172x Filetype PDF File size 0.36 MB Source: www.fpr.se
Rapport till Finanspolitiska rådet 2008/2 A survey of the effects of * discretionary fiscal policy Roel Beetsma University of Amsterdam, CEPR and CESifo The views expressed in this report are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Swedish Fiscal Policy Council. * I thank, for helpful comments, my discussant Lars E.O. Svensson, as well as Lars Calmfors and par- ticipants at the conference “Fiscal Policy and Labour Market Reforms”, organized by the Swedish Fiscal Policy Council in Stockholm, 29 January, 2008. Finanspolitiska rådet är en myndighet som har till uppgift att göra en obe- roende granskning av regeringens finanspolitik. Rådets uppgifter fullföljs framför allt genom publiceringen av rapporten Svensk finanspolitik som lämnas till regeringen en gång per år. Rapporten ska kunna användas som ett underlag för riksdagens granskning av regeringens politik. Rådet anord- nar även konferenser. I serien Studier i finanspolitik publiceras fördjupa- de studier av olika aspekter på finanspolitiken. Finanspolitiska rådet Box 3273 SE-103 65 Stockholm Kungsgatan 12-14 Tel: 08-453 59 90 Fax: 08-453 59 64 info@finanspolitiskaradet.se www.finanspolitiskaradet.se ISSN 1654-8000 3 Abstract Discretionary fiscal policy is undergoing a revival. Recently, the US govern- ment has implemented a fiscal stimulus package. Also, prominent economists and the IMF are pleading in favour of fiscal stimulus. In this paper we survey the theoretical and empirical literature on the effects of discretionary fiscal policy changes through taxes and government spending. We also provide some of our own evidence. Most empirical evidence indicates that a fiscal expansion raises output and consumption and deteriorates the trade balance. Our own evidence, though, suggests that the stimulating effect is weaker and the trade balance deterioration is larger for more open economies. Keynesian-type mod- els with imperfections such as for example credit restrictions seem most in accordance with the empirical evidence. Does this imply that an active fiscal stabilisation policy is desirable? Certainly not: there exists substantial uncer- tainty about the size of the effects of fiscal policy, the long-run cost of a short- run expansion may be high, a government spending increase aimed at stabilisa- tion may be wasteful or create long-term obligations, there exists uncertainty about the state of the economy and there is a substantial time lag before a pol- icy change is implemented. It is best to impose credible fiscal restrictions and have fiscal policy focus on medium-term balance or surplus, leaving enough room for the automatic stabilisers to do their work. That leaves monetary pol- icy free to pursue price stability and stabilize the economy.
no reviews yet
Please Login to review.