagflation Part 16: The Peso's 24th Record Low — When the Pressure Valve Widens 

Even against Cambodia and Laos, the Philippine peso keeps falling—revealing an internal imbalance that dollar strength cannot explain 

I. The Peso is Not Falling, It is Clearing 

The USDPHP closed Friday at a record 62.68, its 24th record low of 2026, 21 of them since the Middle East war began. The pair was up a modest 0.14% week-on-week, pushing YTD depreciation to 6.62%. 

A single record is noise. Twenty-four in one year, overwhelmingly clustered inside a nine-month war window, is a pattern requiring a causal explanation. 

The question is not “why did the dollar rise Friday?” That question is designed to be unanswerable in a way that absolves policy. The question is why the peso, of all regional currencies facing the same war, the same oil shock, the same Fed, keeps landing at the bottom of the pile. 

II. The Peso’s Travails Didn't Start Last Week 

The 2:1 USDPHP peg was not a natural state of affairs. It was written into law by the 1946 Bell Trade Act, a condition the United States attached to $800 million in postwar rebuilding assistance. 

It survived, more or less intact, for over a decade, until the arithmetic of an overvalued peso—visible in a thriving dollar black market and chronic current-account strain—forced a retreat. 

Formal decontrol began in April 1960, when the Central Bank introduced a multi-tier exchange system under Circular 105. The official Php 2 rate held for some transactions while a Central-Bank-managed “free-market” rate, initially Php 3.20, applied to others. Further adjustments followed through 1961. 

In January 1962, President Diosdado Macapagal substantially lifted the remaining controls, and the peso lost roughly half its value, settling near Php 3.90. 

The formal unification came almost four years later. Executive Order No. 195, signed November 6, 1965, fixed the new par value at $0.2564103 per peso—approximately Php 3.90/$1. 

From that Php 2 starting parity to Friday's Php 62.68, the peso has lost more than 97% of its dollar value over six decades. 

That is the scale against which any single week's move should be read. 

Since that 1962-65 transition, and treating the currency the way Nassim Taleb's Lindy Effect heuristic treats any long-surviving process—its continuation is the base case, not the exception—the USDPHP has been in a secular bull market. 

The pattern of countercyclical peso rallies recur:

  • January 1984–February 1985, after the 1983 debt crisis;
  • December 1990–August 1992;
  • September 1998–June 1999, after the Asian crisis;
  • December 2004–February 2008, after the dot-com bust;
  • August 2009–March 2013, after the Great Recession;
  • October 2018–June 2021;
  • October 2022–February 2023, during post-pandemic normalization. 

The mechanism connecting these episodes is not coincidence.


Figure 1 

The peso's sharpest depreciations coincide with technical stagflation—the 1983 debt crisis and 1997 Asian crisis combining recession, inflation, financial stress, and rising unemployment. (Figure 1, upper window) 

The milder depreciations track externally driven stagnation—the dot-com bust, Great Recession, and pandemic recession. 

In both cases, the currency functioned as a release valve, absorbing pressure the real economy could not otherwise clear immediately. 

What's different in 2026 is not the mechanism. It's how long and deep this leg runs. The current depreciation trend traces back to 2021 — five years and counting. History offers no fixed template for how these legs resolve: the 1983 debt-crisis depreciation ground on gradually for over a decade, into 1996; the 1997 Asian crisis spike took seven years to work through, into 2004. What decides the difference isn't the calendar. 

The crux of the matter is whether BSP has the resources left to keep smoothing the path in the face of the current degree of maladjustments. On that count, its position looks more strained now than at either prior turning point — which leaves two ways this can go: a sharp, disorderly snap once the smoothing capacity runs out, or a long, grinding decline like 1983-1996. Which one, we don't know yet. That it has to be one of the two is the point. 

III. It Isn't the Dollar: The Peso Is Losing Ground to Frontier-Market Currencies 

Officials and the financial press default to the same explanation for every leg down: dollar strength, Fed policy, a global phenomenon the Philippines merely inherits. 

That framing starts from the wrong end. It begins with a correlation—the dollar moved, so the peso moved—and searches backward for the most convenient cause rather than starting with the process generating the price. 

The right question isn't “why is the dollar strong.” It is what is generating persistent demand for dollars relative to pesos, specifically? 

The week of this record made the point cleanly. 

The US dollar index (DXY) was little changed week-on-week—another leg down against the yen even as oil and Treasury yields rose, but flat in aggregate as of September 11th. 

