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

Sunday, January 11, 2026

2026 Opens with USDPHP at Record Highs: The Peso Is the Symptom, Policy Is the Disease

  

With the exception only of the 200-year period of the gold standard, practically all governments of history have used their exclusive power to issue money in order to defraud and plunder the people. There is less ground than ever for hoping that, so long as the people have no choice but to use the money their government provides, governments will become more trustworthy—Friedrich August von Hayek 

In this issue 

2026 Opens with USDPHP at Record Highs: The Peso Is the Symptom, Policy Is the Disease 

I. 2026: The Peso at Record Lows, BSP’s Contradictory Stance

II. The USDPHP’s Suppressed Volatility

III. Media Agitprop and Be Careful of What You Wish For

IV. Lindy Effect: USDPHP’s  56-year Uptrend

V. Gold’s Rising Role in the GIR: Serendipity Saved Incompetence

VI. Inflation: Same Story, Different Mask

VII. Self-Poverty Ratings, Sentiment, and the Limits of Macro Optics

VIII. Employment Optics vs Labor Reality

IX. Deficits, Debt, and the Entropic Drift

X. PSE’s January 2026 Boom: Liquidity First, Fundamentals Later

XI. Conclusion: Record USDPHP A Symptom, Policies The Disease 

2026 Opens with USDPHP at Record Highs: The Peso Is the Symptom, Policy Is the Disease 

Gold-inflated FX reserves, suppressed USDPHP volatility, and the slow collapse of the BSP’s soft peg—symptoms of a deeper political problem.

Nota Bene: 

For new readers, this post extends our earlier analysis and projections on USDPHP; please see the reference sections for our previous works. 

I. 2026: The Peso at Record Lows, BSP’s Contradictory Stance 

2026 opened with USDPHP printing its fourth record high, touching 59.355 on January 7, placing the peso at an all-time low. This comes after the pair decisively breached the 59 level in October 2025—a threshold that, in practice, had functioned as a de facto boundary since late 2022, or roughly three years. 

Almost immediately, the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) went public, stating it would not defend the peso, despite what it described as “tremendous pressure” to do so. 

This posture echoed its statement following the October breakout, where the BSP asserted that it merely “allows” market forces to determine the exchange rate. 

As we noted in a November 2025 post, such phrasing implicitly presupposes central bank supremacy over the market, implying that exchange-rate movements occur only at the BSP’s discretion—an assertion belied by the data.

II. The USDPHP’s Suppressed Volatility 


Figure 1

Absent official confirmation, one is reminded of Bismarck’s dictum: never believe anything in politics until it has been officially denied. Circumstantial evidence points strongly to prior intervention. In the seven instances when USDPHP approached or touched 59 before October 2025, both trading volume and realized volatility consistently compressed—a pattern difficult to reconcile with a freely clearing market. (Figure 1, topmost and middle panes) 

The same pattern has persisted after the breakout. 

While the BSP has ostensibly “allowed” USDPHP to violate its three-year boundary, average daily trading volume has trended downward since mid-2025, and by early January 2026 had fallen back to levels last seen in late 2024. Combined with a persistently narrow intraday trading range, this has produced a marked decline in day-to-day price changes. Put bluntly, suppressed volume has translated into suppressed volatility—a classic signature of administrative smoothing. 

III. Media Agitprop and Be Careful of What You Wish For 

Predictably, much of the self-righteous media attributed the peso’s latest record low to a “strong” US dollar. Yet the DXY remains broadly range-bound near its 2022 levels, despite a modest rebound from its mid-2025 trough. (Figure 1, lowest chart) 

The divergence is telling: USDPHP has been rising steadily since May 2025, even as the broad dollar index failed to make new highs. 

Yes, the dollar strengthened this week, appreciating against seven of ten Asian currencies tracked by Bloomberg, and USDPHP—up roughly 0.7% on the week—was among the largest movers. But context matters. 

Be careful what the establishment wishes for. Such agitprop risks becoming self-fulfilling

The US dollar may indeed be attempting a cyclical rebound. Should that occur, it would likely coincide with a tightening of global financial conditions, making dollar funding scarcer and more expensive. 

