The role of automatic stabilizers in business cycle: the case of indonesia

TThe use of large fiscal stimulus packages to dampen the impact of Covid-19 recently has raised concerns about the effectiveness of the discretionary fiscal policy. This paper aims at analysing the feasibility of automatic fiscal stabilisers to mitigate economic fluctuations in the case of Indonesia. Using the IMF standard model for quarterly data over the period of 2001(1) to 2019(4), we find that the role of automatic fiscal stabilisers is getting greater both in revenue and spending. This implies that the automatic fiscal stabilisers are feasible as the main fiscal policy instrument for economic stability goals in the future. However, given the existing circumstances, Indonesia has to reform economic, regulatory, and institutional ecosystems in adopting the automatic fiscal stabilisers.

Government investment fiscal multipliers: evidence from Euro-area countries

This paper aims to estimate the government investment fiscal multipliers in select European countries for the period 1970–2016. To do this, we combine Structural Vector Autoregression (SVAR) modeling with the Local Projections (LP) approach. We estimate models by also controlling for fiscal foresight, excluding the postcrisis period and distinguishing between Northern and Southern countries. Our findings suggest that an increase in government investment generates a “Keynesian effect” by engendering positive and permanent effects on the GDP level, even when government expenditure expectations are considered. Fiscal multipliers are close to 1 on impact and increase in the years after the implementation of a discretionary fiscal policy.

The impact of COVID-19 on households´ income in the EU

This analysis makes use of economic forecasts for 2020 issued by the European Commission in Autumn 2019 and Spring 2020, and of a counterfactual under a no-policy change assumption, to analyse the impact of the COVID-19 crisis on EU households´ income. Additionally, our analysis assesses the cushioning effect of discretionary fiscal policy measures taken by the EU Member States. We find that the COVID-19 pandemic is likely to affect significantly households’ disposable income in the EU, with lower income households being more severely hit. However, our results show that due to policy intervention, the impact of the crisis is expected to be similar to the one experienced during the 2008–2009 financial crisis. In detail, our results indicate that discretionary fiscal policy measures will play a significant cushioning role, reducing the size of the income loss (from −9.3% to −4.3% for the average equivalised disposable income), its regressivity and mitigating the poverty impact of the pandemic. We conclude that policy interventions are therefore instrumental in cushioning against the impact of the crisis on inequality and poverty.

THE EUROPEAN UNION AND ITALY RELATIONS IN THE CONTEXT OF SUPRANATIONAL FISCAL REGULATION

The article presents a retrospective analysis of relations between the government of Italy and the European Union institutions in the context of supranational fiscal regulation in 2002–2019. The authors analyze the influence of external and internal factors on the state of public finance in Italy, note the reasons that made it difficult to meet the requirements of the Stability and Growth Pact, study the main issues on the agenda in the EU-Italy relations and their evolution. The authors also come to conclusion that unlike the earlier discussions about correcting budget deficit in Italy, current focus of supranational fiscal governance is shifted to preventing it, what challenges the economic sovereignty of Italy and country’s opportunities to conduct a discretionary fiscal policy.

Fiscal Sustainability in Aging Societies: Evidence from Euro Area Countries

Fiscal sustainability remains a paramount challenge in the Euro Area (EA) countries after the sharp rise in public debt-to-GDP ratios in the aftermath of the financial crisis of 2008. Using data from 11 EA countries over the period 1980–2019, we apply panel data techniques to examine the effects of population aging on fiscal sustainability, controlling for key macroeconomic variables. Our results suggest that the discretionary fiscal policy is strongly persistent, not being consistent with long-term fiscal solvency. Moreover, our results indicate that the fiscal stance is countercyclical for the countries under study and that population aging poses a major challenge for fiscal sustainability. The findings are robust to a different grouping of countries within the sample (core and peripheral countries, relatively old and young countries, and relatively more and less indebted countries). We consider that our results may have some practical meaning for national policymakers and international organizations responsible for regional and global fiscal surveillance and might shed some light on the possible effects that population aging could have on the effort of EA countries to restore public finances on a sustainable basis.

When is discretionary fiscal policy effective?

We investigate the effects of discretionary changes in government spending and taxes using a medium-scale nonlinear vector autoregressive model with policy shocks identified via sign restrictions. Tax cuts and spending increases have larger stimulative effects when there is excess slack in the economy, while they are much less effective, especially in the case of government spending increases, when the economy is close to potential. We find that contractionary shocks have larger effects than expansionary shocks across the business cycle, but this is much more pronounced during deep recessions and sluggish recoveries than in robust expansions. Notably, tax increases are highly contractionary and largely self-defeating in reducing the debt-to-GDP ratio when the economy is in a deep recession. The effectiveness of discretionary government spending, including its state dependence, appears to be almost entirely due to the response of consumption. The responses of both consumption and investment to discretionary tax changes are state dependent, but investment plays the larger quantitative role.

POLÍTICA FISCAL DISCRECIONAL EN BRASIL, 1995-2017: DESCOMPOSICIÓN Y EVOLUCIÓN

<p>Este artículo tiene como objetivo evaluar la orientación general (expansionista o contraccionista) del componente discrecional de la política fiscal brasileña en el periodo 1995-2017, así como verificar su posición respecto al ciclo económico (procíclica o anticíclica). Con este fin, proponemos y aplicamos una nueva metodología para separar el impulso fiscal discrecional de la parte del resultado fiscal que se obtiene de la activación de los estabilizadores fiscales automáticos. Concluimos que la política fiscal: 1) generó una posición mayormente procíclica (desestabilizadora) de su componente discrecional, lo que la llevó a amplificar en lugar de amortiguar los ciclos económicos; 2) no pudo evitar que la relación deuda pública/PIB entrase en una trayectoria insostenible al final del periodo. Se hacen algunas sugerencias para mejorar su rendimiento.</p><p><strong> </strong></p><p align="center">DISCRETIONARY FISCAL POLICY IN BRAZIL, 1995-2017: DECOMPOSITION AND EVOLUTION</p><p align="center"><strong>ABSTRACT</strong><strong></strong></p>This article aims to evaluate the general (expansionist or contractionist) orientation of the discretionary component of Brazilian fiscal policy in the period 1995-2017, as well as to verify its position in relation to the economic cycle (procyclical or anticyclical). To this end, it proposes and applies a new methodology to separate the discretionary fiscal impulse from the part of the fiscal result arising from the operation of automatic fiscal stabilizers. It concludes that fiscal policy: 1) generated a mostly procyclical (destabilizing) position of its discretionary component, leading it to amplify rather than dampen economic cycles; 2) failed to prevent the public debt/GDP ratio from entering the unsustainable path at the end of the period. Suggestions are made to improve its performance.

Keynesian economics: can it return if it never died?

Appreciation of the Keynesian synthesis was enhanced by the events of the last decade. The global financial crisis highlighted the fragility of financial markets and the capriciousness of animal spirits. The depth of the downturn pointed to the value of not just automatic stabilizers but also discretionary fiscal policy as tools of macroeconomic management. Keynesian models and not their New Classical challengers provided the practical analytical framework for policy design. Models of the anti-Keynesian effects of fiscal consolidation received little support from actual consolidation experience. The secular-stagnation debate that followed the crisis lent legitimacy to the view that policy-makers with fiscal space were wise to use it.