The Philippine Q3 2025 “4.0% GDP Shock” That Wasn’t

 

There is enormous inertia — a tyranny of the status quo — in private and especially governmental arrangements. Only a crisis — actual or perceived — produces real change. When that crisis occurs, the actions that are taken depend on the ideas that are lying around. That, I believe, is our basic function: to develop alternatives to existing policies, to keep them alive and available until the politically impossible becomes politically inevitable—Milton Friedman  

In this issue

The Philippine Q3 2025 “4.0% GDP Shock” That Wasn’t

I. Q3 GDP Shock: A Collapse Few Saw Coming; The Loose Cauldron of Policy Support

II. Why Then the Surprise?

III. The Echo Chamber: Forecasting as Optimism Theater

IV. Statistics ≠ Economics: The Public’s Misguided Faith

V. Ground Truth: SEVN as a Proxy — Retail Reality vs. GDP Fiction

VI. The Consumer Slump is Structural, Not Episodic; Hunger as a Better Predictor; CPI Is Not the Whole Story

VII. So What Happened to Q3 GDP?

VIII. Household Per Capita: The Downtrend

IX. The Real Q3 2025 GDP Story: Consumer Slowdown

X. Government Spending Didn’t Collapse — It Held Up Amid Scandal; Public Construction Implosion

XI. External Sector: Trump Tariffs’ Exports Front-Loaded, Imports Slowing

XII. Corruption Is the Symptom; Policy Induced Malinvestment Is the Disease

XIII. Increasing Influence of Public Spending in the Economy

XIV. Crowding Out, Malinvestment, and the Debt Time Bomb

XV. Statistical Mirage: Base Effects and the GDP Deflator

XVI. Testing Support: Fragility in the Data, Institutional Silence

XVII. Overstating GDP via Understating the CPI

XVIII. Real Estate as a Case Study: GDP vs. Corporate Reality

XIX. Calamities and GDP: Human Tragedy vs. Statistical Resilience

XX. Calamities as a Convenient Political Explanation and Bastiat’s Broken Window Fallacy

XXI. Expanding Marcos-nomics: State of Calamity as Fiscal Stimulus

XXII. More Easing? The Rate-Cut Expectations Game

XXIII. A Fiscal Shock in the Making, Black Swan Dynamics

XXIV. Conclusion: Crisis as the Only Reform 

The Philippine Q3 2025 “4.0% GDP Shock” That Wasn’t 

Behind the typhoon-and-scandal headlines lies the real story: a shocked consensus, overstated aggregates, expanded stimulus, and a political economy running on malinvestment.

I. Q3 GDP Shock: A Collapse Few Saw Coming; The Loose Cauldron of Policy Support 

The Philippine government announced that Q3 GDP growth slumped to a mere 4%, the slowest pace since the pandemic recession. This came as a ‘shock’ to mainstream forecasters, who had projected a modest deceleration—not a plunge. 

Statistics must never be viewed in isolation. This GDP print must be seen in context. Q3 unfolded amid a deepening BSP easing cycle—six rate cuts (with a seventh in October or Q4), two RRR reductions, and a doubling of deposit insurance coverage. 

This stimulus-driven environment was reinforced by all-time-high bank lending, particularly in consumer credit, even as employment—though slightly weaker—remained near full employment levels. 

In short, Q3 growth occurred under the most accommodative financial and fiscal conditions in years—a cauldron of policy backstops. 

II. Why Then the Surprise? 

Forecasting errors were not only widespread—they were flagrant. 

Reuters called the result “shocking,” citing a corruption scandal linked to infrastructure projects that hammered both consumer and investor confidence. The report noted that growth came in “well below the 5.2% forecast in a Reuters poll and significantly weaker than the 5.5% expansion in the previous quarter.” 

BusinessWorld’s survey of 18 economists yielded a median forecast of 5.3%.

Philstar’s poll of six economists projected 5.45%, barely below Q2’s 5.5%. 

A 50-bps drop was labeled a ‘slowdown’? Really? 

That’s not analysis—it’s narrative management. 

Why such a brazen forecasting error? 

III. The Echo Chamber: Forecasting as Optimism Theater 

The DBM chief claimed that Q4 growth would “normalize,” insisting that the 5.5–6.5% full-year target “remains attainable.” 

Implicit in that projection was a soft but stable Q3—a forecast that proved disastrously optimistic. 

This consensus blindness mirrors past failures: the Q1 2020 COVID shock and the 2022 inflation spike. 

This isn’t ideological—it’s institutional. Forecasts aren’t tools for analysis; they are marketing vehicles for official optimism. Economic statistics are not used to diagnose, but to promote and reassure. 

Hence the futility of “pin-the-tail-on-the-donkey” forecasting: a guessing game played on deeply flawed metrics. 

IV. Statistics ≠ Economics: The Public’s Misguided Faith 

Statistics is NOT economics. 

Despite repeated misses, the public continues to cling to mainstream forecasts. They fail to see the incentive mismatch—institutions seek fees, commissions, and access, while individuals seek returns. 

Agency problems, asymmetric information, and lack of skin in the game define this relationship—core realities that mainstream commentary refuses to admit. 

V. Ground Truth: SEVN as a Proxy — Retail Reality vs. GDP Fiction

Figure 1 

Take Philippine Seven Corp. [PSE: SEVN]. In Q3: 

• Revenue rose just 3.8% YoY, its weakest since Q1 2021.
• Same-store sales contracted 3.9%, the worst since the pandemic.
• Store count rose 8.6%, yet total sales fell—signaling demand erosion. 

This downtrend, persisting since 2022, mirrors the slowdown in real retail and household consumption GDP, which posted 5.1% and 4.09% in Q3, respectively. (Figure 1, topmost and middle windows) 

Yet the gap between SEVN’s data and official GDP implies potential overestimation in national accounts. 