A stronger DXY would not cause domestic weakness—but it would expose internal fragilities that have been obscured by global easing

This pattern is consistent with Minsky’s financial instability hypothesis. Repeated suppression of exchange-rate volatility creates the illusion of stability, encouraging leverage, fiscal expansion, and balance-sheet risk. The eventual adjustment does not arrive as a shock—but as accumulated fragility ventilated through the peso.


Figure 2

As we argued last November, USDPHP spikes rarely occur in a vacuum. Historically, they coincide with periods of economic stress. Using BSP end-of-quarter data: (Figure 2) 

  • 1983 debt crisis: +121% over 12 quarters (Q1 1982–Q1 1985)
  • 1997 Asian Financial Crisis: +66.2% over 6 quarters (Q1 1997–Q3 1998)
  • Dot-com bust (1999–2004): +30.6% over 20 quarters (Q2 1999–Q1 2004)
  • Global Financial Crisis: +17.0% over 5 quarters (Q4 2007–Q1 2009)
  • Pandemic recession: +22.6% over 7 quarters (Q4 2020–Q3 2022) 

The current breakout, now coinciding with weakening growth momentum, fits this historical pattern uncomfortably well. 

IV. Lindy Effect: USDPHP’s  56-year Uptrend 

More importantly, the breach of the 59 level reinforces the USDPHP’s roughly 56-year secular uptrend. This can be viewed through Nassim Taleb’s Lindy Effect: not as a property of the exchange rate itself, but of the political-economic ideological regime that governs it. The longer a depreciation bias survives—across crises, cycles, and administrations—the more robust and persistent it proves to be. 

This trend is therefore measured not merely by age, but by repeated survival—by the durability of the policies, incentives, and fiscal behaviors that continually reproduce it.

V. Gold’s Rising Role in the GIR: Serendipity Saved Incompetence 

This context is essential when evaluating the BSP’s reported December 2025 Gross International Reserves (GIR) of $110.872 billion. 


Figure 3

All-time-high gold prices played a decisive role in both the monthly and annual GIR outcome. Remarkably, the valuation gain on gold alone accounted for more than 100% of the roughly $4.6 billion year-on-year increase, while declines in foreign exchange investments exerted a drag on the headline figure.(Figure 3)


Figure 4

As a result, gold now represents its highest share of GIR in over a decade. This is especially striking given that the BSP was the largest net seller of gold in 2024, a move justified at the time as opportunistic monetization of high prices—and, more pointedly, on the argument that gold was a “dead asset.” (Figure 4, topmost and bottom graphs) 

Ironically, the BSP has since been incrementally rebuilding its gold position at higher prices than those at which it sold. 

As in 2020, gold once again served as a leading indicator. Then, large-scale gold sales—alongside increased national government’s external borrowing—were used to finance peso defense under a quasi-soft-peg regime. Once the proceeds were exhausted, borrowing constraints tightened, and usable FX reserves were drawn downmarkets ultimately forced an adjustment: a weaker peso. (Figure 4, middle image) 

Briefly, BSP gold sales foreshadowed the 2020 USDPHP spike—and a rerun appears to be unfolding. 

Gold, however, is not equivalent to FX. It is less liquid in crisis: politically sensitive to mobilize, slower to swap into dollars, and volatile in mark-to-market terms. Markets understand this distinction—even if headline GIR figures do not.

Viewed counterfactually, had gold prices fallen in 2025, GIR would have declined materially, reserve-adequacy ratios would look materially worse, and narrative control would have been far more difficult. None of the reported strength reflects improved external competitiveness, durable capital inflows, or enhanced peso credibility. 

Gold did not validate policy. It rescued the optics. 

In that sense, the 2025 reserve story reveals something uncomfortable to the mainstream but unmistakable: serendipity saved incompetence

VI. Inflation: Same Story, Different Mask 

The government’s inflation narrative should feel familiar by now. 

Last week, sections of the mainstream media began warning—belatedly—about the impact of peso depreciation on electricity prices. This is hardly new. 

