IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nsr/niesrd/113.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Britain's fiscal problems

Author

Listed:
  • Nigel Pain
  • Dr Martin Weale
  • Dr Garry Young

Abstract

Britain's public sector deficit in the 1990s has been much too large to allow the public sector to maintain its balance sheet position. In order to do this the current account deficit has to be reduced from its 1995/6 figure of 3_ per cent of GDP to close to zero. Government plans show this being achieved by 1999/2000. A comparison of the current position with past behaviour shows that the deficit is unusually high, after due account is taken of the state of the economy and of electoral influences on the public finances. The high deficit is a consequence of unusually high spending rather than low taxation and the position has worsened since Britain left the ERM. The National Institute model allows us to compare with our base run a situation in which public finances evolve in line with past behaviour. This reduces consumption in the 1990s but raises it after 2000. An internal real rate of return of 3.85 per cent p.a. equates the current value of the two consumption paths. On the other hand the level of employment is considerably higher in the early stages of our base run and only slightly lower in the later stages.

Suggested Citation

  • Nigel Pain & Dr Martin Weale & Dr Garry Young, 1997. "Britain's fiscal problems," National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) Discussion Papers 113, National Institute of Economic and Social Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:nsr:niesrd:113
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Justin Van De Ven & John Creedy, 2005. "Taxation, Reranking and Equivalence Scales," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(1), pages 13-36, January.
    2. Justin van de Ven, 2016. "LINDA: A dynamic microsimulation model for analysing policy effects on the evolving population cross-section," National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) Discussion Papers 459, National Institute of Economic and Social Research.
    3. Justin van de Ven & Paolo Lucchino, 2013. "Modelling the Dynamic Effects of Transfer Policy: The LINDA Policy Analysis Tool," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2013n20, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    4. Olivier Bargain & Mathias Dolls & Dirk Neumann & Andreas Peichl & Sebastian Siegloch, 2011. "Tax-Benefit Systems in Europe and the US: Between Equity and Efficiency," CESifo Working Paper Series 3534, CESifo.
    5. Justin Ven & Nicolas Hérault & Francisco Azpitarte, 2017. "Identifying tax implicit equivalence scales," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 15(3), pages 257-275, September.
    6. Paolo Lucchino & Dr Justin van de Ven, 2013. "Empirical Analysis of Household Savings Decisions in Context of Uncertainty: A cross-sectional approach," National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) Discussion Papers 417, National Institute of Economic and Social Research.
    7. Justin Van de Ven, 2009. "A Simulation Analysis of the Effects of the Socio-economic Environment on Fertility and Female Labour Supply Decisions in the United Kingdom," National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) Discussion Papers 324, National Institute of Economic and Social Research.
    8. James Sefton & Justin Van De Ven & Martin Weale, 2008. "Means Testing Retirement Benefits: fostering equity or discouraging savings?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(528), pages 556-590, April.
    9. James Sefton & Justin Van De Ven, 2009. "Optimal Design of Means Tested Retirement Benefits," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 119(541), pages 461-481, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nsr:niesrd:113. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Library & Information Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/niesruk.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.