Even in the wake of the most sweeping campaign finance reform law to be enacted in three decades, further significant reform is inevitable. Special interest money continues to flow through loopholes in the Act, and the Presidential Election Campaign Fund is near collapse. The next reform should encourage broader participation in the political process by individual citizens, both to dilute the power of special interests and to serve independent democratic values that recent Supreme Court jurisprudence has identified as vital to meaningful reform. We propose adopting a refundable tax credit of $100/taxpayer for political contributions to federal candidates and national parties; the credit would be targeted to lowerand middle-income Americans. A refundable tax credit is equivalent to giving each eligible citizen up to $100 annually to use for political contributions. We also present data about the relative importance of political contributions by special interests (corporate, labor and other PACs) and individuals that undermine many of the assumptions on which past reform has been based and that have not been discussed in the legal literature. The data clearly show that small contributions by individuals are the dominant source of money in campaigns, and that the influence of special interest money is subtle, appearing to “purchase” benefits like access, a place on the agenda, and minor policy details. Working from an accurate picture of who really pays for politics, and drawing from the experience at the federal and state levels with similar tax refund programs, we present the tax credit as a reform that is simple, easy to administer, and likely to improve political participation by average Americans. Thus, our proposal, unlike the complicated voucher plan with anonymity put forward by Ackerman and Ayres, is likely to be adopted by Congress; moreover, it will appeal to a bipartisan consensus because it mixes public funding with a decentralized allocation mechanism using a tax subsidy.
Twelve years into the implementation of the Local Government Code of 1991, it is but opportune to assess how the key features of this landmark legislation has contributed to (or detracted from) achieving the balance between local autonomy and accountability. The literature on fiscal decentralization suggests that these two goals are not incompatible. In fact, real autonomy (in the sense of subnational governments being able to link their spending decisions with their revenue/tax decisions) promotes fiscal responsibility. In the context of the ongoing debate in the Philippines, however, local autonomy has been equated (by many LGUs officials) with the independence of LGUs from central government interference. As such, LGU officials have focused more on securing even higher levels of block grants in order to address the widely perceived vertical fiscal imbalance. However, closer scrutiny of the problem indicates that greater_x000D_ tax decentralization coupled with a well designed intergovernmental transfer system that includes elements of fiscal equalization and categorical grants conditional on the achievement of minimum service standards would better enhance the gains that are forthcoming from the decentralization process while minimizing the risks of macroinstability.
Vertical fiscal imbalance, decentralized responsibility of spending with centralized financing, creates a common pool problem with spending pressure towards central funds. A model of decentralized government spending under vertical fiscal imbalance is developed, and the importance of national political characteristics for internalization of costs and spending level is investigated in an econometric analysis of Norway during 1880–1990. We argue that in a parliamentary democracy, the internalization of costs is influenced by the party fragmentation of parliament. This is confirmed by the econometric analysis using a Herfindahl index as a measure of fragmentation and political strength.
We provide a model incorporating features of local public finance in Japan, including close fiscal ties between different levels of government as well as bureaucratic determinations of intergovernmental transfers. The discretionary nature of transfers softens local budgets ex post, which exerts perverse incentive effects on local governments ex ante. Fiscal decentralization that assigns more revenue responsibility to the local level serves to counteract this moral hazard incentive. The emphasis is on the endogenous nature of regional fiscal capacities at the local level. Fiscal devolution motivates local jurisdictions to become fiscally independent wherever possible.
Fernando Filgueira, Herman Kamil, Fernando Lorenzo, Juan Andrés Moraes · 5 authors
This paper analyzes the reasons behind Central Government (CG) bailouts of Subnational Governments (SNGs) in the case of Uruguay. We argued that Uruguay represents a good example of the risks of fiscal decentralization, in the context of adjustment policies, and when SNGs` responsibilities and resources have not been carefully defined. We show that, in unitary countries where SNGs lack the opportunities to misbehave that they have in federal countries (e. g. , public debt issuance, international borrowing), SNG officials find ways to finance deficits through non-compliance with politically contestable obligations. In particular, SNGs in Uruguay finance their deficits by accumulating debts with other government agencies and obtaining discretionary transfers from the CG. Through statistical analyses we show that debts and deficits are mainly related to vertical fiscal imbalances and economic conditions in the SN jurisdictions. Yet, the analysis of recent bailout episodes suggests that institutions and political factors play a role (i. e. , they are important ex-post factors). This implies that bailouts have been more than simple compensations for structural imbalances, thus creating opportunities for strategic behavior on the part of SNG authorities (partly confirmed by the disparate fiscal performance of Montevideo vis-à-vis the rest of the country).
Based on cross-country data for up to 78 countries, this paper shows that fiscal decentralization-the assignment of expenditure and revenue mobilization functions to subnational levels of government-is associated with various indicators of governance, such as corruption, rule of law, and government effectiveness. Unlike previous studies in the decentralization/governance literature, which focus primarily on expenditure-based measures of decentralization, the results reported in this paper show that the relationship between decentralization and governance depends on how subnational expenditures are financed. The higher the share in total subnational revenues of nontax revenues and grants and transfers from higher levels of government, the stronger the association between decentralization and governance.