The Philippines’ recent inflation history has unfolded in distinct waves, each closely intertwined with the USDPHP.


Figure 5

During 2013–2018, the steady rise in USDPHP coincided with the first wave of inflationary upswing, which began building from 2015. The second wave in USDPHP (2021–2022) overlapped with the second inflation shock spanning 2019–2022, driven by global central bank easing, supply disruptions, energy prices, and domestic pass-through effects. (Figure 5, topmost image) 

What distinguishes the two episodes is not the inflation spike—but the disinflation phase that followed. 

From September 2018 to June 2021, USDPHP declined by roughly 11%, while CPI fell sharply from 6.7% to just 0.8%. As discussed previously, this period coincided with the BSP’s increasing reliance on Other Reserve Assets (ORA)—including derivatives, repos, and short-term FX borrowing—to manage the exchange-rate regime, a shift clearly visible in the GIR composition. 

In the current episode, the adjustment mechanism has been fundamentally different. 

Since first testing the 59 level in 2022, USDPHP has remained range-bound between 55 and 59, with no sustained appreciation. Yet headline CPI retraced materially—not because of currency relief or market forces, but due to a combination of: 

  • Demand destruction, now evident in slowing GDP growth
  • Administrative price controls, including ₱20 rice programs and mandated MSRPs
  • Distortions arising from these interventions, masking underlying pressures
  • Composition and measurement effects, aligned with political incentives for easing—particularly amid ongoing bailouts of the energy sector, banks, and real estate 

It was therefore no coincidence that a day before the October 2025 59-level breakout, the administration announced renewed price freezes, citing natural calamities as justification. 

Despite these measures, December CPI rose to 1.8%, well above consensus expectations, lifting quarterly inflation from 1.4% in Q3 to 1.7% in Q4. Disinflation, it appears, has already begun to fray. 

This erosion is further reflected in liquidity conditions. Bailouts in the energy sector coincided with an 8.26% year-on-year expansion in M3 in October, the fastest since September 2023. (Figure 5, middle diagram) 

November data remain unpublished. 

More broadly, the BSP has either delayed, discontinued, or reduced the frequency of several previously standard statistical releases—ranging from Bank’s MSME lending to stock market activities (transactions, index, and market capitalization) and more. Whether this reflects capacity constraints or political narrative sensitivity remains an open question. But opacity rarely improves credibility. 

VII. Self-Poverty Ratings, Sentiment, and the Limits of Macro Optics 

While headline CPI surprised to the upside, food inflation for the bottom 30% of households turned positive for the first time since March 2025—a critical inflection point historically associated with rising hunger and self-rated poverty. (Figure 5, lowest visual)


Figure 6

Consistent with this, the SWS Q4 survey showed self-rated poverty rising to 51% of households, with another 12% on the borderline—a combined 63%. (Figure 6, upper chart) 

This deterioration in sentiment persists despite record consumer credit, near-full employment headlines, slowing CPI, pandemic-scale deficit spending, and still-positive GDP growth. 

This is not an anomaly. Improvements in self-rated poverty reversed as early as 2017, spanning two administrations and coinciding with a sustained surge in deficit spending. 

What is rarely discussed is that this reflects the redistributive and extraction effects of crowding out—the attenuation of the private sector in favor of the state and its preferred private sector intermediaries. 

Households have responded predictably by leveraging their balance sheets to sustain consumption amid eroding purchasing power, refinancing debt rather than building resilience through savings. 

This divergence between headline indicators and lived experience is a classic case of James Buchanan’s fiscal illusion. By diffusing costs through inflation, deficits, and administered prices, the state masks the true burden of adjustment—until it reappears in household balance sheets and public sentiment.

VIII. Employment Optics vs Labor Reality 

The government reported improving employment data last November. Less visible is that labor force participation has been declining since late 2022, while employment momentum shows signs of plateauing (via rounding top formation). (Figure 6, lower graph) 

More troubling is the quality of employmentFunctional illiteracy remains widespread, MSMEs and informal work dominate job creation, and household income growth remains structurally dependent on OFW remittances. 

