The United States’ top credit rating was on Tuesday downgraded by rating agency Fitch, stirring a ripple across markets and instigating circumspection response from investors.

Fitch downgraded the US credit rating from AAA to AA+, two months after the government resolved the debt ceiling. The rating agency cited anticipated fiscal decline over the next three years and recurring last-minute debt ceiling negotiations that jeopardize the government’s capacity to meet its financial obligations.

Credit ratings serve as a tool for investors to evaluate the risk level associated with companies and governments when they seek funding in the debt capital markets. Typically, the lower a borrower’s rating, the greater their borrowing expenses tend to be.

The White House has expressed disappointment over the rating, saying it “strongly disagrees with this decision”.

“It defies reality to downgrade the United States at a moment when President Biden has delivered the strongest recovery of any major economy in the world,” said White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre.

In a statement, U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen expressed her disagreement with Fitch’s downgrade, the second major credit rating agency to lower the United States’ triple-A credit rating after Standard & Poor. Yellen called the downgrade “unjustified and founded on outdated information.”

The downgrade is believed to be a repercussion of incessant faceoffs between Republican lawmakers and President Joe Biden reaching a debt ceiling agreement. The last agreement in June, which lifted the government’s $31.4 trillion borrowing limit, was reached following months of political brinkmanship.

Fitch said repeated political standoffs and last-minute resolutions over the debt limit have eroded confidence in fiscal management.

“In Fitch’s view, there has been a steady deterioration in standards of governance over the last 20 years, including on fiscal and debt matters, notwithstanding the June bipartisan agreement to suspend the debt limit until January 2025,” the rating agency said in a statement.

Fitch initially raised concerns about a potential downgrade in May, and despite the resolution of the debt ceiling crisis in June, it reaffirmed this stance. The agency indicated its intention to conclude the review during the third quarter of this year.

In the immediate aftermath of the downgrade, traders have responded by shifting towards safe-haven assets, moving away from stocks, and redirecting their investments into government bonds and the dollar.

Some analysts quoted by Reuters agreed with Fitch that the continuous standoffs over the debt ceiling have constituted a problem for the US credit rating, while others find fault with the timing.

“This basically tells you the U.S. government’s spending is a problem,” said Steven Ricchiuto, U.S. chief economist at Mizuho Securities USA.

“I don’t understand how they (Fitch) have worse information now than before the debt ceiling crisis was resolved,” said Wendy Edelberg, director of The Hamilton Project At The Brookings Institution in Washington D.C.

According to Michael Schulman, chief investment officer at Running Point Capital Advisors, the “U.S. overall will be seen as strong but I think it’s a little chink in our armor.”

“It is a dent against the U.S. reputation and standing,” he said.

Fitch Ratings has cut the U.S.’ long-term credit rating from AAA to AA+, citing “an erosion of governance” over the past 20 years and recurring debt limit skirmishes as contributing factors in its decision. The agency additionally warns of an “expected fiscal deterioration over the next three years.” The move, though perplexing to some experts, comes after Fitch put the U.S. on negative watch in May during the most recent debt ceiling standoff, which was ultimately resolved. The downgrade puts the U.S. in the company of New Zealand and Canada, and below AAA countries, such as Denmark and Germany.

Fitch’s ratings, along with Moody’s and S&P’s, are “closely watched by market participants and economists around the world,” notes the Financial Times. The U.S. still has a AAA rating from Moody’s; S&P’s U.S. rating is AA+. (Linkedin News)

David Meek Jah dropped these lines from Sierra Leone: “What is happening to Nigeria and every other country is what we have said before. Virtually, all African countries are caught off guard by the challenges of the digital economy. We did not build the required infrastructure to thrive in it and the economists we have are not willing to gather new knowledge to play catch-up. Africa is growing so fast that its manual system cannot deal with the new challenges of a new context. We hope all African countries will wake up to this reality and build the required digital infrastructure to manage and thrive in a new context “

I agree with David. Why? As Nigeria is looking for foreign direct investment to cushion the scarcity of US dollars in the nation, the truth is that Nigeria is actually raising tons of money, via its startups. But there is a problem: that money is not making it to Nigerian banks via the Central Bank of Nigeria. What happens is that investors wire funds into US (or rarely British) bank accounts. Those millions of US dollars stay there, and are now imported into Nigeria, piece by piece, as needed.

As I noted in Boston University Law School, during a presentation there last year, that is the biggest risk Africa faces in fixing its broken economy. Yes, digital systems are masking (yes, masking) many components of market systems from the typical economic indicators. The CBN will not see any funds, even when startups have access to hundreds of millions warehoused outside the nation. In the past, that fund would have been in Nigeria. Not anymore because via the web, whether you have the funds in Lagos or New York, you are most likely going to operate the account using the web!

And of course, all these companies are foreign companies and pay taxes abroad even though they do all their activities in Africa. As that redesign scales, you are going to see a massive disintermediation at scale. I hinted that in a post why Nigeria needs to review for new global tax treaties if it wants to have an economic future.

In my readiness document – a document I prepared in case the call comes one day – I have 13 factors which digital tech has distorted, rebalancing the national economic planning equilibrium. Besides the warehousing of raised capital abroad, Nigeria has lost a generation on its stock exchange (the companies to anchor the next wealth). Indeed, most of the leading startups and fintech companies in Nigeria are due for public listing, if you follow what happened in early 1990s when the new generation banks began.

GTBank was born in 1990 and went public in 1996, implying that most of these big startups in Nigeria are overdue for public listing in Nigeria. But that will not happen because most are not legally Nigerian or African.

So, unless the government rethinks and begins to apply modern tools, it cannot understand what is happening. That lack of understanding is the reason we’re not pushing policies which are impactful across Africa. Some do not make sense when you look at what is happening.

So, unless the government rethinks and begins to apply modern tools, it cannot understand what is happening. Respectfully, Africa needs a generation of new leaders who can make sense of the emerging economic architectures. London, New York, etc have disintermediated our capacity to influence our future economies because of digital tech. If all the funds raised by Nigerian startups are kept in Nigerian banks, we will not have forex crises! (But do not quote me…lol)

Comment on Feed

Comment 1: Is it possible to have a requirement that for any start up that wants to operate in Nigeria, any seed fund or DFI raised for such start ups should be domiciled in Nigeria?

My Response: You cannot do that because it is a FREE market. You can only create a better environment to make it better and those founders will come to Nigeria. Money cannot be caged and great policies provide directions to money.

Comment 2: I don’t think that it is New York, London or other developed cities that have disintermediated Nigeria rather Nigerian government has been asleep for more than 8 years. The startup’s keep their capitals outside Nigeria because our justice system and our financial services regulators cannot be trusted. The fact remains that it is not too late for Nigeria or Africa to start playing catch up but do government officials know how far off the tangent the country is?

Comment 3: Insightful! We must also address the low traffic of indigenous investors who would rather invest in foreign-owned company rather than local start-ups. I can tell you there are plenty of African investors putting their money on foreign-based corporations. To reverse the trend, local investors should first, find the act of investing in home-grown enterprises, not only as a good business, but a patriotic move.

My Response: “I can tell you there are plenty of African investors putting their money on foreign-based corporations.” – Great point. It comes down to confidence in local governments.