IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cii/cepiie/2019-q2-158-2.html

Are “twin deficits” asymmetric? Evidence on government budget and current account balances, 1870–2013

Author

Listed:
  • Georgios Karras

Abstract

Using data from seventeen countries over the period 1870–2013, we first find that there is robust empirical support for the “twin deficits” hypothesis: under the assumption of symmetry, a change in the budget deficit by 1% of GDP causes the current account balance to move in the opposite direction by a maximum of about 0.25% of GDP, an effect that is found to be persistent but temporary. To relax symmetry, the current account is next allowed to respond differently to positive and negative budget shocks. The findings suggest that the full time period is adequately described by symmetry: the current account effects of fiscal expansions are not statistically different from those of fiscal consolidations. The postwar period, however, appears to be decidedly asymmetric: negative shocks to the budget deficit are associated with sizable improvements in the current account, while positive shocks have no statistically significant effect. Policy implications outline a clear but limited role for fiscal policy in influencing the current account.

Suggested Citation

  • Georgios Karras, 2019. "Are “twin deficits” asymmetric? Evidence on government budget and current account balances, 1870–2013," International Economics, CEPII research center, issue 158, pages 12-24.
    • Handle: RePEc:cii:cepiie:2019-q2-158-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2110701718302543
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Georgios Karras, 2020. "Are "Twin Deficits" an Illusion? International Evidence on Fiscal Policy and the Current Account," South-Eastern Europe Journal of Economics, Association of Economic Universities of South and Eastern Europe and the Black Sea Region, vol. 18(2), pages 139-157.
    2. Eregha, Perekunah B. & Aworinde, Olalekan B. & Vo, Xuan Vinh, 2022. "Modeling twin deficit hypothesis with oil price volatility in African oil-producing countries," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    3. Maran Marimuthu & Hanana Khan & Romana Bangash, 2021. "Reverse Causality between Fiscal and Current Account Deficits in ASEAN: Evidence from Panel Econometric Analysis," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-18, May.
    4. António Afonso & José Carlos Coelho, 2021. "Current Account Targeting Hypothesis versus Twin Deficit Hypothesis: the EMU experience of Portugal," Working Papers REM 2021/0182, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, REM, Universidade de Lisboa.
    5. Nikolina Kosteletou & Panagiotis Palaios & Evangelia Papapetrou, 2023. "New Evidence on the Asymmetric Linkages Between Fiscal and Current Account Balances," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 14(4), pages 4145-4169, December.
    6. Thanh Dinh Su & Canh Phuc Nguyen, 2021. "Twin balances, public governance and private investment: Quantile estimation for OECD countries," International Economics, CEPII research center, issue 165, pages 85-93.
    7. Hammad Manzoor & Muhammad Zeeshan Younas & Rashid Mehmood & Muhammad Ali Rizwan, 2019. "A Twin Deficit Hypothesis: The Case Study of Pakistan," Bulletin of Business and Economics (BBE), Research Foundation for Humanity (RFH), vol. 8(3), pages 117-131, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • E62 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Macroeconomic Policy, Macroeconomic Aspects of Public Finance, and General Outlook - - - Fiscal Policy; Modern Monetary Theory
    • F41 - International Economics - - Macroeconomic Aspects of International Trade and Finance - - - Open Economy Macroeconomics

    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:cii:cepiie:2019-q2-158-2. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepiifr.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.