Suchergebnisse

AbstractCOVID‐related government outlays will increase the level of government debt. A macroeconomic model, calibrated to the US, quantitatively assesses potential responses to this higher debt. In terms of economic welfare, reducing debt through capital incomes tax hikes is the least desirable option considered: the associated tax base is small, and anticipating such a tax increase reduces capital accumulation. There is little to choose between fiscal austerity through government spending cuts versus raising labour income tax rates. Accommodating higher government debt is welfare‐improving but still requires substantial fiscal austerity owing to higher debt servicing costs.

AbstractTo study the efficacy of the public policy response to the COVID‐19 pandemic, we develop a model of the rich interactions between epidemiology and socioeconomic choices. Preferences feature a "fear of death" that lead individuals to reduce their social activity and work time in the face of the pandemic. The aggregate effect of these reductions is to slow the spread of the novel coronavirus. We calibrate the model, including public policies, to developments in Ontario in the spring of 2020. The model fits the epidemiological data quite well, including the second wave starting in late 2020. We find that socioeconomic interventions work well in the short term, resulting in a rapid drop‐off in new cases. The long run, however, is governed chiefly by health developments. Welfare cost calculations point to synergies between the health and socioeconomic measures.

Following the Great Recession, U.S. government debt levels exceeded 100% of output. We develop a macroeconomic model to evaluate the role of various shocks during and after the Great Recession; labor market shocks have the greatest impact on macroeconomic activity. We then evaluate the consequences of using alternative fiscal policy instruments to implement a fiscal austerity program to return the debt-output ratio to its pre-Great Recession level. Our welfare analysis reveals that there is not much difference between applying fiscal austerity through government spending, the labor income tax, or the consumption tax; using the capital income tax is welfare-reducing.

Following the Great Recession, U.S. government debt levels exceeded 100% of output. We develop a macroeconomic model to evaluate the role of various shocks during and after the Great Recession; labor market shocks have the greatest impact on macroeconomic activity. We then evaluate the consequences of using alternative fiscal policy instruments to implement a fiscal austerity program to return the debt-output ratio to its pre-Great Recession level. Our welfare analysis reveals that there is not much difference between applying fiscal austerity through government spending, the labor income tax, or the consumption tax; using the capital income tax is welfare-reducing.

Following the Great Recession, U.S. government debt levels exceeded 100% of output. We develop a macroeconomic model to evaluate the role of various shocks during and after the Great Recession; labor market shocks have the greatest impact on macroeconomic activity. We then evaluate the consequences of using alternative fiscal policy instruments to implement a fiscal austerity program to return the debt-output ratio to its pre-Great Recession level. Our welfare analysis reveals that there is not much difference between applying fiscal austerity through government spending, the labor income tax, or the consumption tax; using the capital income tax is welfare-reducing.