Asian FX was mixed: the dollar gained against six of ten regional currencies, itself little changed on net. USDPHP was the outlier at the other end—a record Friday close, its third straight Friday all-time high, achieved amid suppressed volatility. (Figure 1, lower image) 

If this were simply a dollar-strength or broad-EM story, the peso would be moving with the pack. 

Instead, on a week the dollar itself was directionless, USDPHP alone kept printing records. 

That makes the record a distinctly USDPHP story, not something adequately explained by Asian FX or dollar strength alone.

Figure 2

The same divergence holds over a longer window: the Singapore dollar, Malaysian ringgit, and Thai baht have all outperformed the peso; the Vietnamese dong has been strengthening against the peso since May 2026. (Figure 2)


Figure 3 

Even the Indonesian rupiah—conventionally the region's “weak” currency—has been rising against the peso since August 2026. 

More strikingly, the Philippine peso has been weakening against the Cambodian riel since 2021 and the Lao kip since 2024. (Figure 3) 

The peso is therefore not simply underperforming developed Asian currencies. It is losing ground even against ASEAN frontier-market currencies! Incredible! 

BusinessWorld/Bloomberg's September 7 reporting makes the same point: the peso has been left behind in Asia even as the region absorbs the same oil shock and dollar-reserve pressures.

The common external shock is real. 

It is simply not sufficient to explain the Philippine outcome. 

IV. The Peso’s Gold Test 

The same divergence appears against gold. 

The peso price of gold has risen from under Php 10,000 in 1993 to roughly over Php 270,000 today. (Figure 3) 

Gold is not a fixed-price numeraire, but its supply is not determined by Philippine monetary policy. A currency losing this much ground against a monetary asset over three decades cannot have that loss explained by short-term DXY movements. 

It is that the long-run loss of purchasing power is a different phenomenon from a temporary bout of dollar strength. 

The dollar may explain a move. 

It does not explain the trend. 

V. The Soft Peg BSP Denies 

BSP's official line is that it smooths volatility and does not defend specific levels. 

The historical ceiling data suggests something more complicated.


Figure 4 

USDPHP held a cap around 56.3 in 2004–05, around 59 from 2022 to 2025, and around 61.75 from May to July 2026. Three distinct ceilings, each eventually breached, each followed by a fresh, higher ceiling. (Figure 4, upper diagram) 

That is not the behavior of a completely hands-off float. 

It is the signature of a managed, adjustable peg that BSP declines to call by that name. The latest record streak reinforces the point: it has come on suppressed volume and suppressed volatility — the hallmark of intervention smoothing the path of depreciation, not an absence of intervention. (Figure 4, lower window) 

If pegs—even informal ones—contributed to the external-debt buildup that culminated in the 1997 Asian crisis, a managed exchange rate can reproduce part of that mechanism while buying more time before the adjustment. 

A peg (formal or de facto) subsidizes the peso side of the ledger: it lowers the effective cost of holding peso liabilities and raises the relative appeal of dollar borrowing, because it dampens the FX-risk premium borrowers would otherwise have to price in. 

That mispricing does two things simultaneously— it channels domestic policy toward being overused (rate hikes held back, liquidity kept loose, because the peg is doing part of the stabilizing work) or weakens its transmission signals and it builds up external leverage that isn't compensated by a correspondingly higher return on peso assets. 

The result is a widening stock of dollar-denominated exposure sitting on balance sheets that were never priced for the FX risk they actually carry — the same imbalance that later shows up as a "wall of maturities" and external debt (Section VII, below).         

Governor Eli Remolona Jr. made the constraint explicit when he said the central bank could not simply force the peso back below Php 60 without risking depletion of foreign-exchange reserves. 

That is not a statement about smoothing volatility. It is a statement about defending a level — phrased as a resource constraint ("we don't have the reserves to do it") rather than a policy choice, but a level-defense admission all the same. 

Read alongside the suppressed volume and volatility accompanying the current record streak, the honest description of where policy stands is a transition: from an explicit, defended soft-peg ceiling to a managed — but still intervention-smoothed — slide. 

BSP is no longer holding a line; it is choreographing the pace of its retreat. 

That sustained intervention is not incidental to the price-suppression architecture this series has documented elsewhere (EO 110, the CPI-suppression basket, the BSP regulatory-relief cascade) — it is another leg of the same scheme, aimed at averting a disorderly, stagflationary FX shock. 

But an intervention that prevents the immediate shock does not remove the underlying mismatch; it re-times it, and each re-timing layers on more of the external-leverage buildup and mispriced FX risk described above — a cost that must eventually clear through some balance sheet. 

