Fixing South Africa’s Debt: Why Rigid Fiscal Rules Are Not the Answer

Fixing South Africa’s Debt: Why Rigid Fiscal Rules Are Not the Answer

South Africa’s debt crisis is often attributed to excessive borrowing, but the real issue lies in the cost of debt, not its size. While fiscal rules are touted as a solution, evidence suggests they may do more harm than good. This policy brief explores why these rules are ill-suited to South Africa’s unique challenges and offers alternative strategies for sustainable fiscal management.

The Problem with Rigid Fiscal Rules

Proponents argue that fiscal rules enhance credibility and curb unsustainable debt. However, South Africa’s debt-to-GDP ratio is comparable to similar countries, yet its debt service costs are significantly higher. Fiscal rules, while popular, often lead to creative accounting, limit democratic engagement, and fail to address the root causes of high borrowing costs.

Lessons from International Case Studies

Countries like Brazil and Indonesia have shown that rigid fiscal rules can encourage austerity, distort spending priorities, and undermine social services. Economic growth, rather than fiscal rules, has proven more effective in improving debt dynamics. These lessons highlight the risks of adopting inflexible fiscal frameworks in a developing economy like South Africa.

Recommendations for South Africa

Instead of imposing rigid fiscal rules, South Africa should focus on:

  • Building political consensus on spending priorities.
  • Lowering borrowing costs through Reserve Bank interventions and capital controls.
  • Prioritising growth and poverty alleviation to reduce unemployment and expand supply capacity.
  • Renegotiating SOE debt and rethinking the use of the repo rate to control inflation.

By adopting a more flexible and growth-oriented approach, South Africa can address its debt crisis without compromising its developmental goals.