This combination explains why sentiment remains depressed—and why slowing GDP risks morphing into a more pernicious mix of rising NPLsrenewed inflation pressures from deficit monetization, or outright stagflation.

IX. Deficits, Debt, and the Entropic Drift 

Despite the rhetoric surrounding corruption and reform, the administration has signed a Php 6.793 trillion 2026 budgetensuring that the entropic forces dragging on growth remain firmly in place.


Figure 7

Public debt rose to a record Php 17.65 trillion in November, up 9.7% year-on-year, defying the Bureau of the Treasury’s September projection of year-end declines. (Figure 7, middle and topmost images) 

Domestic debt expanded by 10.95%, while foreign debt rose 7%, continuing its gradual upward share since 2021.(Figure 7, lowest diagram) 

As we have repeatedly argued, expanding deficits mechanically imply rising debt and servicing burdens. Whether domestic or foreign, this accumulation heightens balance-sheet and duration risks. 

No amount of propa-news or fiscal newspeak alters that arithmetic. 

Eventually, these imbalances surface—in the exchange rate, inflation, interest rates, asset prices, and real activity. Not abruptly, but gradually, through a boiling-frog dynamic—a process that markets ventilate over time. 

As Mancur Olson warned, mature systems accumulate distributional coalitions that extract rents while resisting adjustment. The result is slower growth, rising inequality, and a political preference for redistribution over reform—precisely the conditions now reflected in peso weakness and declining household sentiment.

X. PSE’s January 2026 Boom: Liquidity First, Fundamentals Later 

Unsurprisingly, liquidity-driven rallies continue to propel global equity markets, with the effect especially visible in Asia. The Philippine PSEi 30 gained 3.47% week-on-week (WoW), ranking fourth in the region. As evidence of speculative mania, nine of nineteen Asian indices closed at or near all-time highs for the first time, delivering unusually strong market breadth.


Figure 8

Yet the Philippine rally remains highly concentrated, with a handful of brokers and heavily traded issues generating most of the volume. The largest-capitalization stock, ICTSI, surged 12.5% WoW, almost single-handedly driving the PSEi 30, flanked by Jollibee (+12.32%) and AEV (+11.35%). (Figure 8, topmost visual) 

Weekly breadth within the PSEi 30 favored gainers (19 of 30), while the broader PSE recorded its best two-week breadth since January 2023—ironically, the PSEi 30 still closed 2023 down 1.77%. (Figure 8, middle window) 

Although the number of issues traded daily spiked to 2022 highs—often read as a sign of rising retail participation—main-board turnover averaged just Php 6.25 billion per day, a curious outcome amid New Year euphoria. (Figure 8, lowest chart) 

As with prior easing-driven rallies, such liquidity pumps tend to have short half-lives.

XI. Conclusion: Record USDPHP A Symptom, Policies The Disease 

The November break of USDPHP 59 marked the unraveling of the BSP’s soft peg and exposed underlying economic fragility. December’s record highs made clear that this was not a transient overshoot, but the manifestation of deeper fault lines—fiscal bailouts, and mounting financial stress—expressed as widening bailouts initially at the energy sector 

January 2026 merely confirms the trajectoryWhat appears as resilience in the BSP’s foreign reserves has largely been valuation-driven. What looks like disinflation is increasingly administrative maneuvers. What passes for growth is the rising use of leverage, mounting deficits, and liquidity injections rather than productivity or competitiveness

In this sense, the peso’s decline is not an accident of global conditions. It is the byproduct of a political-economic regime that repeatedly socializes losses, crowds out private adjustment, favors centralization, predisposed to asset bubbles and substitutes newspeak for balance-sheet repair. 

The exchange rate is not the problem. It is the messenger. 

____

References

Friedrich von Hayek, Choice In Currency, A Way To Stop Inflation, The Institute Of Economic Affairs 1976 

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

Prudent Investor Newsletters, USD-PHP at Record Highs: The Three Philippine Fault Lines—Energy Fragility, Fiscal Bailouts, Bank Stress, Substack, December 21, 2025 

Nassim Nicholas Taleb An Expert Called Lindy January 9, 2017

Sunday, November 16, 2025

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 projectsThese 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