If major retail chains show a sustained slowdown or outright contraction, then headline consumption growth of 4–5% either overstates economic reality—or implies that GDP should be even weaker than reported. 

These trend declines offer a structural lens into the economy’s underlying deterioration. 

VI. The Consumer Slump is Structural, Not Episodic; Hunger as a Better Predictor; CPI Is Not the Whole Story

The consumer slowdown did not emerge from the corruption scandal or recent natural calamities (earthquakes and typhoons)—it preceded both. The underlying weakness has long been visible to anyone looking beyond the official narrative. 

While economists missed the turn, sentiment data didn’t. 

The SWS hunger survey—a proxy for household stress—proved a far better leading indicator. Its late-September spike revealed deepening hardship among lower- and middle-income Filipinos—mirroring the Q3 GDP plunge. (Figure 1, lowest graph) 

Like SEVN’s revenue and the deceleration in consumption and retail GDP, hunger is not an anomaly—it’s a trend. One that has persisted since the pandemic and now appears to be accelerating.

Figure 2

With CPI steady at 1.4% for two consecutive quarters—assuming the number’s accuracy—the malaise clearly extends beyond price pressures. 

The hunger dilemma reflects deeper economic deterioration: slowing jobs, stagnant wages, weak investments, falling earnings, declining productivity, and eroding savings. (Figure 2, topmost image) 

This is the institutional blind spot—prioritizing political and commercial relationships over truth. 

VII. So What Happened to Q3 GDP? 

Aside from back-to-back typhoons, officials attributed the unexpected slowdown to concerns over the integrity of public spending and further erosion of investor sentiment. 

And it was not just investors. According to Philstar, the DEPDEV (Department of Economy, Planning, and Development) chief said consumer confidence has also been hit by the flood control probes, with many households postponing planned purchases. 

But unless there has been a call for nationwide civil disobedience (à la Gandhi or Etienne de La Boétie), why should people’s daily consumption habits suddenly be affected by politics? 

The reality is more complex. Universal commercial banks’ household loan portfolios surged 23.5% in Q3 2025—marking the 13th consecutive quarter of 20%+ growth. If households weren’t spending, what were they doing with interest-bearing loans? Investing? Speculating? Or simply refinancing old debt? (Figure 2, middle chart) 

VIII. Household Per Capita: The Downtrend 

Meanwhile, real household per capita consumption grew just 3.2%, its lowest since the BSP-sponsored recovery in Q2 2021. This wasn’t an anomaly—it reflected a downtrend in household spending growth since Q1 2022. (Figure 2, lowest visual) 

In short, the corruption scandal was not the root cause but an aggravating circumstance layered atop an existing structural slowdown. 

IX. The Real Q3 2025 GDP Story: Consumer Slowdown

Let us look at the real Q3 2025 expenditure trend, and how it compares with recent periods. 

Q3 2025 (4% GDP):

• Household spending: +4.1%
• Government spending: +5.8%
• Construction spending: –0.5%
• Gross capital formation: –2.8%
•  Exports: +7%
• Imports: +2.6%

Q2 2025 (5.5% GDP): 

• Household spending: +5.3%
•  Government spending: +8.7%
• Capital formation: +1.2%
• Construction: +0.9%
• Exports and imports: +4.7%, +3.5%

Q3 2024 (5.2% GDP): 

• Household spending: +5.2% 
• Government spending: +5%
• Capital formation: +12.8%
• Construction: +9%
• Exports and imports: –1.3%, +6.5%

X. Government Spending Didn’t Collapse — It Held Up Amid Scandal; Public Construction Implosion 

Despite the corruption scandal, government consumption remained positive and was even higher in Q3 2025 than in Q3 2024. This alone undermines the narrative that the GDP slump was simply "sentiment shock."

Figure 3

Government construction plummeted 26.6%, matching the pandemic lockdown era of Q3 2020. This single line item pulled construction GDP into a mild –0.5% decline. (Figure 3, topmost pane) 

But buried beneath the headline, private construction was strong:

• Private corporate construction: +14.4%
• Household construction: +13.3%

These robust figures cushioned the damage from the government crash.

Absent private-sector strength, construction GDP would have mirrored the government collapse. 

Government construction also contracted –8.2% in Q2, reflecting procurement restrictions during the midterm election ban. 

As we already noted last September: (bold original) 

"Many large firms are structurally tied to public projects, and the economy’s current momentum leans heavily on credit-fueled activity rather than organic productivity."

"Curtailing infrastructure outlays, even temporarily, risks puncturing GDP optics and exposing the private sector’s underlying weakness." 

The Q3 data has now validated this. 

A large network of sectors tied to public works absorbed the first-round impact—and that ‘shock’ bled into already stressed consumers. 

XI. External Sector: Trump Tariffs’ Exports Front-Loaded, Imports Slowing 

Exports rose +7% in Q3 2025, boosted by front-loading ahead of Trump tariffs. 

Imports slowed to +2.6%, the weakest pace in recent periods, reflecting consumer retrenchment. 

This divergence highlights how external momentum was artificially timed, while domestic demand faltered.

XII. Corruption Is the Symptom; Policy Induced Malinvestment Is the Disease

The controversial flood control scandal represents the visible tip of a much deeper corruption iceberg. It is not the anomaly—it is the artifact. 

Political power is, at its core, about monopoly. 

In the Philippines, political dynasties are merely its institutional symptom. The deeper question is: what incentives drive politicians to cling to power, and how do they sustain it? 

