IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/ieadps/313925.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How should Britain's government spending and tax burdens be measured? A historic perspective on the 2009 budget forecasts

Author

Listed:
  • Smith, David B.

Abstract

In the 24th IEA Discussion Paper, David B. Smith takes an historical perspective on the 2009 Budget forecasts. His analysis concludes that the budget deficit will reach levels that are unprecedented in peacetime.The government's preferred market-price GDP measure overstates national output because it is reported gross of indirect taxes and subsidies. Factor-cost GDP, which excludes all indirect taxes and subsidies, is a far better measure for analysing the government spending burden.Using this better measure of national income, the 2009 Budget projections imply that the ratio of general government expenditure to national income will rise to 53.4% in 2010, the highest ratio since World War II and 6.9% above the peak recorded in World War I. The ratio of public expenditure to private spending, which was 92.4% in 2008, will rise to 107% in 2009 and 114.5% in 2010 - the highest burden since 1945.Also using the factor-cost measure, public sector net borrowing is projected to increase from 8% of national income in 2008-09, to 14.1% in 2009-10, and 13.5% in 2011-12.There must be serious doubt whether deficits on this scale can be financed in a non-inflationary manner, without very large capital inflows from abroad. It is hard to see why such inflows should be forthcoming now that the British economy has become so highly taxed by international standards.The deficit can only partly be explained by the onset of severe recession. The ratio of government spending to GDP rose from 41.8% in 1999 to 45.8% in 2007 before the downturn commenced.The rise in non-productive spending as a share of GDP since 2000 is likely to have cut the UK's sustainable growth rate by some 1.0 to 1.7% per annum. Such a drop in productive potential will have reduced investment returns, which may have lead to a reduction in the supply of capital and contributed to the current crisis.Britain's current profligate fiscal policies are more likely to lead to 1970s-style stagflation than cure the recession.When Keynes wrote his General Theory in 1936 the ratio of general government expenditure to national output was only slightly over one half of the figure officially projected for next year. His correspondence after World War II suggests that Keynes would not have advocated further increases in the government spending ratio from such a high starting point.

Suggested Citation

  • Smith, David B., 2009. "How should Britain's government spending and tax burdens be measured? A historic perspective on the 2009 budget forecasts," IEA Discussion Papers 24, Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:ieadps:313925
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/313925/1/iea-dp024.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tanzi,Vito & Schuknecht,Ludger, 2000. "Public Spending in the 20th Century," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521662918, Enero-Abr.
    2. Pak Hung Mo, 2007. "Government Expenditures and Economic Growth: The Supply and Demand Sides," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 28(4), pages 497-522, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andersen, Torben M., 2006. "The public sector and international integration," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 93(2), pages 202-209, November.
    2. Gonzalez-Eiras, Martín & Niepelt, Dirk, 2012. "Ageing, government budgets, retirement, and growth," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 97-115.
    3. Photis Lysandrou, 2016. "The colonization of the future: An alternative view of financialization and its portents," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(4), pages 444-472, October.
    4. Torsten Persson & Guido Tabellini, "undated". "Political Institutions and Policy Outcomes: What are the Stylized Facts?," Working Papers 189, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
    5. Vojtěch Roženský, 2012. "Mandatorní výdaje a flexibilita fiskální politiky v ČR [Mandatory Expenditure and the Flexibility of Fiscal Policy in the Czech Republic]," Politická ekonomie, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2012(1), pages 40-57.
    6. Dan Anderberg, 2007. "Inefficient households and the mix of government spending," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 131(1), pages 127-140, April.
    7. Andersen, Torben M. & Bhattacharya, Joydeep & Gestsson, Marias H., 2021. "Pareto-improving transition to fully funded pensions under myopia," Journal of Demographic Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 87(2), pages 169-212, June.
    8. Lora, Eduardo, 2008. "El futuro de los pactos fiscales en América Latina," Coediciones, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL), number 1310.
    9. Antonio Di Majo, 2020. "Budgeting pubblico, democrazia di bilancio, governo delle finanze pubbliche: la storia di una complessa interazione (Public budgeting, budet democracy, and public finances governance: History of a com," Moneta e Credito, Economia civile, vol. 73(291), pages 237-259.
    10. Ant—nio Afonso & Ludger Schuknecht & Vito Tanzi, 2023. "The size of government," Chapters, in: António Afonso & João Tovar Jalles & Ana Venâncio (ed.), Handbook on Public Sector Efficiency, chapter 1, pages 6-31, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Bedri Peci, 2016. "Fiscal Transparency In Theory And Practice: The Case Of Kosovo," International Journal of Business and Management, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences, vol. 4(4), pages 78-91, November.
    12. Christl, Michael & Köppl-Turyna, Monika & Kucsera, Dénes, 2018. "Public sector efficiency in Europe: Long-run trends, recent developments and determinants," Working Papers 14, Agenda Austria.
    13. Gaspar, Ví­tor & Afonso, António, 2006. "Excess burden and the cost of inefficiency in public services provision," Working Paper Series 601, European Central Bank.
    14. Murtin, Fabrice & Viarengo, Martina, 2008. "The convergence of compulsory schooling in Western Europe: 1950-2000," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 23311, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    15. Greasley, David & McLaughlin, Eoin & Hanley, Nick & Oxley, Les, 2017. "Australia: a land of missed opportunities?," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(6), pages 674-698, December.
    16. Sefa Awaworyi Churchill & Mehmet Ugur & Siew Ling Yew, 2017. "Does Government Size Affect Per-Capita Income Growth? A Hierarchical Meta-Regression Analysis," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 93(300), pages 142-171, March.
    17. Anthony J. Makin, 2014. "The Paradoxes and Pitfalls of Revived Fiscal Activism," Economic Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(1), pages 59-67, February.
    18. Marc Audi & Amjad Ali, 2023. "Public Policy and Economic Misery Nexus: A Comparative Analysis of Developed and Developing World," International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Econjournals, vol. 13(3), pages 56-73, May.
    19. Asem Alshami, 2016. "Theoretical Evidences Regarding Methodologies Of Calculating Efficiency Of Public Sector," Management Strategies Journal, Constantin Brancoveanu University, vol. 34(4), pages 88-94.
    20. Alberto Alesina & Ignazio Angeloni & Ludger Schuknecht, 2005. "What does the European Union do?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 123(3), pages 275-319, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:zbw:ieadps:313925. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ieaaauk.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.