Kreditfinanzierung versus Steuerfinanzierung der Staatsausgaben - ein langfristiger Vergleich
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Cite JOURNAL ARTICLE
Style
Format
Kreditfinanzierung versus Steuerfinanzierung der Staatsausgaben - ein langfristiger Vergleich
Credit and Capital Markets – Kredit und Kapital, Vol. 17 (1984), Iss. 1 : pp. 84–101
Additional Information
Article Details
Carlberg, Michael
References
-
Arrow, RK. J., Kurz, M.: Public Investment, the Rate of Return, and Optimal Fiscal Policy, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins 1970.
Google Scholar -
Cavaco-Silva, A.: Economic Effects of Public Debt, London: Robertson 1977.
Google Scholar -
Domar, E. D.: The “Burden of the Debt” and the National Income, in: American Economic Review 34, 1944, 798 - 827.
Google Scholar -
Dreissig, W.: Die Technik der Staatsverschuldung, in: Handbuch der Finanzwissenschaft, Hg. F. Neumark, Tübingen: Mohr 1981.
Google Scholar -
Gandenberger, O.: Theorie der öffentlichen Verschuldung, in: Handbuch der Finanzwissenschaft, Hg. F. Neumark, Tübingen: Mohr 1981.
Google Scholar -
Haller, H., Albers, W. (Hg.): Probleme der Staatsverschuldung, Berlin: Duncker und Humblot 1972.
Google Scholar -
Henke, K. D.: Kreditaufnahme und Besteuerung als Alternativen der Infrastrukturfinanzierung, in: Öffentliche Verschuldung, Hg. E. Nowotny, Stuttgart: Gustav Fischer 1979.
Google Scholar -
Modigliani, F.: Long-run Implications of Alternative Fiscal Policies and the Burden of the National Debt, in: Economic Journal 71, 1961, 730 - 755.
Google Scholar -
Mückl, W. J.: Ein Beitrag zur Theorie der Staatsverschuldung, in: Finanzarchiv 39, 1981, 253 - 278.
Google Scholar -
Mückl, W. J.: Zur Frage der intertemporalen Belastungswirkungen von kreditfinanzierten öffentlichen Ausgaben, in: Wirtschaftstheorie und Wirtschaftspolitik, Hg. W. J. Mückl, A. E. Ott, Passau: Passavia 1981.
Google Scholar -
Nowotny, E. (Hg.): Öffentliche Verschuldung, Stuttgart: Gustav Fischer 1979.
Google Scholar -
Phelps, E. S., Shell, K.: Public Debt, Taxation and Capital Intensiveness, in: Journal of Economic Theory 1, 1969, 330 - 346. - Sato, K.: Taxation and Neoclassical Growth, in: Public Finance 22, 1967, 346 - 374.
Google Scholar -
Sato, R.: Fiscal Policy ina Neo-Classical Growth Model: An Analysis of Time Required for an Equilibrium Adjustment, in: Review of Economic Studies 30, 1963, 16 - 23. - Schneider, H.: Staatsaktivität und optimales Wachstum, in: Probleme der Staatsverschuldung, Hg. H. Haller, W. Albers, Berlin: Duncker und Humblot 1972.
Google Scholar -
Simmert, D. B., Wagner, K.D. (Hg.): Staatsverschuldung kontrovers, Köln: Verlag Wissenschaft und Politik 1981. - Tolkemitt, G.: Zur Theorie der langfristigen Wirkungen Öffentlicher Verschuldung, Tübingen: Mohr 1975.
Google Scholar -
von Weizsäcker, C. C.: Langfristige Minimierung der Steuerlast bei gegebenen Staatsausgaben, in: Wirtschaftswissenschaft als Grundlage staatlichen Handelns, Hg. P. Bohley, G. Tolkemitt, Tübingen: Mohr 1979.
Google Scholar -
Ziffzer, S.: Ökonomische Grenzen der staatlichen Kreditaufnahme, Berlin: Duncker und Humblot 1980
Google Scholar
Abstract
Credit Financing versus Tax Financing of Government Expenditures - a long-term comparison
In the long-term comparison of credit financing and tax financing of government expenditures, three indicators are examined: (1) Is the burden of interest tax in the case of credit financing greater than the burden of income tax in the case of tax financing? .(2) Are the borrowed funds swallowed up by interest on the debt? (3) Which financing form promises the higher welfare level. As the theoretical study demonstrates, in answering these questions it is advisible to distinguish among three situations. (1) The private propensity to save, the public borrowing rate (for credit financing) and the income tax rate (for tax financing) are taken as given. In this situation all three indicators tend to give the same recommendation: If the private propensity to save is great (small), credit financing (tax financing) is superior. This result is attributable to the fact that credit financing burdens private savings, while tax financing is a burden primarily on private consumption. Divergent recommendations are conceivable, however, since the critical propensities to save differ from each other. (2) The private propensity to save, the public borrowing rate (for credit financing) and the income tax rate (for tax financing) are optimal. In this situation, credit financing and tax financing are on a par with each other, regardless of which indicator is considered. The reason is that the optimal propensity to save is correspondingly greater under credit financing than under tax financing. However, there is no cogent argument as to why private households should choose the optimal propensity to save. (3) The private propensity to save is set at an arbitrary level, while the borrowing rate the income tax rate are optimal. In this situation, there is an optimal combination of credit financing and tax financing which is superior to both pure credit financing and pure tax financing