Guillém López i Casasnovas, Esther Martínez Garcia
The authors analyse the magnitude and composition of the fiscal imbalance between Catalonia and the Spanish Central government for 1995-1998, and its evolution since 1986. A flow approach is adopted, whereas the usual incidence hypothesis is followed in alloating tax revenues. The results show a rather stable net contribution of Catalonia to the Spanish Central government in 1998 of 1.3 trillion pesetas (8.37% of Catalan GDP). Calalonia participated in 19.60 % of Central government revenues, but received only 15.03% of expenditures. Catalan population is 15.5% of the Spanish total. Overall, in 1994 constant terms, the evolution of the per capita imbalance rises from 117,133 PTAs. in 1986, to 192,294 PTAs. in 1998. The authors also introduce an explicit way to deal with the effects of Central government budget deficits on fiscal revenues, in computing the financial distortions of the political and economic central role of Madrid, different tax compliance among regions, the impact of inflation differentials, and the evaluation of the social security flows on regional imbalances. In general, the authors favour an estimation of the amount of revenues at the disposal of Catalonia in order to finance its own expenditure, without the mediation of the Central government, but maintaining a single Spanish fiscal system. This approach may force the contribution of Catalonia as any other region to finance the joint expenditures of the Central government, and/or to finance its owm public sector, but in a rather more dear way. As a result, with regard to the financial decentralization system, territorial solidarity and social cohesion is enhanced, at the same time that autonomy and self-governance,
in a better way than it is today.
Problems of `soft budget` constraints in intergovernmental relationships are currently at the frontier of research in local public economics. This paper reviews the Italian experience in the field, starting from the mid-1970s up to the present period, compares it with that of other countries, and uses it to comment upon the state of the literature. The paper argues that the soft budget constraint problem has been a rampant one in Italian local public finance, generating efficiency losses, lack of political accountability and undermining the soundness of public finances. The paper inquires into the causes and possible solutions to the problem, and in particular describes and comments upon the decentralization process of the 1990s. Finally, the Italian debate on fiscal federalism of the 1990s is also reviewed, arguing that some of the suggestions of this debate may be of interest more generally.
Fiscal Decentralization is a popular economic development strategy among transition and developing countries. This article reviews the advantages of fiscal decentralization in a theoretical context, but critiques the relevance of the standard theory of federalism as it applies to emerging economies. It is argued that the macroeconomic benefits of fiscal centralization, the absence of good instruments of local government finance, and the centralist politics that characterize most low income countries have been strong enough to hold back increased emphasis on local government finance.
The note highlights the importance of \n sound intergovernmental fiscal relations, and proper \n regulation for successful sub-national borrowing, and \n illustrates the potential macroeconomic hazards of \n decentralizing borrowing powers, arguing that the impact of \n a possible moral hazard problem, namely, the access to \n financial markets by sub-national governments, may generate \n unplanned liabilities for central governments. Yet academia, \n and country experiences do not suggest adverse links between \n decentralized borrowing powers, and the central \n government's ability to maintain fiscal discipline, and \n macroeconomic stability. Rather the key seems to lie in the \n design of fiscal decentralization, particularly the \n regulatory framework under which borrowing powers are \n decentralized. The note outlines the reasons why \n sub-national governments require access to financial \n markets: to finance capital spending, and foster political \n accountability, which can be achieved through direct \n borrowing by central government, through a public financial \n intermediary, or, through direct borrowing. As per designing \n the regulatory framework, the note suggests better \n information systems, bankruptcy laws, and access to tax \n bases, in addition to separate fiscal/financial systems, and \n sound legislation to impose budget discipline, enabling \n access to capital markets to complement fiscal powers \n devolution to regional authorities.
Estonian authorities have made remarkable progress in a relatively short period of time by putting into place the elements of a modern budget process and fiscal management system. This progress is especially notable given the difficult circumstances the country has gone through in the transition period of the last five years. The most significant changes in budgetary policy took place with the adoption of the Law on State Budget in June 1993. Several other pieces of legislation have come to complement the Budget Law including laws on local budgets, state external audit and the department of treasury. Other reforms have helped establish the basis of a modern fiscal management system. These include a monetary board assuring the independence of monetary policy from fiscal management and eliminating all possibilities of inflationary deficit financing, a well designed and impressively simple tax code, an overall well designed system of decentralized government, and the privatization of many state enterprises.However, there are still significant steps that need to be taken for making the government budget and the budget process itself effective instruments of fiscal management in Estonia. In some cases, the new budget institutions are at the early stages of development and appear fragile because of lack of resources or trained personnel and lack of tradition. In other cases, the proper institutions for fiscal management have not been developed or are lacking. Addressing these reform issues should significantly enhance the ability of the Government of Estonia to accomplish its objectives of macroeconomic stability, a more efficient allocation of public funds, and growth of the economy’s private sector.This report takes stock and evaluates the reforms in fiscal management already introduced, those scheduled for introduction, and those that the Government still should consider putting in place to accomplish an effective fiscal management system. Because they have been reviewed recently, this report does not discuss in depth existing budget institutions but instead puts emphasis on recent reform and highlights those problem areas where additional reforms will be necessary. The first section of the report provides a brief overview of the main accomplishments and failings of Estonia’s budget process and fiscal management system. The next three sections of the report review in more depth the three stages of the budget process: policy formulation, forecasting and budget preparation; budget execution and the ongoing effort to introduce a modern treasury function in the Ministry of Finance; and the institutions for budget compliance, namely internal and external ex-post audits and budget evaluation.
This paper analyzes one method governments employ to circumvent the discipline of a competitive system of fiscal federalism - intergovernmental collusion in the form of intergovernmental grants. Grants, it is argued, serve to encourage the expansion of the public sector by concentrating taxing powers in the hands of the central government and by weakening the fiscal discipline imposed on governments forced to self-finance their expenditures. The results reported suggest that intergovernmental grants do encourage growth in the public sector. The results offer further support for the use of monopoly government assumptions in public sector modeling.