Fiscal cliff is a
newly coined term in USA, referring to the effect of a number of laws
which, if unchanged, could result in tax increases, spending cuts, and a
corresponding reduction in the budget deficit beginning in 2013. These
laws include tax increases due to the expiration of the so-called Bush
tax cuts and across-the-board spending cuts under the Budget Control Act
of 2011. The year-over-year changes for fiscal years 2012–13 include a
19.63% increase in tax revenue and 0.25% reduction in spending. The US
Congressional Budget Office estimates that allowing certain laws on the
books during 2012 to expire or take effect in 2013 (the baseline
scenario) would cut the 2013 deficit approximately in half and
significantly reduce the trajectory of future deficits and debt
increases for the next decade and beyond. However, the 2013 deficit
reduction would adversely impact the economy in the short-run. On the
other hand, if Congress acts to extend current policies (the alternative
scenario), deficits and debt will rise rapidly over the next decade and
beyond, slowing the economy over the long run and dramatically
increasing interest costs. Many experts have argued that the U.S. should
avoid the fiscal cliff while taking steps to bring the long-term
deficit and debt trajectory under control. For example, economist Paul
Krugman recommended that the US focus on employment in the short-run,
rather than the deficit. Federal Reserve Chair Ben Bernanke emphasized
the importance of balancing long-term deficit reduction with actions
that would not slow the economy in the short-run. Charles Konigsburg,
who directed the bi-partisan Domenici-Rivlin deficit reduction panel,
advocated avoiding the fiscal cliff while taking steps to reduce the
budget deficit over time. He recommended the adoption of ideas from
deficit panels such as Domenici-Rivlin and Bowles-Simpson that
accomplish these two goals.
No comments:
Post a Comment