Public service often serves as a facade for the real intent: access to political-economic rents, impunity, and the machinery of patronage. Through electoral engineering—name recall, direct and indirect (policy-based) vote-buying, and bureaucratic capture—politicians commodify entitlement, turning public goods into tradable favors.

Dependency is weaponized or transformed into political capital, politicizing people’s basic needs to secure loyalty, votes, and tenure. 

Poverty becomes leverage. 

This erodes the civic ethic of self-reliance and responsibility, and it traps constituents—who participate out of a survival calculus—into legitimizing dynastic monopolies. 

This free-lunch electoral process, built on deepening dependence on ever-growing public funds, represents the social-democratic architecture of a political economy of control, centralization, and extraction—one that incentivizes corruption not as an aberration but as a structural outcome of concentrated power. 

XIII. Increasing Influence of Public Spending in the Economy 

Direct public spending reached 16.1% of 9M 2025 real GDP—the second highest on record after the 2021 lockdown recession.  (Figure 3, middle diagram) 

This figure excludes government construction outlays and the spending of private firms reliant on state contracts and agency revenues, such as PPPs, suppliers, outsourcing, etc. 

In this context, corruption is not merely a moral failure but a symptom of structural defects in the political-economic electoral process, reinforced by the misdirection of resources and finances, which signifies chronic systemic malinvestment. 

GDP metrics mask political decay, economic erosion, and institutional fragility. 

Yet even with statistical concealment, the entropy is visible. 

XIV. Crowding Out, Malinvestment, and the Debt Time Bomb 

The ever-rising share of public spending has coincided with a slowdown in GDP growth. Public outlays now prop up output, while pandemic-level deficits have shrunk the consumer share of GDP. (Figure 3, lowest graph) 

Crowding-out effects, combined with “build-and-they-will-come” malinvestments, have drained savings and forced greater reliance on leverage—weakening real consumption.

Figure 4 

Most alarming, nominal public debt rose Php 1.56 trillion YoY in September, equivalent to 126% of the Php 1.237 trillion increase in nominal GDP over the same period. 126%! (Figure 4, topmost visual) 

As a result, 2025 public debt-to-GDP surged to 65.11%—the highest since 2006. (Figure 4, middle graph) 

Needless to say, Corruption is what we see; malinvestment is what drives the crisis path. 

XV. Statistical Mirage: Base Effects and the GDP Deflator 

Yet, the “shocking” Q3 GDP overstates its actual rate. 

Because the headline GDP growth rate is derived from statistical base effects, almost no analyst examines the underlying price base, which is the most critical determinant of real GDP. The focus is always on the percentage change—never on the structural level from which the change is computed. 

For years, the consensus has touted the goal of “upper middle income status,” equating progress with high GDP numbers. 

But whatever outcome they anticipate, the PSA’s nominal and real GDP price base trends have consistently defied expectations. (Figure 4, lowest chart) 

The primary trend line was violated during the pandemic recession and replaced by a weaker secondary trend line. Statistically, this guarantees that base-effect growth will be slower than what the original trajectory implied. 

The economy is no longer expanding along its pre-pandemic path; it is merely oscillating below it. 

XVI. Testing Support: Fragility in the Data, Institutional Silence 

Recent GDP prints have repeatedly tested support levels. The risk is not an upside breakout but a downside violation—the path consistent with a recession.   

Q3 GDP brought both the nominal and real price base to the brink of its crucial support. A further slowdown could trigger its incursion. 

Yet you hear none of this discussed—despite all this coming straight from government data. 

The silence underscores a broader indictment: statistics are deployed as optimism theater, not as diagnostic tools. 

XVII. Overstating GDP via Understating the CPI 

And this brings us to a deeper issue that amplifies the problem. 

Real GDP is computed by dividing nominal GDP by the implicit GDP deflator. For the personal consumption component, the PSA uses CPI-based price indices to adjust nominal household spending.

Figure 5

The implicit price index is technically the GDP deflator. (Figure 5, topmost diagram) 

If CPI becomes distorted by widespread price interventions—such as MSRPs, the Php 20-rice rollout, or palay price floors—its measured inflation rate can diverge from actual market conditions. 

Any downward bias in CPI would mechanically lower the corresponding deflators used in the national accounts. 

A lower deflator raises the computed real GDP. 

Thus, even without access to PSA’s internal methodology, the basic statistical relationship still holds: systematic price suppression in CPI-tracked goods would tend to understate the deflator and, in turn, overstate real GDP. 

As noted in our August post: (bold & italics original) 

"Repressing CPI to pad GDP isn’t stewardship—it’s pantomine. A calculated communication strategy designed to preserve public confidence through statistical theater.  

"Within this top-down, social-democratic Keynesian spending framework, the objective is unmistakable: Cheap access to household savings to bankroll political vanity projects. These are the hallmarks of free lunch politics.  

"The illusion of growth props up the illusion of competence. And both are running on borrowed time.  

XVIII. Real Estate as a Case Study: GDP vs. Corporate Reality 

The GDP headline may be overstating growth due to deviations in calculation assumptions or outright political agenda— what I call as "benchmark-ism." 

Consider the revenues of the Top 4 listed developers—SM Prime, Ayala Land, Megaworld, and Robinsons Land. 

Despite abundant bank credit flowing to both supply and demand sides, their aggregate revenues increased only 1.16% in Q3 2025, barely above Q2’s 1.1%. This mirrors the slowing consumer growth trend: since peaking in Q2 2021, revenue growth rates have been steadily declining, leading to the current stagnation. The slowdown also coincides with rising vacancies. Reported revenues may still be overstated, given that the industry faces slowing cash reserves alongside record debt levels. 

Meanwhile, official GDP prints show:

• Real estate nominal GDP: +6.8%
• Real estate real GDP: +4.7% 

Yet inflation-adjusted revenues for the Top 4 translate to zero growth—or contraction. 

