CLARIFYING CONFUSION ABOUT THE BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT

1995 ◽  
Vol 48 (3) ◽  
pp. 347-355
Author(s):  
JAMES M. BUCHANAN
Keyword(s):  
2012 ◽  
pp. 108-123
Author(s):  
E. Penukhina ◽  
D. Belousov ◽  
K. Mikhailenko

The article determines, describes and analyzes phases of tax reforms in Russia. We estimate macroeconomic and fiscal effects of various tax policies held during the second and third phases of tax reforms. The necessity of providing a balanced budget system, as well as complex assessment of effects of tax policy changes for the development of the Russian economy is noted.


2012 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 291-313
Author(s):  
WAYNE SIMPSON ◽  
JARED J. WESLEY

1998 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 224-231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandra Christensen

2021 ◽  
Vol 49 (5) ◽  
pp. 635-672
Author(s):  
Sharon N. Kioko ◽  
Michelle L. Lofton

We test the effect of balanced budget requirements (BBRs) on budget outcomes using data published in audited financial statements. With a focus on the General Fund, we find states frequently reported deficits in their adopted budgets and relied on sizeable and favorable expenditure variances to close budget gaps before the end of the budget period. Empirical analysis shows that technical or strict BBRs procedures did not increase the likelihood that a state would report a balanced budget. We corroborate our findings using fund balance data. If technical or strict BBRs are effective, states would report higher fund balances, all else equal. Results show that states that adopted political BBRs reported lower fund balances. More importantly, the adoption of strict or technical BBRs did not lead to higher fund balances.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Kumhof ◽  
T. Nicolaus Tideman ◽  
Michael Hudson ◽  
Charles A.E. Goodhart
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document