Dynamic scoring

Last updated

Dynamic scoring is a forecasting technique for government revenues, expenditures, and budget deficits that incorporates predictions about the behavior of people and organizations based on changes in fiscal policy, usually tax rates. Dynamic scoring depends on models of the behavior of economic agents which predict how they would react once the tax rate or other policy change goes into effect. This means the uncertainty induced in predictions is greater to the degree that the proposed policy is unlike current policy. Unfortunately, any such model depends heavily on judgment, and there is no evidence that it is more effective or accurate. [1]

Contents

For example, a dynamic scoring model may include econometric model of a transitional phase as the population adapts to the new policy, rather than the so-called static-scoring [2] alternative of standard assumption about behavior of people being immediately and directly sensitive to prices. The outcome of the dynamic analysis is therefore heavily dependent on assumptions about future behaviors and rates of change. The dynamic analysis is potentially more accurate than the alternative, if the econometric model correctly captures how households and firms will react to a policy changes. This has been attacked as assumption-driven compared to static scoring which makes simpler assumptions about behavior change due to the introduction of a new policy.

United States national government, 2015-2018

Using dynamic scoring has been promoted by Republican legislators to argue that supply-side tax policy, for example the Bush tax cuts of 2001 [3] and 2011 GOP Path to Prosperity proposal, [4] return higher benefits in terms of GDP growth and revenue increases than are predicted from static scoring. Some economists [5] argue that their dynamic scoring conclusions are overstated, [6] pointing out that Congressional Budget Office (CBO) practices already include some dynamic scoring elements and that to include more may lead to politicization of the department. [7]

On January 6, 2013, the version of the Pro-Growth Budgeting Act of 2013 included in the Budget and Accounting Transparency Act of 2014 passed the United States House of Representatives as part of their Rules adopted in House Resolution 5, passed with the exclusive support of the Republican Party (United States) by a vote of 234-172. [8] The same rules package for the year had other controversial provisions funded. [9] The bill would require the Congressional Budget Office to use dynamic scoring to provide a macroeconomic impact analysis for bills that are estimated to have a large budgetary effect. [10] The text of the provision read:

(a) An estimate provided by the Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 for any major legislation shall, to the extent practicable, incorporate the budgetary effects of changes in economic output, employment, capital stock, and other macroeconomic variables resulting from such legislation.

(b) An estimate provided by the Joint Committee on Taxation to the Director of the Congressional Budget Office under section 201(f) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 for any major legislation shall, to the extent practicable, incorporate the budgetary effects of changes in economic output, employment, capital stock, and other macroeconomic variables resulting from such legislation.

(c) An estimate referred to in this clause shall, to the extent practicable, include--

(1) a qualitative assessment of the budgetary effects (including macroeconomic variables described in paragraphs (a) and (b)) of such legislation in the 20-fiscal year period beginning after the last fiscal year of the most recently agreed to concurrent resolution on the budget that set forth appropriate levels required by section 301 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974; and
(2) an identification of the critical assumptions and the source of data underlying that estimate.

(d) As used in this clause--

(1) the term `major legislation' means any bill or joint resolution--
(A) for which an estimate is required to be prepared pursuant to section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and that causes a gross budgetary effect (before incorporating macroeconomic effects) in any fiscal year over the years of the most recently agreed to concurrent resolution on the budget equal to or greater than 0.25 percent of the current projected gross domestic product of the United States for that fiscal year; or
(B) designated as such by the chair of the Committee on the Budget for all direct spending legislation other than revenue legislation or the Member who is chair or vice chair, as applicable, of the Joint Committee on Taxation for revenue legislation; and
(2) the term `budgetary effects' means changes in revenues, outlays, and deficits. [11]

These provisions were removed in January 2019 for the 116th Congress by H. Res. 6 section 102(u). [12]

Kansas

The Kansas state government cut personal income taxes to stimulate economic growth, depending on optimistic assumptions from dynamic scoring for state revenue. Authors of the plan claimed that "cutting taxes can have a near immediate and permanent impact," [13] arguing for tax cuts over rebuilding roads or improving the quality of schools. In addition, the tax on "pass-through" businesses was eliminated. After continual revenue deficits, the largest sales tax increase in Kansas history, downgrades from Moody's and Standard & Poor's and economic performance that lagged neighboring states, the election of 2016 was a referendum on tax policy and the legislature increased income taxes over the governor's veto [14] [15] [16] Kansas's "rainy day" fund reported levels $570 million lower than before the tax cut, [17] even though Kansas had directed more tax revenue to it.