Their revenues accounted for 26.4% of nominal real estate GDP in Q3 2025. Real estate’s share of national GDP was 6.2% nominal, 6% real. (Figure 5 middle image) 

This gap between corporate revenues and GDP aggregates suggests statistical inflation of output. 

This highlights a broader point: The industry’s CPI barely explains the wide divergence between revenues and GDP. And this is just one sector. 

Comparing listed company performance with GDP aggregates exposes the disconnect between macro statistics and micro realities, not just episodic shocks—a motif that recurs across retail, consumption, and sentiment indicators. 

Yet, natural calamities—especially typhoons—are often blamed, but their impact on national output is minimal—much like the weak revenue trends, the real slowdown lies deeper than headline statistics suggest. 

XIX. Calamities and GDP: Human Tragedy vs. Statistical Resilience

Despite public perception, the Philippine economy has been structurally resilient to typhoon disruptions—not because disasters are mild, but because GDP barely registers them. 

In Q3 2025, ten tropical cyclones passed through or enhanced the monsoon system, with the July cluster (Crising, Dante, Emong + Habagat) causing an estimated Php 21.3 billion in officially reported damages and the September cluster (Nando/Ragasa, Bualoi/Ompong + Habagat) adding another Php 1.9 billion in infrastructure and agricultural losses. 

The combined Php 23.1 billion destruction sounds enormous, but in macroeconomic terms it is equal to just 0.37% of quarterly nominal GDP. 

This pattern is consistent with past experience: Yolanda (Q4 2013, 5.4%), Odette (Q4 2021, 7.9%), Ompong (Q3 2018, 6.1%), Pablo (Q4 2012, 7.8%), and Glenda (Q3 2014, 5.9%) all inflicted large localized damage yet barely dented national output. (Figure 5, Table) 

The reason is structural: GDP is weighted toward services and urban economic activity, while disasters strike geographically narrow areas. Catastrophic in human terms, typhoons seldom materially affect national accounts. 

The Q3 2025 storms fit the same pattern: human tragedy, fiscal strain, and regional losses—but minimal macroeconomic imprint. Resilience in the data conceals suffering on the ground, because GDP measures transactions, not destroyed livelihoods. 

XX. Calamities as a Convenient Political Explanation and Bastiat’s Broken Window Fallacy 

Given this historical consistency, attributing the Q3 slowdown to typhoons is politically convenient but analytically weak. It reflects self-attribution bias—positive outcomes are claimed as accomplishments, negative ones pinned on exogenous forces. 

GDP simply does not respond to weather shocks of this scale. At most, calamities intensify pre-existing consumption weakness rather than create it. They add entropy to a deteriorating trend; they do not determine it. 

The same applies to earthquakes. The deadly July 1990 Luzon earthquake claimed over 1,600 lives and caused Php 10 billion in damage, yet Q3 1990 GDP posted +3.7% growth. The slowdown that followed led to a technical recession in Q2 (-1.1%) and Q3 1991 (-1.9%), driven more by political crisis (coup attempts, post-EDSA transition) and the US recession (July 1990–March 1991) than by the quake itself. 

Recovery spending from calamities gets factored into GDP, but as Frédéric Bastiat taught us, this is the broken window fallacy—a diversion of resources, not genuine growth. 

XXI. Expanding Marcos-nomics: State of Calamity as Fiscal Stimulus 

The administration has relied on this same narrative today. 

The cited calamities—Typhoon Tino and Uwan, plus the Cebu and Davao earthquakes—occurred in Q4 2025. These events contributed to entropic consumer conditions but did not create them. 

But their political and bureaucratic timing proved useful. 

Authorities tightened the national price freeze a day before the USD/PHP broke 59 (see reference discussion on the USDPHP breakout) 

Typhoon Tino, followed by Uwan, justified declaring a State of Nationwide Calamity for one year—the longest fixed-term declaration in Philippine history. (By comparison, the COVID-era State of Calamity lasted 2.5 years due to repeated extensions.) 

This one-year window: 

• Reinforces the price freeze, aggravating distortions.
• Enables liberalized public spending under relief and rehabilitation cover.
• Allows budget realignments, procurement exemptions (RA 9184 Sec. 53[b]), calamity/QRF access, and inter-agency mobilization (RA 10121). 

In effect, the national calamity declaration acts as a workaround to the spending constraints imposed by the flood-control corruption scandal. It restores fiscal maneuvering room under the guise of emergency relief and rehabilitation. 

This is emergency Marcos-nomics, designed to lift headline GDP via public-sector outlays—on top of pandemic-level deficits, easy-money liquidity, and the FX soft-peg regime. 

XXII. More Easing? The Rate-Cut Expectations Game 

Layered onto this is the growing consensus expectation of a jumbo BSP rate cut in November. One must ask: 

• Are establishment institutions applying indirect pressure on the BSP?
• Or is the BSP conditioning the public for an outsized cut to stem a crisis of confidence? 

Both interpretations are possible—and neither signals macro-stability. 

Meanwhile, supermarkets warn that “noche buena” food items may rise due to relief-driven demand—a symptom of distortions. 

This is the predictable byproduct of a price-freeze regime: shortages, hoarding, cost-pass-through, and black-market substitution.

XXIII. A Fiscal Shock in the Making, Black Swan Dynamics 

At worst, emergency stimulus during a slowdown widens the deficit and accelerates fiscal deterioration—pushing the economy toward the fiscal shock we warned about in June: 

"Unless authorities rein in spending—which would drag GDP, risking a recession—a fiscal shock could emerge as early as 2H 2025 or by 2026.  

