299x 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.