This is the same seen/unseen distinction Bastiat used to unmask public spending: what's seen is the stable, orderly exchange rate — the thing officials point to as evidence policy is working. 

What's unseen is where the cost of holding that rate stable actually goes: depleted reserves, a growing stock of dollar liabilities on corporate and sovereign balance sheets, savers earning less on peso assets than the currency risk warrants. The peg's defenders only ever have to account for the seen half. 

VI. What the GIR Data Actually Shows 

BSP's Gross International Reserves history provides a second line of evidence for how the peso has been managed. 

Three developments stand out.


Figure 5

One. BSP sold gold reserves in 2020 and became the world's largest sovereign gold seller in the first half of 2024. The latter episode coincided with the period in which the peso was again weakening into new lows. (Figure 5, upper pane) 

Two. BSP also began leaning more heavily on Other Reserve Assets—repos and derivatives—from 2018 onward, coinciding with the October 2018–May 2021 peso rally. (Figure 5, lower chart)         

And three, the National Government’s foreign-currency deposits from fresh sovereign borrowing—the $2.5 billion eurobond, the $1 billion World Bank loan, and similar inflows—have repeatedly supported the headline GIR figure, including in the latest August release. 

These are not necessarily separate stories. 

They describe point to a crucial transition: as organic FX inflows — goods and services exports, FDI, tourism, remittances, portfolio flows — have weakened, BSP has complimented them with leverage (ORA positions and NG borrowing) and asset sales (gold). 

The distinction that matters here is between a stock and a flow. 

GIR is a stock — a balance-sheet snapshot that can be topped up through borrowing, derivatives positioning, or selling down an existing asset. 

Organic FX generation is a flow — the ongoing, self-renewing output of a productive economy. 

A rising stock built on borrowed or sold-down components says nothing about whether the underlying flow has improved; it can just as easily mean the flow has weakened badly enough that the stock had to be propped up to disguise it. 

The headline GIR number holds up. What holds it up has changed. 

The USDPHP has been rising on the back of an increasingly ‘short’ BSP dollar position dressed up as reserve strength — which is a materially different reserve-adequacy story than the one implied by simply citing months-of-import coverage. 

The latest GIR report, which rose from $103.3B in July to $104.8B in August, should be an example. The surge in gold prices delivered all of the gains plus some ($1.6B), offsetting decreases in its foreign holdings. 

The USDPHP is telling us which side of that balance sheet is doing the adjusting. 

It is revealing a deeper mismatch between the country's demand for foreign exchange and its capacity to generate it. 

VII. The Central Argument: This Is a Savings-Investment Gap, Not an Oil Shock 

Strip away the fuel‑subsidy and price‑suppression noise and the underlying mechanism is the one this series has tracked since Part 1: a deepening reliance on a Keynesian savings‑investment gap development model — spending‑led growth financed by debt rather than by real domestic savings — which politicizes and centralizes capital allocation, entrenches malinvestments, degrades productivity, discourages savings in favor of consumption, raises leverage across every balance sheet it touches, and relies on financial repression as part of capital consumption. 

EO 110's price-suppression architecture, BSP's cascade of regulatory and capital reliefs, the FX policies via NDF warnings, the 61.75 soft-peg ceiling, and a run of timid rate hikes are not independent policy choices. They are the same mechanism applied to five different transmission points at once — each one deferring an adjustment rather than making it. 

The distinction that makes this more than a Keynesian-labeling exercise is between statistical savings and real savings. 

The national-accounts savings rate is a residual of GDP accounting — spending minus consumption, whatever that arithmetic yields. It says nothing about whether the economy has actually set aside real resources — goods, capital, productive capacity — for future production. 

Production is what generates the purchasing power to sustain demand in the first place; debt‑financed spending can inflate the accounting residual — through money illusion — without creating a single additional unit of real resource behind it. 

When spending outruns what the economy has genuinely saved, the gap between the two doesn't disappear. 

It has to surface somewhere — and currently it is surfacing across fiscal deficits, trade deficits, leverage, liquidity, weak investment, and currency depreciation simultaneously, because these aren't eight separate problems. They are eight readings of the same shortfall. 

