HOW RIVAL ARE THE RICARDIAN EQUIVALENCE PROPOSITION AND THE FISCAL POLICY POTENCY VIEW?

1992 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 457-476 ◽  
Author(s):  
Basil A. Dalamagas
2012 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 395-417 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raffaele Rossi

This paper studies the determinacy properties of monetary and fiscal policy rules in a small-scale New Keynesian model. We modify the standard model in two ways. First, we allow positive public debt in the steady state as in Leeper [Journal of Monetary Economics 27, 129–147 (1991)]. Second, we add rule-of-thumb consumers as in Bilbiie [Journal of Economic Theory 140, 162–196 (2008)]. Leeper studied a model in which Ricardian equivalence holds, and he showed that monetary and fiscal policy can be studied independently. In Bilbiie's analysis, rule-of-thumb consumers break the Ricardian equivalence and generate important consequences for the design of monetary policy. In his model, steady-state public debt was equal to zero. We study a model with both rule-of-thumb consumers and positive steady-state public debt. We find that the mix of fiscal and monetary policies that guarantees equilibrium determinacy is sensitive to the exact values of the parameters of the model.


2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (3) ◽  
pp. 340-353
Author(s):  
Rachel Moore ◽  
Brandon Pecoraro

Analysis of fiscal policy changes using general equilibrium models with forward-looking agents typically requires a counterfactual adjustment to some fiscal instrument in order to achieve the debt sustainability implied by the government’s intertemporal budget constraint. The choice of fiscal instrument can induce economic behavior unrelated to the policy change in models where Ricardian Equivalence does not hold. In this article, we use an overlapping generations framework to examine the effects of alternative fiscal closing assumptions on projected changes to economic aggregates following a change in tax policy, assessing the extent to which the bias associated with a particular fiscal instrument can be mitigated. While we find quantitative differences in projected macroeconomic activity across alternative fiscal instruments, these differences tend to shrink as the closing date is delayed. Ultimately, the choice of fiscal instrument becomes relatively unimportant if fiscal closing can be delayed sufficiently into the future.


2010 ◽  
Vol 49 (4II) ◽  
pp. 497-512 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shahid Ali ◽  
Naved Ahmad

Fiscal policy refers to government‟s efforts to influence the direction of the economy through changes in taxes or expenditures. Optimal fiscal policy in Pakistan and in other developing countries plays a pivotal role in growth process and, hence, serves as a vital instrument for economic growth. The efficacy of fiscal policy in improving economic conditions in the long run is, however, a controversial issue and needs further investigation. In conventional model, a federal tax cut without a corresponding reduction in federal expenditures will encourage consumption expenditures and interest earnings due to increase in personal disposable income. Contrarily, according to Ricardian Equivalence Theorem (RET), the same change in fiscal policy will not result in any of the above mentioned macroeconomic impacts. In other words, a reduction in deficit-financed federal tax cut will not affect macroeconomic outcomes [Saxton (1999)].


2020 ◽  
pp. 206-215
Author(s):  
Vito Tanzi

This chapter briefly revisits the book’s discussions of Keynes, the Great Depresssion, and Stabilization policies. It considers the importance of fiscal policy and the importance of simplicity in its use and the trust in its impact, especially in the 1960s. The chapter then looks at stagflation and growing doubts in the 1970s and the growing importance of rational expectations and of the Ricardian Equivalence Hypothesis and their impact on stabilization policy. Monetary policy also took on increasing importance in light of the growing complexity of the structure of the economy and the consequent growth of many new occupations. Finally, the impact of these changes and of growing globalization on the design of stabilization policies is discussed alongside a possible reduction in the effectiveness of fiscal policy.


2010 ◽  
Vol 49 (4II) ◽  
pp. 577-592 ◽  
Author(s):  
Attiya Y. Javid ◽  
Muhammad Javid ◽  
Umiama Arif

The relationship between fiscal policy and the current account has long attracted interest among academic economists and policymakers after introduction of the standard intertemporal model of the current account by Sachs (1981) and its extension by Obstfeld and Rogoff, (1995) in open economy macroeconomics. There are two major strands of the current account literature Mundell-Fleming [Mundell (1968) and Fleming (1967)] and Ricardian equivalence [Barro (1974, 1989)] to explain such variations in the deficits. According to Mundell-Fleming model budget deficits cause current account deficits through stimulating income growth or exchange rate appreciation [Darrat (1988); Abell (1990); Bachman (1992) and Bahmani-Oskooee (1992)]. On the other hand, there is Ricardian view that the financing of budget deficits, either through reduced taxes or by issuing bond does not alter present value wealth of private households since both temporarily reduced taxes and issuance of bonds represent future tax liabilities [Kaufmann, et al. (2002); Evans (1989); Miller and Russek (1989); Enders and Lee (1990) and Kim (1995)]. The underlying reason is that the effects of fiscal deficits on the current account depend on the nature of the fiscal imbalance. For example, in a simple theoretical model in which Ricardian equivalence holds, a cut in lump sum taxes and the ensuing fiscal deficit would not affect the current account as the private savings increase will offset the fiscal deficit but investment will be unchanged. Conversely, a transitory increase in government spending will increase both the fiscal deficit and the current account deficit, a case of twin deficits. And a permanent increase in government spending will have no effects on the current account while its effects on the fiscal balance will depend on whether the extra spending is financed right away with taxes (in which case the fiscal balance is unchanged) or whether it is financed with debt (future taxes) in which case the fiscal balance worsens. Thus, fiscal deficit may or may not lead to current account deficits depending on the nature and persistence of the fiscal shock. There is also a third scenario relate to Recardian view that portrays the possibility of negative relationship between the deficits where, for example, output shock give rise to endogenous movements and two deficits are divergent.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document