On the dynamic effects of fiscal policy

In the wake of the 2008-09 Global Recession, several issues have been raised in the economic literature about the short and long-run effects of fiscal policy on economic activity with respect to its signs, its size and its duration. These have important implications to better understand the transmission channels and the effectiveness of fiscal policies, along with the monetary policy being pursued, as well as for their economic fallouts. This dissertation is part of this renewed strand of literature to assess how changes in fiscal policy affect economic activity. It therefore relies on three essays: the macroeconomic effects of government spending and tax revenue shocks, the economic outcomes of the interaction between fiscal and monetary policies and the nexus between fiscal policy and income distribution.   The first chapter examines the effects of fiscal policy shocks (government spending and tax revenue shocks) on the Canadian economy, building on the sign-restrictions-VAR approach developed by Mountford and Uhlig [2009]. In response to the Global Recession, fiscal authorities in advanced economies including Canada typically implemented a two-phase approach to fiscal policy. First, they introduced unprecedented stimulus packages to revive their economies. For instance, stimulus measures in Canada, introduced through Canada's Economic Action Plan, were projected at 3.2 percent of GDP in the 2009 federal budget while the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) was estimated at 7 percent of GDP. Following the stimulus, they shifted gears, adopting adjustment plans to reduce public debt and ensure long-term fiscal sustainability. Against this backdrop, examining the size of fiscal multiplier is important to informing the effectiveness of such policy measures in reviving or not economic activity. I find that tax-cut multipliers vary between 0.2 and 0.5, while spending multipliers range between 0.2 and 1.1. Spending multipliers tend to be larger than tax-cut multipliers over the last two decades. For policy implications, these results tend to suggest that fiscal consolidations through large spending cuts could be more harmful to the economy than tax-based fiscal adjustments.  The second chapter, co-written with Constant Lonkeng Ngouana, provides estimates of the US government spending multiplier over the monetary policy cycle. Government spending shocks are identified as forecast errors of the growth rate of government spending from the Survey of Professional Forecasters (SPF) and from the Greenbook record, further stripped from their predictable components. The state of monetary policy is inferred from the deviation of the Fed funds rate from the target rate, using a smooth transition function. Applying the local projections method to quarterly US data over the period 1965-2012, results show that the federal government spending multiplier is substantially higher under accommodative than non-accommodative monetary policy. The estimations also suggest that federal government spending may crowd-in or crowd-out private consumption, depending on the extent of monetary policy accommodation. The latter result reconciles---in a unified framework---apparently contradictory findings in the literature. These findings have important policy implications. They broadly suggest that fiscal policy is more effective when needed the most (e.g., at times of slack), if supported by monetary policy. They also have implications for the normalization of monetary conditions in advanced economies: the exit from UMP would lead to much lower federal government spending multipliers than otherwise, even if some amount of slack was to remain in the economy. This further highlights the need for a careful calibration of the timing of exit from unconventional monetary policy.  The third chapter examines the impact of fiscal expansion and fiscal contraction measures on income distribution in a panel of 18 Latin American countries over the period 1990-2010, with a focus on the bottom 40 percent. It therefore explores how these fiscal measures and their composition have affected the income growth of the bottom 40 percent, their income share growth and economic growth. Fiscal expansions and fiscal consolidations are identified by periods for which there is a significant change in the cyclically-adjusted primary deficit as share of GDP. I find that on average, expenditures-based fiscal expansion are more likely to increase the income of the bottom 40 percent than revenues-based fiscal expansion. This result is mainly driven by government current consumption, transfers and subsidies. In addition, these fiscal expansion measures help to reduce income inequality by improving the income share of the bottom segments of the population while reducing the top income share. However, fiscal expansion could either have no effect on economic growth or prevent the latter through capital expenditures increases. Results for fiscal consolidation are somewhat mixed. Sometime, fiscal consolidation is associated with a decline of the income growth of the less well-off and rising inequality, sometime the impact is non-significant. None of the fiscal contraction measures affects significantly GDP growth. These findings have important policy implications. Countries with some fiscal space could initiate or continue to implement safety nets program--like conditional cash transfer programs--necessary to prevent the vulnerable segment of the population to adverse shocks and to improve their living standards. With a potential of stimulating low-skill employment, a wise fiscal stimulus through government current consumption increases could also play a significant role to reduce income inequality. Also, to avoid capital expenditures that hinder economic growth, efficient public investment projects should be prioritized in the policy making process. This consists of implementing investment projects with higher productivity that can enhance economic growth necessary to reduce inequality.

Keyphrases: Deficits jumeaux, Fiscal policy, Fiscal multipliers, Accommodative monetary policy, Sign restrictions, Local projections, Income inequality, Twin deficits