The national debt surpassed $39 trillion this spring, with federal interest costs for fiscal 2025 exceeding $1.2 trillion—more than the entire defense budget. The U.S. is effectively borrowing from the future to pay for past obligations, and Congress has failed to offer a structural solution for decades.
President Trump’s executive order on February 3, 2025, directed the Treasury and Commerce departments to produce a blueprint for a sovereign wealth fund within 90 days. The plan was submitted, but more than a year later, the fund remains stuck in bureaucratic limbo.
The United States is the only major developed economy without such a fund. Norway’s sovereign wealth fund now stands at $2.2 trillion, having generated a 15.1% return in 2025. Alaska’s Permanent Fund has distributed over $25 billion to residents since 1982. While more than 20 state-level investment vehicles exist, there is zero at the federal level—even as deficits grow by $7.6 billion daily.
Two revenue streams could seed a U.S. fund without new taxes. Customs duties brought in $195 billion in fiscal 2025, a 150% increase from the previous year. Although the Supreme Court struck down Trump’s original tariff order in February, the administration reimposed equivalent duties under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, keeping that revenue intact. Additionally, the former Department of Government Efficiency identified over $160 billion in spending reductions through contract terminations, lease renegotiations, and workforce restructuring. Independent analysts question the exact figure, but meaningful savings are real.
At a conservative 5% real return, a fund seeded with $500 billion to $1 trillion could generate $25 billion to $50 billion annually within a decade. That income could offset debt service or bolster Social Security before its trust fund runs dry. The 2025 Social Security Trustees Report projects the Old Age Survivors Insurance program will be depleted by 2033, with only 77% of benefits payable then. Eight years is not far off, even if Congress acts otherwise.
Beyond debt relief, a wealth fund would preserve wealth for future generations rather than letting it vanish into the general budget. One-time windfalls—tariff proceeds, asset monetization, energy revenues—should not be absorbed into the same budget that created the problem. Alaska proved this model works at the state level; a national version could eventually deliver modest annual payments to every American, funded by investment returns, not new borrowing. That is ownership, not redistribution.
The government has already shown it can execute such transactions. In August 2025, the Trump administration converted $8.9 billion in CHIPS Act grants into a 9.9% equity stake in Intel, yielding an unrealized gain of $47.6 billion—a 495% return in under nine months. Similar equity deals followed in rare-earth mining, battery metals, and magnet manufacturing with companies like MP Materials, Lithium Americas, and Vulcan Elements. But each was structured separately under different agencies with inconsistent governance.
The In-Q-Tel precedent is instructive. The CIA’s venture-capital arm invested in Palantir before commercial capital was interested; Palantir’s first-quarter 2026 revenue grew 85% year-over-year. In-Q-Tel is a nonprofit, and gains stayed within the intelligence community. A sovereign wealth fund would use the same patient-capital logic but return the upside to every American, not just one agency.
The obvious objection is that another federal vehicle could become a slush fund. Norway counters this with statute—a prohibition on political interference, professional management accountable to a single mandate, and quarterly public disclosure. Similar rules can be written here, staffed with investment professionals, not appointees, and with an inspector general. Governance structure is the decisive variable. Get it right, and the fund compounds for decades, as Norway, Singapore’s Temasek, and Abu Dhabi’s ADIA have shown.
The alternative is the status quo: deficits compounding, trust funds draining, and a generation inheriting a stack of IOUs. Congress needs to close the loop, because our children deserve an ownership stake in the most productive economy on the planet. Build the fund, invest it wisely, and hand the next generation something worth inheriting.
For more on how tariff revenue could be redirected, see allocating tariff refunds to early childhood investment. Meanwhile, concerns about federal slush funds have sparked protests, as reported in this projection on the DOJ building. The broader political stakes are examined in why a landslide in 2028 could restore democracy.
