TAX CHANGES, BUDGETARY EFFECT, AND ECONOMIC GROWTH
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55532/1806-8944.2020.97Keywords:
Taxation, Growth, Budgetary effect, Dynamic scoringAbstract
Fiscal policy decisions – in particular, those related to tax policy – have real impact on private sector activity. A central result from studies on taxation is that taxes affect behaviour and result in distortions on the choices of companies, workers and investors; thus, a country's tax system - and, therefore, variations in that system - reflects on the nation's economic growth. In Brazil, changes in tax legislation bringing about revenue losses at federal level must obey the fiscal neutrality rule, assuring compensation equivalent to the estimated decrease in revenue. Consequently, it becomes mandatory measure the corresponding revenue loss, so that the task of scorekeeping gains special contours in the fiscal control framework which aims to promote the balance of public accounts. This paper demonstrates that the static technique of estimating budgetary effects, coupled to the legal design that requires prompt compensation of the effects on revenue, discourages the production of tax rules seeking to promote efficiency and economic growth. The result was reached using a general equilibrium model stylized and calibrated for the Brazilian economy, by simulating permanent shocks on the average tax rates on consumption, labour, and capital income. Comparing the different methodologies, we concluded that the static scoring overestimate revenue losses in face of tax cuts, in parallel to results produced from dynamic estimations. The latter, in turn, allow to capture and differentiate – according to the tax base – the positive effects stemming from cuts in the tax burden on capital stock, labour supply, consumption and aggregate investment, ultimately identifying higher long-term economic growth. Dynamic scoring offers clarity about the extra-fiscal consequences on the economy that may yield from changes in the tax system, and provides a more accurate measurement of the normative change's budgetary effect, qualifying the debate and the political decisions in the country.
Keywords: Taxation. Growth. Budgetary effect. Dynamic scoring.
References
Adam, S.; Bozio, A. Dynamic Scoring. OECD Journal on Budgeting, vol. 2009/2. 2009.
Almeida, D. P. B. Impactos Econômicos e Fiscais da Atuação do Congresso Nacional: o caso da Reforma Trabalhista à luz de um Modelo DSGE. In: XXII Prêmio Tesouro Nacional 2017: Finanças Públicas: coletânea de monografias premiadas. Ministério da Fazenda, Secretaria do Tesouro Nacional. Brasília-DF, 2018.
Almeida, V.; Divino, J. A.; Gadelha, S. R. B.; Maranhão, A. Alíquotas Tributárias Efetivas Médias para a Economia Brasileira: Uma Abordagem Macroeconômica. Revista Brasileira de Economia, v. 71, n. 2, p. 153-175. Mar-Jun. 2017.
Areosa, W. D.; Coelho, C. A. Utilizando um modelo DSGE para avaliar os efeitos macroeconômicos dos recolhimentos compulsórios no Brasil. Pesquisa e Planejamento Econômico, v. 45, n. 3, p. 407-435. Dez. 2015.
Auerbach, A. J. Dynamic Revenue Estimation. Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol. 10, n. 1, p, 141-157. Winter, 1996.
_____. Dynamic Scoring: An Introduction to the Issues. American Economic Review, v. 95, (2), p. 421-425. 2005.
Blanchard, O.; Perotti, R. An Empirical Characterization of the Dynamic Effects of Changes in Government Spending and Taxes on Output. National Bureau of Economic Research. Working Paper 7269. July 1999.
BRASIL. Ministério do Orçamento e Gestão, Ministério da Fazenda, Ministério da Previdência e Assistência Social. Exposição de Motivos Interministerial n. 106, de 13 de abril de 1999. Submete à consideração do Presidente da República Projeto de Lei Complementar que estabelece o regime de gestão fiscal responsável; dispõe sobre os princípios fundamentais e normas gerais das finanças públicas, conforme o art. 163 da Constituição; regula o art. 169 da Constituição e altera a Lei Complementar 64. de 18 do maio de 1990. Brasília, Distrito Federal, 1999.
_____. Lei Complementar n. 101, de 4 de maio de 2000. Estabelece normas de finanças públicas voltadas para a responsabilidade na gestão fiscal e dá outras providências. Brasília, Distrito Federal. Disponível em: http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/lcp/lcp101.htm. Acesso em: 29 jul. 2019 (2000).
_____. Constituição (1988). Emenda Constitucional n. 95, de 15 de dezembro de 2016. Altera o Ato das Disposições Constitucionais Transitórias, para instituir o Novo Regime Fiscal, e dá outras providências. Brasília, Distrito Federal. Disponível em: http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/constituicao/emendas/emc/emc95.htm. Acesso em: 31 ago. 2019 (2016).
_____. Lei n. 13.707, de 14 de agosto de 2018. Dispõe sobre as diretrizes para a elaboração e execução da Lei Orçamentária de 2019 e dá outras providências. Brasília, Distrito Federal. Disponível em: http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2015-2018/2018/lei/L13707.htm. Acesso em: 29 jul. 2019. (2018).