"If so, expect magnified volatility across stocks, bonds, and the USDPHP exchange rate."

Figure 6 

Market behavior is already signaling intensifying stress: the USDPHP and the PSE remain under pressure despite repeated rescue efforts. (Figure 6) 

XXIV. Conclusion: Crisis as the Only Reform 

A political-economic crisis—a black swan event—doesn’t happen when expected. It occurs because almost everyone is in entrenched denial and complacency, blinded by past resilience. Like substance abuse, they believe unsustainable events can extend indefinitely: It hasn’t happened, so it won’t (appeal to ignorance). 

But history gives us a blueprint: 

economic strains → political tensions → revolution/reforms

• EDSA I followed the 1983 debt crisis.
• EDSA II followed the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis.

Economic strains were visible even before the flood-control scandal. This is Kindleberger’s and Minsky’s late-cycle phase: swindles/fraud/deflacation emerge when liquidity thins, growth slows, tenuous relationships and political coalitions fracture. 

More improprieties—public and private—will surface as slowing growth exposes hidden malfeasance, nonfeasance, and misfeasance. 

The sunk-cost architecture of vested interests, built on free-lunch trickle-down policies, points to a grand finale: either EDSA 3.0 or a putsch. 

A crisis, not politics, will force change. 

To repeat our conclusion last October, 

In the end, because both political and economic structures are ideological and self-reinforcing, reform from within is improbable.  

The deepening economic and financial imbalances will not resolve through policy, but will ventilate through a crisis—again the lessons of the post-1983 debt restructuring of EDSA I and the post-Asian Financial Crisis of EDSA II.  

____

References

Prudent Investor Newsletter, When Free Lunch Politics Meets Fiscal Reality: Lessons from the DPWH Flood Control Scandal, Substack, September 07, 2025 

Prudent Investor Newsletter, The 5.5% Q2 GDP Mirage: How Debt-Fueled Deficit Spending Masks a Slowing Economy, Substack, August 10, 2025 

Prudent Investor Newsletter, Is the Philippines on the Brink of a 2025 Fiscal Shock? Substack, June 08, 2025

Prudent Investor Newsletter, The Political Economy of Corruption: How Social Democracy Became the Engine of Decay, Substack, October 26, 2025 

Prudent Investor Newsletter, The USD-PHP Breaks 59: BSP’s Soft Peg Unravels, Exposing Economic Fragility, Substack, November 02, 2025

  

The USD-PHP Breaks 59: BSP’s Soft Peg Unravels, Exposing Economic Fragility

 

Devaluing is a de facto default and the manifestation of the insolvency of a nation—Daniel Lacalle 

In this Issue

The USD-PHP Breaks 59: BSP’s Soft Peg Unravels, Exposing Economic Fragility 

Part I: The USD-Philippine peso Breach at Php59

IA. The Soft Peg’s Strain Finally Shows

IB. "Market Forces" or Managed Retreat?

IC. Gold, GIR, and the Mirage of Strength

ID. Historical Context: Peso Spikes and Economic Stress

Part II: The Savings–Investment Gap (SIG) Illusion

IIA. Savings–Investment Gap—a Flawed Metric and Free Lunch Spending

IIB. Misclassified Investment, ICOR and the Productivity mirage

Part III: Soft Peg Unravels: Systemic Fragility Surfaces, Confidence Breakdown

IIIA. The Keynesian Hangover: How "Spending Drives Growth" Became National Pathology

IIIB. Credit-Fueled Consumption and Fiscal Excess: Twin Deficits

IIIC. CMEPA and the Deepening of Financial Repression: How the State Institutionalized Capital Flight

IIID. Corruption as Symptom, Not Cause: The Flood Control Scandal and Malinvestment Crisis

IIIE. The Soft Peg's Hidden Costs: FX Regime as Subsidy Machine and Flight Accelerant

IIIF. Gold Sales Redux: The 2020–2021 Playbook Returns

IIIG. GIR Theater: Borrowed Reserves and Accounting Opacity, Slowing NFA and Widening BOP Gap

IIIH. Soft Peg Lessons: Where From Here? Historical Patterns and the Road to 62—or 67?

IV. Conclusion: Why This Time May Be Worse, the BSP is Whistling Past the Graveyard 

The USD-PHP Breaks 59: BSP’s Soft Peg Unravels, Exposing Economic Fragility 

How the BSP’s widening savings–investment gap, soft peg, flood control response left the peso exposed—and what it reveals about the Philippine economy.

Part I: The USD-Philippine peso Breach at Php59 

IA. The Soft Peg’s Strain Finally Shows 

This is what we posted at X.com 

After three years, $USDPHP breaks the BSP’s 59 Maginot line. What cracked it?

• 👉 Record savings–investment gap (BSP easing, deficit spending, CMEPA)
• 👉 BSP soft peg (gold sales)
• 👉 Capital controls fueling flight
• 👉 Weak economy + high debt 

The soft peg’s strain finally shows. 

After three years of tacit defense, the BSP’s 59.00 line cracked on October 28. Yet it closed the week—and the month—at 58.85, just below what we’ve long called the BSP’s ‘Maginot line.’ 

IB. "Market Forces" or Managed Retreat? 

The BSP and media attributed the breach to “market forces.” But if the peso’s rate is truly market-determined, why issue a press release at all? To reassure the public? Why the need for reassurance? And if the breakout were merely “temporary,” why frame it at all—unless the goal is to condition perception before the markets interpret the breach as systemic or draw their own conclusions?

Figure 1

Another dead giveaway lies in the BSP’s phrasing: it “allows the exchange rate to be determined by market forces.” (Figure 1, upper image)

That single word—allows—is revealing. 