See also

Related Research Articles

Supply-side economics is a macroeconomic theory postulating that economic growth can be most effectively fostered by lowering taxes, decreasing regulation, and allowing free trade. According to supply-side economics theory, consumers will benefit from greater supply of goods and services at lower prices, and employment will increase. Supply-side fiscal policies are designed to increase aggregate supply, as opposed to aggregate demand, thereby expanding output and employment while lowering prices. Such policies are of several general varieties:

  1. Investments in human capital, such as education, healthcare, and encouraging the transfer of technologies and business processes, to improve productivity. Encouraging globalized free trade via containerization is a major recent example.
  2. Tax reduction, to provide incentives to work, invest and take risks. Lowering income tax rates and eliminating or lowering tariffs are examples of such policies.
  3. Investments in new capital equipment and research and development (R&D), to further improve productivity. Allowing businesses to depreciate capital equipment more rapidly gives them an immediate financial incentive to invest in such equipment.
  4. Reduction in government regulations, to encourage business formation and expansion.
<span class="mw-page-title-main">Arthur Laffer</span> American economist (1940-)

Arthur Betz Laffer is an American economist and author who first gained prominence during the Reagan administration as a member of Reagan's Economic Policy Advisory Board (1981–1989). Laffer is best known for the Laffer curve, an illustration of the theory that there exists some tax rate between 0% and 100% that will result in maximum tax revenue for government. In certain circumstances, this would allow governments to cut taxes, and simultaneously increase revenue and economic growth.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Government budget balance</span> Difference between revenues and spending

The government budget balance, also referred to as the general government balance, public budget balance, or public fiscal balance, is the difference between government revenues and spending. For a government that uses accrual accounting the budget balance is calculated using only spending on current operations, with expenditure on new capital assets excluded. A positive balance is called a government budget surplus, and a negative balance is a government budget deficit. A government budget presents the government's proposed revenues and spending for a financial year.

The United States budget process is the framework used by Congress and the President of the United States to formulate and create the United States federal budget. The process was established by the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921, the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, and additional budget legislation.

A tax cut represents a decrease in the amount of money taken from taxpayers to go towards government revenue. Tax cuts decrease the revenue of the government and increase the disposable income of taxpayers. Tax cuts usually refer to reductions in the percentage of tax paid on income, goods and services. As they leave consumers with more disposable income, tax cuts are an example of an expansionary fiscal policy. Tax cuts also include reduction in tax in other ways, such as tax credit, deductions and loopholes.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Congressional Budget Office</span> U.S. Government agency

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) is a federal agency within the legislative branch of the United States government that provides budget and economic information to Congress. Inspired by California's Legislative Analyst's Office that manages the state budget in a strictly nonpartisan fashion, the CBO was created as a nonpartisan agency by the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States federal budget</span> Budget of the U.S. federal government

The United States budget comprises the spending and revenues of the U.S. federal government. The budget is the financial representation of the priorities of the government, reflecting historical debates and competing economic philosophies. The government primarily spends on healthcare, retirement, and defense programs. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office provides extensive analysis of the budget and its economic effects. CBO estimated in February 2024 that Federal debt held by the public is projected to rise from 99 percent of GDP in 2024 to 116 percent in 2034 and would continue to grow if current laws generally remained unchanged. Over that period, the growth of interest costs and mandatory spending outpaces the growth of revenues and the economy, driving up debt. Those factors persist beyond 2034, pushing federal debt higher still, to 172 percent of GDP in 2054.

The economic policy and legacy of the George W. Bush administration was characterized by significant income tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, the implementation of Medicare Part D in 2003, increased military spending for two wars, a housing bubble that contributed to the subprime mortgage crisis of 2007–2008, and the Great Recession that followed. Economic performance during the period was adversely affected by two recessions, in 2001 and 2007–2009.

The phrase Bush tax cuts refers to changes to the United States tax code passed originally during the presidency of George W. Bush and extended during the presidency of Barack Obama, through:

Baseline budgeting is an accounting method the United States Federal Government uses to develop a budget for future years. Baseline budgeting uses current spending levels as the "baseline" for establishing future funding requirements and assumes future budgets will equal the current budget times the inflation rate times the population growth rate. Twice a year—generally in January and August—CBO prepares baseline projections of federal revenues, outlays, and the surplus or deficit. Those projections are designed to show what would happen if current budgetary policies were continued as is—that is, they serve as a benchmark for assessing possible changes in policy. They are not forecasts of actual budget outcomes, since the Congress will undoubtedly enact legislation that will change revenues and outlays. Similarly, they are not intended to represent the appropriate or desirable levels of federal taxes and spending.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Laffer curve</span> Representation of the relationship between taxation and government revenue

In economics, the Laffer curve illustrates a theoretical relationship between rates of taxation and the resulting levels of the government's tax revenue. The Laffer curve assumes that no tax revenue is raised at the extreme tax rates of 0% and 100%, meaning that there is a tax rate between 0% and 100% that maximizes government tax revenue.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Expenditures in the United States federal budget</span> Overview of expenditures in the United States federal budget

The United States federal budget consists of mandatory expenditures, discretionary spending for defense, Cabinet departments and agencies, and interest payments on debt. This is currently over half of U.S. government spending, the remainder coming from state and local governments.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">The Path to Prosperity</span> U.S. budget proposal of the Republican Party

The Path to Prosperity: Restoring America's Promise was the Republican Party's budget proposal for the federal government of the United States in the fiscal year 2012. It was succeeded in March 2012 by "The Path to Prosperity: A Blueprint for American Renewal", the Republican budget proposal for 2013. Representative Paul Ryan, Chairman of the House Budget Committee, played a prominent public role in drafting and promoting both The Path to Prosperity proposals, and they are therefore often referred to as the Ryan budget, Ryan plan or Ryan proposal.

