Nominal Bonds and Budgetary Discipline in a Currency Union
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Cite JOURNAL ARTICLE
Style
Format
Nominal Bonds and Budgetary Discipline in a Currency Union
Credit and Capital Markets – Kredit und Kapital, Vol. 32 (1999), Iss. 1 : pp. 1–23
1 Citations (CrossRef)
Additional Information
Article Details
Author Details
Gerhard Illing, Frankfurt/Main
Cited By
-
Bailing in the private sector
Illing, Gerhard
Intereconomics, Vol. 35 (2000), Iss. 2 P.64
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02930129 [Citations: 0]
References
-
Barro, R./Gordon, D. (1983): A Positive Theory of Monetary Policy in a Natural Rate Model, Journal of Political Economy 91, 589 - 610.
Google Scholar -
Bohn, H. (1988): Why Do we have Nominal Government Debt?, Journal of Monetary Economics 21, 127 - 140.
Google Scholar -
Buiter, W., Corsetti, G./Roubini, N. (1993): Excessive deficits: Sense and nonsense in the treaty of Maastricht, Economic policy, April 1993, 58 - 100.
Google Scholar -
Calvo, G./Guidotti, P. (1992): Indexation and Maturity of Government Bonds: An Exploratory Model, in: Dornbusch, R./Draghy, M. (eds.) Public Debt Management: Theory and History, Cambridge University Press, 52 - 82.
Google Scholar -
Calvo, G. / Guidotti, P. (1993): On the Flexibility of Monetary Policy: The Case of the optimal Inflation Tax, Review of Economic Studies, 60, 667 - 687.
Google Scholar
Abstract
The paper analyses monetary policy in a stochastic economy with shocks on government spending. Due to a moral hazard problem (efforts for budgetary discipline being not observable), nominal debt serves as a substitute for risk markets. It is shown that the optimal level of debt is finite even in a regime with reputation. A transfer of reputation in a currency union can work smoothly only under conditions of an optimum currency area (strongly correlated spendings shocks). Even in that case, however, budgetary policy has to be centrally coordinated as well, because otherwise incentives for budgetary discipline will be distorted. (JEL E50, E62, H63)