It presupposes BSP supremacy over the market, implying that exchange rate movements occur only at the central bank’s discretion. FX determination, in this framing, is not a spontaneous process but a managed performance. Market forces operate only within the parameters permitted by the BSP. “Allowing” or “disallowing” thus reflects not market discipline, but bureaucratic control masquerading as market freedom. 

Yet, the irony is striking: they cite “resilient remittance inflows” as a stabilizer—even as the peso weakens. If OFW remittances, BPO earnings, and tourism inflows are as strong as claimed, what explains the breakdown? 

Beneath the surface, the pressures are unmistakable: thinning FX buffers, rising debt service, and the mounting cost of defending a soft peg that was never officially admitted.

IC. Gold, GIR, and the Mirage of Strength

Then there’s the gold angle. 

In 2024, the BSP was the world’s largest central bank seller of gold—offloading reserves to raise usable dollars. (Figure 1, lower chart)

Figure 2

Now, higher gold prices inflate its GIRs on paper—an accounting comfort masking liquidity strain. It’s the same irony we saw in 2021–22, when the BSP sold gold amid a pandemic recession and the peso still plunged. (Figure 2, upper graph) 

Adding to the drama, the government announced a price freeze on basic goods just a day before the peso broke Php 59. Coincidence—or coordination to suppress the impact? 

And there was no “strong dollar” to blame. The breakout came as ASEAN peers—the Thai baht, Indonesian rupiah, Singapore dollar, and Malaysian ringgit—strengthened. This was a PHP-specific fracture, not a USD-driven move. (Figure 2, lower table) 

ID. Historical Context: Peso Spikes and Economic Stress

Figure 3

Historically, sharp spikes in USDPHP have coincided with economic strain:

• 1983 debt restructuring
• 1997 Asian Financial Crisis
• 2000 dotcom bubble bust
• 2008–2010 Global Financial Crisis
• 2020 pandemic recession (Figure 3, upper window)

The BSP even admitted “potential moderation in economic growth due in part to the infra spending controversy” for this historic event. That makes reassurance an even more potent motive. 

Remember: USDPHP made seven attempts to breach 59.00—four in October 2022 (3, 10, 13, 17), three from November 21 and 26 to December 19, 2024. That ceiling revealed the BSP’s implicit soft peg. The communique doesn’t explain why the eighth breach succeeded—except to say it was “market determined.” But that’s just another way of saying the market has abandoned the illusion of BSP control. (Figure 3, lower diagram)

As I’ve discussed in earlier Substack notes, this moment was years in the making: 

• The widening savings–investment gap
• CMEPA’s distortions
• Asset bubbles, the creeping financial repression and fiscal extraction that eroded domestic liquidity 

The peso’s breach of 59 isn’t just a technical move. It’s the culmination of structural stress that monetary theater can no longer hide. 

Part II: The Savings–Investment Gap (SIG) Illusion

IIA. Savings–Investment Gap—a Flawed Metric and Free Lunch Spending 

Spending drives the economy.  That ideology underpins Philippine economic policy—from the BSP’s inflation targeting and deficit spending to its regulatory, tax, and FX regimes—and it has culminated in a record savings–investment (SIG) gap. 

This is the Keynesian hangover institutionalized in Philippine policy—confusing short-term demand management with sustainable capital formation 

But this is not merely technocratic doctrine; the obsession with spending anchors the free-lunch politics of ochlocratic social democracy. 

Yet even the SIG is a flawed metric. 

As previously discussed, “savings” in national accounts is a residual GDP-derived figure riddled with distortions, not an empirical aggregation of household or corporate saving. It even counts government savings—retained surpluses and depreciation allowances—when, in truth, fiscal deficits represent outright dissaving. (see reference) 

Worse, the inclusion of non-cash items such as depreciation and retained earnings inflates measured savings, masking the erosion of actual household liquidity.

IIB. Misclassified Investment, ICOR and the Productivity mirage 

Even the “investment” side is overstated. Much of it is public consumption misclassified as capital formation. Because politics—not markets—dictate pricing and returns, the viability of monopolistic political projects cannot be credibly established. 

Consider infrastructure. Despite record outlays, the Incremental Capital-Output Ratio (ICOR) has worsened—proof that spending does not equal productivity.

Figure 4

According to BSP estimates, the Philippines’ ICOR has fallen from around 8.3 in the 1989-92 period to approximately 4.1 in 2017-19, contracted by 12.7% and recovered to around 3.0 by 2022 (see reference) (Figure 4, topmost visual) 

While the ICOR trend suggests some efficiency gains since the 1990s, it remains a blunt and often misleading proxy—distorted by GDP rebasing, project misclassification, and delayed returns. What it does reveal, however, is the widening gap between spending and sustainable productivity 

Listed PPP firms, meanwhile, sustain appearances through leverage, regulatory capture and forbearance, and mark-to-model accounting. The result is concealed fragility, reinforced by the hidden costs of various acts of malfeasance, conveniently euphemized as by the public as “corruption.” 

In the end, the SIG tells a simple truth: domestic savings are too scarce to fund both public and private investment. The gap is bridged by FX borrowing. 

But this is not a sign of strength—it’s a symptom of deepening structural dependence, masked by monetary theater and fiscal illusion, thus amplifying peso vulnerability. Every fiscal impulse now imports external leverage, entrenching the illusion of growth at the expense of stability. 

Part III: Soft Peg Unravels: Systemic Fragility Surfaces, Confidence Breakdown 

IIIA. The Keynesian Hangover: How "Spending Drives Growth" Became National Pathology 

Spending-as-growth isn’t just policy—it’s pathology.

While the BSP’s mandate is "to promote price stability conducive to balanced and sustainable growth," its inflation-targeting framework—tilted toward persistent monetary easing—has effectively become a GDP-boosting machine to finance free-lunch political projects. 