Political debates about the United States federal budget discusses some of the more significant U.S. budgetary debates of the 21st century. These include the causes of debt increases, the impact of tax cuts, specific events such as the United States fiscal cliff, the effectiveness of stimulus, and the impact of the Great Recession, among others. The article explains how to analyze the U.S. budget as well as the competing economic schools of thought that support the budgetary positions of the major parties.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Deficit reduction in the United States</span> Economic policy debate

Deficit reduction in the United States refers to taxation, spending, and economic policy debates and proposals designed to reduce the federal government budget deficit. Government agencies including the Government Accountability Office (GAO), Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and the U.S. Treasury Department have reported that the federal government is facing a series of important long-run financing challenges, mainly driven by an aging population, rising healthcare costs per person, and rising interest payments on the national debt.

The United States fiscal cliff refers to the combined effect of several previously-enacted laws that came into effect simultaneously in January 2013, increasing taxes and decreasing spending.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012</span> Federal law in the United States changing taxation, "ATRA".

The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (ATRA) was enacted and passed by the United States Congress on January 1, 2013, and was signed into law by US President Barack Obama the next day. ATRA gave permanence to the lower rates of much of the "Bush tax cuts".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Baseline Reform Act of 2013</span>

The Baseline Reform Act of 2013 is a bill that would change the way in which discretionary appropriations for individual accounts are projected in CBO’s baseline. Under H.R. 1871, projections of such spending would still be based on the current year’s appropriations, but would not be adjusted for inflation going forward. Other adjustments to projections of future discretionary spending would also be eliminated.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pro-Growth Budgeting Act of 2013</span> 2013 proposed legislature of the United States

The Pro-Growth Budgeting Act of 2013 is a bill that would require the Congressional Budget Office to provide a macroeconomic impact analysis for bills that are estimated to have a large budgetary effect.

The economic policy of the Donald Trump administration was characterized by the individual and corporate tax cuts, attempts to repeal the Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare"), trade protectionism, deregulation focused on the energy and financial sectors, and responses to the COVID-19 pandemic.

References

  1. ↑ Klein, Ezra (2 March 2015). "Dynamic scoring is a good idea with big problems".
  2. ↑ Holtz‐Eakin, D. "SCORING AND DYNAMIC SCORING. J. Pol. Anal. Manage., 34: 965-970". doi:10.1002/pam.21864.{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  3. ↑ Wilson, D; William Beach. "The Economic Impact of President Bush's Tax Relief Plan". The Heritage Foundation. Archived from the original on 8 March 2011. Retrieved 6 April 2011.
  4. ↑ Ryan, Paul. "Path to Prosperity 2012" (PDF). Retrieved 6 April 2011.
  5. ↑ Krugman, Paul (2014-10-05). "Voodoo Economics, the Next Generation". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved 2016-12-01.
  6. ↑ "Brad deLong's blog". Delong.typepad.com. 2006-05-15. Retrieved 2012-03-27.
  7. ↑ "Center on Budget and Policy Priorities" (PDF). Retrieved 2012-03-27.
  8. ↑ "Final vote results for roll call 6". clerk.house.gov. Retrieved 19 November 2023.
  9. ↑ Marcos, Cristina (6 January 2015). "House adopts 'dynamic scoring' rule". The Hill. Retrieved 12 January 2015.
  10. ↑ "H.R. 1874 - CBO". Congressional Budget Office. 21 June 2013. Retrieved 28 March 2014.
  11. ↑ "H.Res.5 - Adopting rules for the One Hundred Fourteenth Congress" US House of Representatives, January 6, 2015
  12. ↑ "H. RES. 6, ADOPTING THE RULES FOR THE 116th CONGRESS, SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS" (PDF). house.gov. U.S. House of Representatives. Retrieved 9 January 2019.
  13. ↑ Laffer, Arthur; Moore, Stephen (September 2012), Taxes Really Do Matter: Look at the States (PDF), Laffer Center for Supply-Side Economics[ permanent dead link ]
  14. ↑ Hobson, Jeremy; Russell, Dean; Raphelson, Samantha (25 October 2017). "As Trump Proposes Tax Cuts, Kansas Deals with Aftermath of Experiment". NPR.
  15. ↑ "Kansas Republicans Warn Congress: 'You Better Learn Our Lesson'". The Atlantic . 11 October 2017.
  16. ↑ Jim Tankersley. Kansas Tried a Tax Plan Similar to Trump’s. It Failed. New York Times. 10 Oct 2017
  17. ↑ Goossen, Duane (July 13, 2016). "Income Tax Cuts Broke the Kansas Budget". Kansas Center For Economic Growth. Retrieved April 22, 2017.{{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)[ permanent dead link ]
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.