IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ecinqu/v32y1994i3p511-18.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is the Budget Deficit "Too Large"?: Some Further Evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Tanner, Evan
  • Liu, Peter

Abstract

The size of the federal budget deficit has alarmed politicians and the general public both. Following recent work, the authors examine the long-run solvency of the U.S. government by testing for cointegration of federal expenditures and revenues. They include a break term in the cointegrating recession for 1981 to capture a shift in the fiscal process in the first Reagan administration. Tests show the break to be significant; and with the break, in contrast to earlier work, expenditures and revenues are cointegrated with a coefficient of one. Thus, the authors find the deficit to be stationary and so potentially sustainable. Copyright 1994 by Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Tanner, Evan & Liu, Peter, 1994. "Is the Budget Deficit "Too Large"?: Some Further Evidence," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 32(3), pages 511-518, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ecinqu:v:32:y:1994:i:3:p:511-18
    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.

    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:oup:ecinqu:v:32:y:1994:i:3:p:511-18. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/weaaaea.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.