Banks have realigned their balance sheets accordingly. Consumer loans by universal and commercial banks rose from 8.2% of total lending in December 2018 to 13.5% in August 2025—a 64% surge—while the share of industry loans declined from 91.7% to 86.5% over the same period. (Figure 4, middle pane) 

Fueled by interest rate subsidies and real income erosion, households are leveraging aggressively to sustain consumption. Yet as GDP growth slows, the marginal productivity of credit collapses—meaning every new peso of debt generates less output and more fragility for both banks and borrowers. 

Production credit’s stagnation also forces greater import dependence to meet domestic demand.

IIIB. Credit-Fueled Consumption and Fiscal Excess: Twin Deficits 

Meanwhile, deficit spending—now nearing 2021 pandemic levels—artificially props up consumption at the expense of productivity gains. (See reference for last week’s Substack.) 

Together, credit-fueled consumption and fiscal excess have produced record "twin deficits." (Figure 4, lowest chart) 

The fiscal deficit widened from Php 319.5 billion in Q2 to Php 351.8 billion in Q3, while the trade deficit expanded from USD 12.0 billion to USD 12.76 billion—levels last seen in 2020. 

Historically, fiscal deficits lead trade gaps—it raises import demand. If the budget shortfall hits fresh records by year-end, the external imbalance will likely push the trade deficit back to its 2022 peak.

Figure 5

These deficits are not funded by real savings but by credit—domestic and external. The apparent slowdown in approved public foreign borrowings in Q3 likely masks rescheduling (with Q4 FX borrowings set to spike?), delayed recognition, shift to BSP-led financing (to reduce scrutiny) or accounting prestidigitation (Figure 5, topmost diagram) 

Public external debt accounted for roughly 60% of the record USD 148.87 billion in Q2. Even if Q3 slows, the trajectory remains upward. (Figure 5, middle graph) 

In short, widening twin deficits mean more—not less—debt. 

Slowing consumer sales growth, coupled with rising real estate vacancies, signals that private consumption is already being crowded out—a deepening symptom of structural strain in the economy.

IIIC. CMEPA and the Deepening of Financial Repression: How the State Institutionalized Capital Flight

Yet the newly enacted CMEPA (Capital Market Efficiency Promotion Act, R.A. 12214) deepens the financial repression: it taxes savings, institutionalizes these by redirecting or diverting household savings into state-controlled channels or equity speculation, and discriminates against private-sector financing. By weakening the deposit base, it also amplifies systemic fragility. The doubling of deposit insurance last March, following RRR cuts, appears preemptive—an implicit admission of the risk CMEPA introduces. 

Authorities embraced a false choice. Savers are not confined to pesos—they can shift to dollars or move capital abroad entirely. Capital flight is not theoretical; for the monied class, it can be a reflexive response. 

IIID. Corruption as Symptom, Not Cause: The Flood Control Scandal and Malinvestment Crisis 

The recent “flood control” corruption scandal has merely exposed the deeper rot. 

Consensus recently blames the peso’s fall and stock market weakness on “exposed corruption.” But this is post hoc reasoning: both the peso and PSEi 30 peaked in May 2025—months before the scandal broke. (Figure 5, lowest image)

Corruption, as argued last week, is not an aberration—it’s embedded or a natural expression of free-lunch social democracy 

It begins at the ballot box and metastasizes through centralization, cheap money, financial repression, the gaming of the system and rent-seeking. It explains the entrenchment of political dynasties and the extraction economy they operate on. 

What media and the pundits call “corruption” is merely the visible tip. The deeper pathology is malinvestment—surfacing across: 

• Bank liquidity strains
• Wile E. Coyote NPLs
• Record real estate vacancies
• Slowing consumer spending despite record debt
• Cracks in employment data
• Persistently elevated self-rated poverty ratings (50% + 12% borderline as of September).
• Stubborn price pressures and more… 

The BSP’s populist response to visible corruption? 

Capital controls, withdrawal caps, probes, and virtue signaling. These have worsened the erosion of confidence, potentially accelerating the flight to foreign currency—and escalating malinvestments in the process. (see reference) 

What emerges is not just structural decay, but a slow-motion confidence collapse. 

IIIE. The Soft Peg's Hidden Costs: FX Regime as Subsidy Machine and Flight Accelerant 

And there is more. The BSP also operates a de facto FX soft-peg regime. 

By keeping a lid on its tacit thrust to devalue, its implicit goal is not merely to project macro stability, but to subsidize the USD and manage the CPI within its target band. Unfortunately, this policy overvalues the peso, encouraging USD-denominated borrowing and external savings while providing the behavioral incentive for capital flight.

Figure 6

Including public borrowing, the weak peso has prompted intensified growth in the banking system’s FX deposits. In August 2025, FX deposits rose 11.96%—the second straight month above 10%—reaching 15.07% of total bank liabilities, the highest since November 2017. (Figure 6, topmost window) 

The BSP’s FX regime also includes its reserves management—Gross International Reserves (GIR).

IIIF. Gold Sales Redux: The 2020–2021 Playbook Returns 

As noted above, similar to 2020–2021, the BSP embarked on massive gold sales to defend the USDPHP soft peg. Yet the peso still soared 22.97% from 47.90 in May 2021 to 58.9 in September 2022. That pandemic-era devaluation coincided with a CPI spike—peaking at 8.7% in January 2023. The 2024 gold sales echo this pattern, offering a blueprint for where USDPHP could be heading. 