VIII. Eight Barometers of the Savings-Investment Gap 

The evidence, current as of the most recent data:


Figure 6

One. Fiscal and trade deficits. Seven-month/YTD fiscal deficit (Php 893.1 billion) and trade deficit ($37.338 billion) both at records; public debt at an all-time high Php 19.389 trillion and at the second-highest YTD accumulation since 2022, against the DBCC's full-year targets (deficit Php 1.658 trillion, debt Php 19.765 trillion) (Figure 6, top and middle panes) 

Two. BOP structurally deteriorating. The Balance of Payments peaked in Q4 2020 — itself a pandemic-era anomaly — and has trended toward deficit since 2011. The long trend line, not the 2020 spike, is the relevant baseline. (Figure 6, bottom chart)



Figure 7

Three. August CPI’s marginal decline to 6.1% conceals more than it reveals. Beyond the balance-sheet transfers, price suppression, and the FX peg already discussed, headline CPI is further distorted by money illusion and by sneakflation, skimpflation, and shrinkflation — quantity and quality as well as benefit reductions and stealth fees dressed up as stable prices. 

The bottom-30% income group absorbs a disproportionate share of the real adjustment CPI barely captures. For instance, the food CPI spread between the bottom 30% and the headline index surged to its highest level since at least 2022 — suggesting a lower standard of living, particularly for the lower class and the poor, while also exerting pressure on the middle class. (Figure 7, topmost graph) 

Four. Rising global food prices. The Bloomberg Agriculture Spot Index recently posted its largest monthly jump since the Arab Spring food-crisis era, and the FAO Food Price Index is at its highest since 2022, amid mounting supply risk. (Figure 7, middle image) 

Because the Philippines imports a large share of its food requirements, this is a direct transmission channel into both the trade deficit and domestic food inflation — not a coincidental overlay. July's agricultural trade deficit of $1.192 billion, the second-highest on record, is the balance-of-payments face of the same pressure. (Figure 7, lowest visual)


Figure 8

Five. Liquidity growth outrunning nominal GDP. Money supply M-series liquidity growth had eased slightly by July but remains in double digits — still outpacing nominal GDP growth, even before the Iran oil shock is layered on top. Excess liquidity is the primary driver of rising general prices; supply bottlenecks compound rather than originate the pressure, and the peso absorbs the resulting imbalance through the same feedback loop described above. (Figure 8, topmost window) 

This is where the exchange rate stops being a passive readout: loose liquidity feeds import demand and price pressure, which weakens the peso, which raises import costs, which policy then responds to with more intervention — and that intervention itself becomes a new input into the fundamentals it was meant to merely observe. The political regime isn't managing an external process from outside it; it is the process — the essence of the imbalance, not an observer of it. 

Six. Labor market deterioration. July’s unemployed population rose to a post‑pandemic‑era high (February 2022/December 2021) as participation rates slow — a labor‑market crack surfacing despite a price‑suppression regime that delivered 2.3% Q2 GDP and 2.6% first‑half GDP. Growth this administered should not be producing rising joblessness. That it is tells you the suppression is masking weakness, not curing it. (Figure 8, second to the highest image) 

The NCR hike is only the most recent installment in a running series of national minimum-wage increases, and the mechanism here isn't limited to weakening savings. A wage floor set above what productivity in the affected sectors can support functions as a regulatory tax on capital — it raises the cost of employing labor without a matching gain in output, and employers absorb that through slower hiring, automation, or informalization instead. That compounds the savings-investment gap from a second direction: capital gets penalized directly, and the standard of living falls for the workers the policy was meant to protect, not just for savers holding depreciating peso assets. 

Seven. Wall of Maturities (Corporate FX Debt). BSP’s own 2025 Financial Stability Report flags “sizable foreign‑currency exposures, with US dollar‑denominated debt averaging 37.6% of conglomerate debt” over the coming five years. That is precisely the external‑leverage buildup the soft‑peg mechanism in Section III predicts. Vista Land’s proposed sale of two non‑core malls is an early, visible symptom of the liquidity and solvency strain this exposure is starting to produce — not an isolated corporate decision. 

Eight. External Debt Pressures (Macro Leverage). The external debt stock rose to $154.9 billion as of June 2026, the highest on record, up from $147.4 billion a year earlier— and now roughly 48% larger than the $104.7 billion GIR that's supposed to be the country's reserve cushion against exactly this kind of external exposure. (Figure 8, second to the lowest pane) 

Yet, the composition matters more than the headline: medium‑ and long‑term borrowings dominate ($134.3B), and the public sector alone accounts for $92.8B — showing that the national government has become the primary driver of external leverage. Private corporates and banks are crowded into the same FX pool, but it is sovereign borrowing that now sets the tone. (Figure 8, lowest graph) 

Bondholders and multilaterals are the largest creditors — $49.2B owed to bond markets, $43.2B to multilaterals — underscoring dependence on volatile capital markets and crisis‑era financing that has quietly become structural. 

