Re-evaluation the stabilization function of the fiscal policy (Bulgarian)
The fiscal–monetary policy mix has been used as anticyclical tools in the stabilization policy. In the làst 10-15 years, the monetary policy became neutral and the fiscal policy transformed into pro-cyclical. As a result, large budget deficit emerged during the economic boom, which required debt financing and led to accumulation of significant government debt. Many countries have entered into debt fiscal crises. For going out of the vicious circle: permanent budget deficit, debt funding and growing public debt, changes are proposed in the model of conducting fiscal policy: creation of the fiscal reserves during economic upsurge, which has to be used for stimulating aggregate demand during crisis, instead debt financing; accepting the fiscal rules in order to discipline politicians in their fiscal decisions; accepting the low level of budget deficit in time of crisis, which has to be reached by budget expenditure cuts, instead tax rate increase. There are sufficient fiscal consolidation programmes, which testified the correctness of these changes, launched as optimal fiscal policy.
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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): (2012)
Issue (Month): 5 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: (+359 2) 810 40 18
Fax: (+359 2) 988 21 08
Web page: http://www.iki.bas.bg
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Talvi, Ernesto & Vegh, Carlos A., 2005. "Tax base variability and procyclical fiscal policy in developing countries," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(1), pages 156-190, October.
- Alberto Alesina & Filipe R. Campante & Guido Tabellini, 2008.
"Why is Fiscal Policy Often Procyclical?,"
Journal of the European Economic Association,
MIT Press, vol. 6(5), pages 1006-1036, 09.
- Alberto Alesina & Guido Tabellini, 2005. "Why is Fiscal Policy often Procyclical?," CESifo Working Paper Series 1556, CESifo Group Munich.
- Alberto Alesina & Guido Tabellini, 2005. "Why is fiscal policy often procyclical?," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 2090, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
- Alberto Alesina & Guido Tabellini, 2005. "Why is Fiscal Policy Often Procyclical?," NBER Working Papers 11600, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Alberto Alesina & Guido Tabellini, 2005. "Why Is Fiscal Policy Often Procyclical?," Working Papers 297, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
- Alberto Alesina & Guido Tabellini, 2005. "Why is fiscal policy often procyclical?," Levine's Bibliography 784828000000000465, UCLA Department of Economics.
- Martin S. Feldstein, 2009.
"Rethinking the Role of Fiscal Policy,"
NBER Working Papers
14684, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- James M. Poterba & Jürgen von Hagen, 1999. "Fiscal Institutions and Fiscal Performance," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number pote99-1, December.
- Torsten Persson & Guido Tabellini, 2004. "Constitutional Rules and Fiscal Policy Outcomes," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(1), pages 25-45, March.
- James M. Poterba & Jürgen von Hagen, 1999. "Introduction to "Fiscal Institutions and Fiscal Performance"," NBER Chapters, in: Fiscal Institutions and Fiscal Performance, pages 1-12 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Adi Brender & Allan Drazen, 2008. "How Do Budget Deficits and Economic Growth Affect Reelection Prospects? Evidence from a Large Panel of Countries," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(5), pages 2203-20, December.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bas:econth:y:2012:i:5:p:3-29. 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: (Diana Dimitrova)
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.