Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

On the Performance and Use of Government Revenue Forecasts

Contents:

Author Info

  • Auerbach, Alan Jeffrey

Abstract

This paper considers the performance of government forecasts--by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)--from the standpoint of bias and efficiency. The results are mixed. On the one hand, their performance has not differed significantly from that of a private forecaster, Data Resources, Inc. (DRI). Further, even when the sample period is broken down into "pessimistic" and "optimistic" periods, forecast errors have such large standard errors that it is difficult to conclude that the forecasts exhibit any underlying bias. On the other hand, the government forecasts fail statistical tests of efficiency. In particular, forecast revisions exhibit significant serial correlation and strong seasonality. These results suggest that government revenue forecasts could, in principle, convey more information than they do at present. Also, the large standard errors of the forecasts stand at odds with the use of point estimates for policy purposes. Because the budget process ignores forecast uncertainty, the "best" forecasts for budget purposes need not be the most accurate point estimates; it might well be appropriate, for example, for forecasts to reflect a pessimistic bias. Thus, the requirements of forecast efficiency and those of a poorly conceived budget process are inconsistent.

(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Download Info

If 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.
File URL: http://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/8h845262.pdf;origin=repeccitec
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics in its series Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series with number qt8h845262.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: 20 Jul 1999
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:cdl:oplwec:qt8h845262

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Boalt Hall, Berkeley, CA 94720
Fax: (510) 642-3767
Email:
Web page: http://www.escholarship.org/repec/blewp/
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords:

Other versions of this item:

References

References listed on IDEAS
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.:
as in new window
  1. Bengt Holmstrom, 1981. "Moral Hazard in Teams," Discussion Papers 471, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
  2. Campbell, Bryan & Ghysels, Eric, 1995. "Federal Budget Projections: A Nonparametric Assessment of Bias and Efficiency," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 77(1), pages 17-31, February.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as in new window

Cited by:
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cdl:oplwec:qt8h845262. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Lisa Schiff).

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.