Does right or left matter? Cabinets, credibility and fiscal adjustments
AbstractThis paper uses the widely held assumption that left-wing cabinets prefer a larger size of government than right-wing cabinets to answer the question: does the pair cabinet ideology - fiscal action affect the persistence of fiscal adjustments? For a panel of OECD countries from 1960 to 1995, we find that left and right-wing cabinets are partisan in the expected way, namely, when cutting the deficit, the left relies on tax increases and the right on spending cuts. Our testable hypothesis is that cabinets signal commitment and gain credibility by pursuing fiscal adjustments in ways not favored by their constituents, i.e., the left cuts expenditures and the right increases taxes. Probit estimates of the impact of adjustment characteristics on the likelihood of success provide evidence in favor of the fact that cuts in spending by the left and tax increases by the right lead to more persistent adjustments than the reverse. These results are consistent with the literature on fiscal adjustments that has revealed that adjustments pursued by spending cuts are more persistent. We identify other adjustment characteristics that influence the persistence of the deficit cut: coalition cabinets, as well as majority cabinets, are less likely to be successful; a high level of public debt or a public debt that has been growing in the recent past tend to make the adjustment more credible. We also find evidence that private investment responds to the pair cabinet ideology - fiscal action in a way that is consistent with our hypothesis. First, cuts in spending by the left have a stronger stimulative effect on investment than cuts by the right, whereas increases in taxes by the left actually contract private investment, in contrast to the positive effect of tax increases by the right.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Elsevier in its journal Journal of Public Economics.
Volume (Year): 88 (2004)
Issue (Month): 12 (December)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505578
Other versions of this item:
- Jose Tavares, 2000. "Does Right or Left Matter? Cabinets, Credibility and Fiscal Adjustments," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 1548, Econometric Society.
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Philip R. Lane & Roberto Perotti, 2001.
"The Importance of Composition of Fiscal Policy: Evidence from Different Exchange Rate Regimes,"
Trinity Economics Papers
200116, Trinity College Dublin, Department of Economics.
- Lane, Philip R. & Perotti, Roberto, 2003. "The importance of composition of fiscal policy: evidence from different exchange rate regimes," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(9-10), pages 2253-2279, September.
- Philip R. Lane & Roberto Perotti, 2001. "The Importance of Composition of Fiscal Policy: Evidence from Different Exchange Rate Regimes," CEG Working Papers 200111, Trinity College Dublin, Department of Economics.
- Cukierman, Alex & Tommasi, Mariano, 1998.
"When Does It Take a Nixon to Go to China?,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 88(1), pages 180-97, March.
- Cukierman, A. & Tommasi, M., 1997. "When Does It Take a Nixon to Go to China," Papers 30-97, Tel Aviv.
- Cukierman, A., 1997. "When Does it Take A Nixon To Go To China?," Discussion Paper 1997-91, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
- Mariano Tommasi, 1995. "Why Does it Take a Nixon to go to China?," UCLA Economics Working Papers 728, UCLA Department of Economics.
- Mark Hallerberg & Jürgen von Hagen, 1999.
"Electoral Institutions, Cabinet Negotiations, and Budget Deficits in the European Union,"
in: Fiscal Institutions and Fiscal Performance, pages 209-232
National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Mark Hallerberg & Jurgen von Hagen, 1997. "Electoral Institutions, Cabinet Negotiations, and Budget Deficits in the European Union," NBER Working Papers 6341, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Edin, P-A. & Ohlsson, H., 1990.
"Political Determinants Of Budget Deficits: Coalition Effects Versus Minority Effects,"
1990k, Uppsala - Working Paper Series.
- Edin, Per-Anders & Ohlsson, Henry, 1991. "Political determinants of budget deficits: Coalition effects versus minority effects," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 1597-1603, December.
- Giavazzi, Francesco & Pagano, Marco, 1995.
"Non-Keynesian Effects of Fiscal Policy Changes: International Evidence and the Swedish Experience,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
1284, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Francesco Giavazzi & Marco Pagano, 1996. "Non-Keynesian Effects of Fiscal Policy Changes: International Evidence and the Swedish Experience," NBER Working Papers 5332, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Roberto Perotti, 1999. "Fiscal Policy In Good Times And Bad," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 114(4), pages 1399-1436, November.
- Alberto Alesina & Roberto Perotti & José Tavares, 1998. "The Political Economy of Fiscal Adjustments," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 29(1), pages 197-266.
- Roubini, Nouriel & Sachs, Jeffrey D., 1989. "Political and economic determinants of budget deficits in the industrial democracies," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 903-933, May.
- Volkerink, BjÃ¸rn & Haan, Jacob de, 2000. "Fragmented government effects on fiscal policy: new evidence," CCSO Working Papers 200006, University of Groningen, CCSO Centre for Economic Research.
- Blinder, Alan S & Holtz-Eakin, Douglas, 1984.
"Public Opinion and the Balanced Budget,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 74(2), pages 144-49, May.
- Giuseppe Bertola & Allan Drazen, 1991.
"Trigger Points and Budget Cuts: Explaining the Effects of Fiscal Austerity,"
NBER Working Papers
3844, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Bertola, Giuseppe & Drazen, Allan, 1993. "Trigger Points and Budget Cuts: Explaining the Effects of Fiscal Austerity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(1), pages 11-26, March.
- Bertola, Giuseppe & Drazen, Allan, 1991. "Trigger Points and Budget Cuts: Explaining the Effects of Fiscal Austerity," CEPR Discussion Papers 599, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Bertola, G. & Drazen, A., 1991. "Trigger Pointsand Budget Cuts ; Explaining the Effects of Fiscal Austerity," Papers 26-91, Tel Aviv.
- Alesina, A. & Drazen, A., 1991.
"Why Are Stabilizations Delayed?,"
6-91, Tel Aviv - the Sackler Institute of Economic Studies.
- Alberto Alesina & Roberto Perotti, 1997. "Fiscal Adjustments in OECD Countries: Composition and Macroeconomic Effects," IMF Staff Papers, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 44(2), pages 210-248, June.
- Dan A. Fuller & Richard M. Alston & Michael B. Vaughan, 1995. "The Split between Political Parties on Economic Issues: A Survey of Republicans, Democrats, and Economists," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 21(2), pages 227-238, Spring.
- Lambertini Luisa & Tavares José A, 2005. "Exchange Rates and Fiscal Adjustments: Evidence from the OECD and Implications for the EMU," The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 1-30, December.
- Rodrik, Dani, 1993. "The Positive Economics of Policy Reform," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(2), pages 356-61, May.
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page. reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.