The BSP insists that benchmarks like the GIR assure the public of sufficient reserves. Yet it has never disclosed the composition in detail. Gold—which the BSP remains averse to—accounts for only ~15% of the GIR (September). A former BSP governor even advocates selling gold "to profit” from it." (2020 gold sales and devaluation occurred in his tenure) 

But since the BSP doesn’t operate for profit-and-loss, but for political objectives such as "price stability," this logic misrepresents intent.

IIIG. GIR Theater: Borrowed Reserves and Accounting Opacity, Slowing NFA and Widening BOP Gap 

A significant portion of GIR—around 5%—consists of repos, derivatives, and other short-term instruments classified as Other Reserve Assets (ORA), introduced during the 2018 peso appreciation. Not only that: national government borrowings deposited with the BSP are also counted as GIR. Hence, “borrowed reserves” make up a substantial share. (Figure 6, middle graph) 

If reserves are truly as strong as officially claimed, why the peso breakout—and the need for a press release? 

All this is reflected in the stagnating growth of BSP net foreign assets (NFA) since 2025, reinforcing a downtrend that began in 2013. While nominally at Php 6.355 trillion, NFA is down 2.1% from the record Php 6.398 trillion in November 2024. (Figure 6, lowest diagram)

Figure 7

This fragility is also evident in the balance of payments (BOP) gap. Though narrowing in recent months, it reached USD 5.315 billion year-to-date—its highest since the post-pandemic recession of 2022. That’s 67% of the November 2022 peak. (Figure 7, topmost graph) 

The apparent improvement merely reflects deferred pressure—delayed borrowings and import compression. 

Despite BSP claims, net outflows reflect more than trade gaps. They signal external debt servicing amid rising leverage, capital flight, and systemic strain.

IIIH. Soft Peg Lessons: Where From Here? Historical Patterns and the Road to 62—or 67? 

Last March, we wrote: 

The USDPHP exchange rate operates under a ‘soft peg’ regime, meaning the BSP will likely determine the next upper band or ceiling. In the previous adjustment, the ceiling rose from 56.48 in 2004 to 59 in 2022, representing a 4.5% increase. If history rhymes, the next likely cap could be in the 61–62 range. (see reference) 

At the time, our lens was historical—measuring breakout levels from 2004 to 2022 and projecting forward to 2025. 

But as noted above, USDPHP spikes rarely occur in a vacuum. They tend to coincide with economic stress. Using BSP’s end-of-quarter data, we find: (Figure 7, middle table) 

• 1983 debt restructuring: +121% over 12 quarters (Q1 1982–Q1 1985)
• 1997 Asian Financial Crisis: +66.15% over 6 quarters (Q1 1997–Q3 1998)
• 1999–2004 dotcom bust: +30.6% over 20 quarters (Q2 1999–Q1 2004)
• 2007–2009 Global Financial Crisis: +16.95% over 5 quarters (Q4 2007–Q1 2009)
• 2020–2022 pandemic recession: +22.64% over 7 quarters (Q4 2020–Q3 2022) 

While the USDPHP also rose from 2013–2018, this episode was largely driven by the Fed’s Taper Tantrum, China’s 2015 devaluation, and Trump-era fiscal stimulus—with no comparable economic event.

IV. Conclusion: Why This Time May Be Worse, the BSP is Whistling Past the Graveyard 

The current moment is different. 

Using the post-2022 low—Q2 2025 at 56.581—as a base, a 10% devaluation implies a target of 62.24. But with the late-cycle unraveling, a weakening domestic economy, and rising debt burdens, the odds tilt towards a deepening of stagflation—or worse. If the peso mirrors its pandemic-era response, a 20% devaluation to 67.90 is not far-fetched. 

Even the BSP now concedes "potential moderation in economic growth." 

Yet it continues to cite “resilient inflows” like tourism. The Department of Tourism data tells another story: as of September 2025, foreign arrivals were down 3.5% year-on-year—hardly a sign of strength. (Figure 7, lowest chart) 

Otto von Bismarck’s maxim applies: 

Never believe anything in politics until it has been officially denied. 

Hounded by diminishing returns and Goodhart’s Law—where every target becomes a distortion—the BSP clings to benchmarks that no longer signal strength. From the USDPHP to GIR composition, Net Foreign Assets, and FX deposit ratios, the metrics have become theater. The more they’re defended, the less they reflect reality.

In the face of unraveling malinvestments, deepening institutional opacity, and accelerating behavioral flight, the BSP is whistling past the graveyard. 

Caveat emptor. The illusion is priced in.  

____ 

References 

Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas, Discussion Paper Series No. 2024-10: Estimating the Incremental Capital Output Ratio (ICOR) for the Philippines, Towards Greater Efficiency: Estimating the Philippines’ Total Factor Productivity Growth and its Determinants BSP Research Academy, June 2024. 

Prudent Investor Newsletters: 

When Free Lunch Politics Meets Fiscal Reality: Lessons from the DPWH Flood Control Scandal, Substack, September 07, 2025 

The CMEPA Delusion: How Fallacious Arguments Conceal the Risk of Systemic Blowback, Substack, July 27, 2025 

The Seen, the Unseen, and the Taxed: CMEPA as Financial Repression by Design, Substack, July 27, 2025 

The Philippine Flood Control Scandal: Systemic Failure and Central Bank Complicity, Substack, October 05, 2025 

The Political Economy of Corruption: How Social Democracy Became the Engine of Decay, Substack, October 26, 2025 

BSP’s Gold Reserves Policy: A Precursor to a Higher USD-PHP Exchange Rate? Substack, March 03, 2025 

How the BSP's Soft Peg will Contribute to the Weakening of the US Dollar-Philippine Peso Exchange Rate, Substack, January 02, 2025 

June 2025 Deficit: A Countdown to Fiscal Shock, Substack, August 03, 2025