What looks like financing is in fact capital consumption: debt service ratios rise, GIR adequacy is flattered by borrowed inflows, and the peso’s weakness is the balance‑sheet readout of a system living on external leverage. 

The corporate wall of maturities (#7) and the sovereign external-debt buildup (#8) aren't separate problems — one is the micro expression of the same mechanism the other expresses at the macro level. Organic savings and FX generation have slowed, so the system substitutes debt. Leveraging doesn't create new resources. It only layers fragility across every balance sheet it touches. 

Every one of these data points is downstream of the same root cause: organic revenue generation has been slowing while the system crowds out savings, tightens the competition for what capital remains, and accumulates malinvestment and balance-sheet mismatches that a suppressed exchange rate and a suppressed CPI print cannot make disappear — only relocate. 

Notice the pattern that recurs across three separate statistics in this piece: CPI, GDP, and GIR. In each case, the headline number can improve — or hold steady — while the underlying capacity it's supposed to represent does not. 

  • CPI doesn't capture sneakflation, shrinkflation and skimpflation; 
  • GDP doesn't distinguish debt-financed spending from genuine productive capacity; 
  • GIR doesn't distinguish organic FX flow from borrowed or sold-down stock. 

The representation starts standing in for the reality it's supposed to describe, and policy gets evaluated against the representation instead. That substitution is not an accident of measurement. It is what makes price suppression look like it's working, right up until the exchange rate — the one price left that's hardest to fully administer — starts printing the difference. 

None of this is likely to unwind on its own. Interventions introduced as temporary crisis responses have a well-documented tendency to become permanent features of the policy landscape once the crisis passes: price controls become policy, regulatory relief becomes precedent, liquidity support becomes an expectation, and FX intervention becomes simply how the market is understood to operate. Each of the mechanisms catalogued above — EO 110, the BSP relief cascade, the soft-peg ceilings, the ORA-and-borrowing-propped reserves — was introduced to manage a specific, bounded stress. 

None of them shows signs of being unwound now that the stress has evolved into something more chronic. That is how a set of emergency measures quietly becomes the baseline the economy is now structurally dependent on. 

IX. The Strawman Defense 

When asked directly, the administration doesn't deny the peso's weakness is connected to spending. It reframes the causality. Malacañang's response to the peso's earlier close at Php 62.56 was that the government remains focused on "fiscal discipline and more efficient use of public funds" — a line issued the day after that record close — conceding the timing, not the mechanism, and substituting an efficiency claim for the deficit and debt figures documented above. 

Other coverage leans on imported inflation and self-attribution bias — as if the oil shock explains the weakness on its own, rather than exposing a structural vulnerability that was already there. Trickle-down and imported-inflation framings both mislead in the same direction: they treat symptoms of the savings-investment gap as if they were independent, external causes. The oil shock didn't create the vulnerability. It exposed the belly that was already soft.

X. Conclusion: The Pressure Valve, Again 

None of this is new in kind — only in scale and duration. 

The peso has always functioned as the pressure-release valve absorbing the strains the rest of the system won't adjust to directly. What officials present as monitoring, smoothing, and prudent reserve management is, read against the reserve composition, the ceiling history, and the twin-deficit trajectory, a policy of financing today's imbalances with tomorrow's leverage. 

The 24th record of the year won't be the last. 

The relevant question for readers isn't when the next one comes. It's what balance sheet — household, corporate, or sovereign — absorbs the difference when the leverage funding this "stability" runs out of room. 

The peso isn't creating the imbalance. It is clearing it. 

The record USDPHP is not merely a currency story. It is the stagflation story — priced in pesos.

___ 

Last three stagflation series: 

Stagflation Part 15: The PSEi 30 1H 2026 Earnings Mirage — Nominal Growth, Record Debt, Real Stagnation, August 30, 2026 

Stagflation Part 14: Q2 GDP at 2.3% and Falling — A GDP Built on Suppression and Debt, August 9, 2026 

Stagflation Part 13: Record Twin Deficits Signal the Cost of Deferred Adjustment, August 2, 2026



PSEi 5,761: The Rotational Pump: When the Index Rises and the Market Doesn’t

  Central banks can, and do, intervene to prop up stock markets and failing institutions. In 2008, the government rescued or supported AIG, ...