_____. Ministério da Fazenda. Receita Federal do Brasil. Carga Tributária no Brasil – 2017: Análise por Tributos e Bases de Incidência. Brasília, Distrito Federal, 2018 (2018b).
_____. Ministério da Economia. Receita Federal do Brasil. Metodologia de Cálculo dos Gastos Tributários (V1.0). Brasília, Distrito Federal, 2019.
Chacón, J. L. T. Introduction do Dynamic Macroeconomic General Equilibrium Models. Vernon Press. 2016.
D’Amico, Z.; Lash, J. Dynamic Scoring: Challenges and Advantages of Macroeconomic Revenue Estimation and Scoring. Harvard Law School: Briefing Papers on Federal Budget Policy. Briefing Paper n. 52. May 2015.
Einarsson, T.; Marquis, M. H. Fiscal policy under alternative mechanisms of endogenous growth. University of Iceland, Institute of Economic Studies, Working Paper n. W97:08. 1997.
Engen, E. M.; Skinner, J. Taxation and economic growth. National Bureau of Economic Research. Working Paper 5826. 1996.
Feldstein. M. The Effect of Taxes on Efficiency and Growth. National Bureau of Economic Research. Working Paper 12201. May 2006.
_____. Effects of Taxes on Economic Behaviour. National Bureau of Economic Research. Working Paper 13745. Jan 2008.
Fichtner, J.; McLaughlin, P. Legislative impact accounting: Rethinking How to Account for Policies’ Economic Costs in the Federal Budget Process. Mercatus Working Paper. June, 2015.
Fjeldstad, O. Taxation and development: A review of donor support to strengthen tax systems in developing countries. WIDER Working Paper, n. 2013/010. 2013.
Gravelle, J. G. Issues in Dynamic Revenue Estimating. Congressional Research Service Report n. 31949. May 2007.
_____. Dynamic Scoring for Tax Legislation: A Review of Models. Congressional Research Service Report n. 43381. July 2014.
Hodge. S. A. Dynamic Scoring Made Simple. Tax Foundation. Feb. 2015.
Johansson, A.; Heady, C.; Arnold, J.; Brys, B.; Vartia, L. Taxation and Economic Growth. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Economics Department Working Paper n. 620. 2008.
King, R. G.; Rebelo, S. Public policy and endogenous growth: developing neoclassical implications. Journal of Political Economy, vol. 98, p. S126–50. 1990.
Loureiro, M. R.; Abrucio, F. L. Política e Reformas Fiscais no Brasil Recente. Revista de Economia Política, vol. 24, n. 1 (93), p. 50-72. Jan.-mar. 2004.
Lucas, R. E. Supply-side economics: an analytical review. Oxford Economic Papers, vol. 42, p. 293–316. 1990.
Macek, R. The Impact of Taxation on Economic Growth: Case Study of OECD Countries. Review of Economic Perspectives, vol. 14, issue 4, p. 309-328. 2014.
Mankiw, G. N. Dynamic Scoring in Congress Is Defensible but Slippery. Economic View. The New York Times. 25 dez. 2018.
Martinez-Vazquez, J.; Bird, R. M. Sustainable development requires a good tax system. In Taxation and Development: The Weakest Link? Chapter 1, p. 1-24. Edward Elgar Publishing. 2014.
Mauskopf, E.; Reifschneider, D. Dynamic Scoring, Fiscal Policy and the Short-Run Behaviour of the Macroeconomy. National Tax Journal, vol. 50, n. 3, p. 631-655. Sept. 1997.
Mitchell, D. J. The Correct Way to Measure the Revenue Impact of Changes in Tax Rates. The Heritage Foundation: Backgrounder, n.1544. May, 2002.
Myles, G. D. Taxation and Economic Growth. Fiscal Studies, vol. 21, n. 1, p. 141–168. 2000.
Nickell, S. Employment and Taxes. CEP Discussion Paper 634. 2004.
Oliveira, W. Curso de Responsabilidade Fiscal. Vol. I. Editora Fórum. Belo Horizonte, 2013.
Organização para a Cooperação e Desenvolvimento Económico (OCDE). OECD Jobs Strategy: Lessons from a Decade's Experience, Main Report, Economics Department Working Paper n. 1. 2005.
Pacheco, L. B. Como se Fazem as Leis. 3ª. ed. Câmara dos Deputados – Centro de Informação e Documentação. Edições Câmara. Brasília – DF, 2013.
Santa Helena, E. Z. Competência parlamentar para geração e controle de despesas obrigatórias de caráter continuado e de gastos tributários. Brasília: Edições Câmara, 2009. 342 p.
United States of America (U.S.A.). Economic Report of the President. United States Government Printing Office. Washington, 2004.
_____. House of Representatives. Rules of the House of Representatives: One Hundred Fourteenth Congress. Jan. 2015.
Walsh, C. E. Monetary theory and policy. The MIT Press, 3rd ed. Cambridge, 2010.
Williams, B. Dynamic Scoring Forum: California’s Dynamic Revenue Estimating Experience. TaxVox, mar. 2015.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
The articles can be copied, since quoted the source.
