scholarly journals The failure of stabilization policy: Balanced-budget fiscal rules in the presence of incompressible public expenditures

2020 ◽  
Vol 120 ◽  
pp. 103996
Author(s):  
Nicolas Abad ◽  
Teresa Lloyd-Braga ◽  
Leonor Modesto
2004 ◽  
Vol 53 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Carsten Hefeker ◽  
Friedrich Heinemann ◽  
Klaus F. Zimmermann

AbstractIn his contribution Carsten Hefeker points out that most of the official arguments concerning the necessity of the Stability and Growth Pact are not convincing. Nevertheless, a mechanism that credibly avoids excessive debts and deficits is needed in most member states. It would be more useful, however, if such rules would focus on overall debt rather than on deficits. In addition, he advocates to create an external control for such fiscal rules, independent from the Commission and ECOFIN. He concludes that the Pact does not need to become more flexible, but more credible.Friedrich Heinemann states that much of the recent reform debate on the Stability Pact is based on a fundamental misconception: The Pact has not been established as a guiding tool for welfare - maximising politicians, but in order to limit detrimental incentives from fiscal short-sightedness. “Stupid” elements like the three-per-cent deficit ceiling have a clear and beneficial strategic function as boundary within the national budgetary process. Furthermore, simple rules are superior to smart ones in increasing the political costs of high deficits in terms of public awareness. The critique on the pact′s missing flexibility is correct mainly regarding its lose logical link to long-run sustainability. Increasing flexibility in a cyclical sense, however, is not a reform priority. Already today the Pact leaves sufficient leeway for responsible politicians. Instead, the reform focus must be on depoliticising the pact in the sense of limiting Council power in the deficit procedure. More flexibility must not come without depoliticising. He recommends that any reform should only be carried into effect with a significant time lag in order to limit the reputation damage which would be the consequence of any quick institutional response to the Pact′s recent crisis.In his paper Klaus F. Zimmermann argues that the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP) has been subject to criticism ever since its inception. He points out that it overlooks business cycle developments within the framework of the consolidation process; it adopts a too short-term view of the stabilisation target which is also hardly under control of policy-makers; and it deals with policy imperfections in a sub-optimal way. Therefore, a reform of the SGP is urgent. The author suggests that the rules must be handled more flexibly. In his opinion, a mediumterm budgetary target and a focus on public expenditures to tackle the pro-cyclical bias is needed. To restore credibility, the task of supervision should be transferred to an independent European institution.


Author(s):  
Etienne Farvaque ◽  
Hira Iqbal ◽  
Nicolas Ooghe

Were policy responses of the US states to the pandemic driven by partisan politics or by budgetary reasons? We show that balanced-budget rules also had an impact, mediated by the possibility of benefiting from the funds previously stored in budget stabilisation funds. State policymakers tried to square the circle by simultaneously respecting budget rules, limiting the economic impact of the social distancing measures, combating the pandemic and pandering to their political bases. Some fiscal rules have induced a trade-off between health and public finance, which may reignite the debate on the pro-cyclicality of fiscal rules.


Author(s):  
Facundo Piguillem ◽  
Alessandro Riboni

Abstract Most fiscal rules can be overridden by consensus. We show that this does not make them ineffectual. Since fiscal rules determine the outside option in case of disagreement, the opposition uses them as “bargaining chips” to obtain spending concessions. We show that under some conditions this political bargain mitigates the debt accumulation problem. We analyze various rules and find that when political polarization is high, harsh fiscal rules (e.g., government shutdown) maximize the opposition’s bargaining power and lead to lower debt accumulation. When polarization is low, less strict fiscal limits (e.g, balanced-budget rule) are preferable. Moreover, we find that the optimal fiscal rules could arise in equilibrium by negotiation. Finally, by insuring against power fluctuations, negotiable rules yield higher welfare than hard ones.


2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 137-156 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haryo Kuncoro

Abstract This paper aims at analyzing the co-movement between fiscal policy and monetary policy rules in the context of price stabilization. More specifically, we observe the potential impact of fiscal policy credibility on the price stabilization in the inflation targeting framework. Motivated by the fact that empirical studies concerning this aspect are still limited, we take the case of Indonesia over the period 2001-2013. Based on the quarterly data analysis, we found that the impact of credibility typically depends on characteristics of fiscal rules commitment. On one hand, the credibility of debt rule reduces the inflation rate. In contrast, the incredible deficit rule policy does not have any impact on the inflation rate and therefore does not support to inflation targeting. Given those results, we conclude that credibility matters in stabilizing price levels. Accordingly, those findings suggest tightening coordination between monetary and fiscal policy to maintain fiscal sustainability in accordance with price stabilization policy


2020 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 351-365
Author(s):  
Zsolt Darvas

AbstractBoth the level and composition of public expenditures and revenues have implications for economic development, as argued by the ‘fiscal multiplier’ and the ‘quality of public finance’ literature. Public finance decisions also influence the distribution of income. By reviewing the literature, I argue for a fair distribution of income as reflected in low income inequality, not particularly because of the impact of income inequality on long-term growth (which is a controversial issue), but primarily because income inequality typically implies inequality of opportunity. European Union countries have very diverse public finance structures and different levels of effectiveness, and there is room for improvement in growth and equality impacts in all countries. A general guideline would be that the most effective approach comprises progressive taxes and inheritance taxes, spending on education, health and public infrastructure, and better government effectiveness. At the height of the 2008 global and the subsequent European financial and economic crises, the fiscal consolidation strategies of EU countries largely relied on cutting public investment and social spending (except pensions), which is the opposite of what is suggested in the literature. Better fiscal rules and good fiscal institutions are needed to safeguard growth- and distribution friendly expenditures in a crisis.


2016 ◽  
Vol 63 (2) ◽  
pp. 149-159
Author(s):  
Tatiana Covalschi ◽  
Sebastian Lazăr

This paper analyses public finances sustainability in the Republic of Moldova under the European Union fiscal rules, by estimating the structural budget balance indicator using a three steps methodology. We concluded that, except for 2009, the Republic of Moldova complies with the Maastricht numerical fiscal rule; however it does not comply with the new fiscal rules regarding the structural deficit and public expenditures growth that had been set by the Fiscal Compact. The fact that budget deficits and public debt had been sustainable was mainly because of the concessions made by the external creditors in restructuring the public debt and was not a merit of national government. Moreover, since the regular budget deficit and the structural one tell different stories, we strongly advocate for using the latter in order to complement the existing data with a medium-term budgetary view.


2011 ◽  
Vol 58 (5) ◽  
pp. 631-649 ◽  
Author(s):  
Costa Fernandes ◽  
Paulo Mota

The main purposes of this paper are twofold: a) to determine if there are significant differences on the determinants of public expenditures and tax revenues between the so-called PIGS and the remaining Eurozone member states; b) to uncover possible explanations for the different situations in which these countries find themselves nowadays. The paper focus on the effects of the cyclical state of the economy on those fiscal variables, and on the actual adherence to the fiscal rules imposed by the Maastricht Treaty. Based on the estimated results we conclude that the anti-cyclical reaction with respect to the unemployment rate is much stronger among non-PIGS. We also find that fiscal rules have, in general, not been followed by those two groups of countries. Moreover, PIGS, in spite of their economic frailties, have tried to emulate the fiscal behavior of their more prosperous Eurozone partners instead of executing more rigorous policies.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document