Symbiosis of Monetary and Fiscal Policies in a Monetary Union Λ by Avinash Dixit, Princeton University and Luisa Lambertini, UCLA First draft August 1

Similar documents
Monetary-Fiscal Policy Interactions and Commitment Versus Discretion in a Monetary Union Λ Avinash Dixit a, Luisa Lambertini b;y a Princeton Universit

Monetary Economics Final Exam

1 Optimal Taxation of Labor Income

HONG KONG INSTITUTE FOR MONETARY RESEARCH

Introducing nominal rigidities. A static model.

Economic Growth and Development : Exam. Consider the model by Barro (1990). The production function takes the

Introducing nominal rigidities.

NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES IMPERFECT COMPETITION AND THE KEYNESIAN CROSS. N. Gregory Mankiw. Working Paper No. 2386

Notes for Econ FALL 2010 Midterm 1 Exam

Endogenous Markups in the New Keynesian Model: Implications for In ation-output Trade-O and Optimal Policy

9. Real business cycles in a two period economy

Chapter 10 Solutions

Fiscal Cooperation in a Monetary Union

1. Borrowing Constraints on Firms The Financial Accelerator

ECON 6022B Problem Set 2 Suggested Solutions Fall 2011

AGGREGATE DEMAND, AGGREGATE SUPPLY, AND INFLATION. Chapter 25

Was The New Deal Contractionary? Appendix C:Proofs of Propositions (not intended for publication)

This paper is not to be removed from the Examination Halls

Conditional versus Unconditional Utility as Welfare Criterion: Two Examples

Eco504 Spring 2010 C. Sims MID-TERM EXAM. (1) (45 minutes) Consider a model in which a representative agent has the objective. B t 1.

1 No capital mobility

Chapter 9, section 3 from the 3rd edition: Policy Coordination

Comments on Credit Frictions and Optimal Monetary Policy, by Cúrdia and Woodford

Macro II. John Hassler. Spring John Hassler () New Keynesian Model:1 04/17 1 / 10

Final Exam (Solutions) ECON 4310, Fall 2014

Chapter 9 Dynamic Models of Investment

Econ 101A Final exam Mo 18 May, 2009.

Sharing the Burden: Monetary and Fiscal Responses to a World Liquidity Trap David Cook and Michael B. Devereux

Topic 7. Nominal rigidities

1 Answers to the Sept 08 macro prelim - Long Questions

Suggested Solutions to Assignment 7 (OPTIONAL)

Keynesian Views On The Fiscal Multiplier

1 Fiscal stimulus (Certification exam, 2009) Question (a) Question (b)... 6

This paper is not to be removed from the Examination Halls

Macroeconomics. Basic New Keynesian Model. Nicola Viegi. April 29, 2014

Eco 504, Macroeconomic Theory II Final exam, Part 1, Monetary Theory and Policy, with Solutions

Simple Analytics of the Government Expenditure Multiplier

Macroeconomics: Fluctuations and Growth

Monetary Economics. Lecture 11: monetary/fiscal interactions in the new Keynesian model, part one. Chris Edmond. 2nd Semester 2014

On Quality Bias and Inflation Targets: Supplementary Material

Econ 3029 Advanced Macro. Lecture 2: The Liquidity Trap

1. Cash-in-Advance models a. Basic model under certainty b. Extended model in stochastic case. recommended)

Queen s University Faculty of Arts and Science Department of Economics ECON 222 Macroeconomic Theory I Fall Term 2012

Supply-side effects of monetary policy and the central bank s objective function. Eurilton Araújo

Final Exam Solutions

Financial Intermediation and the Supply of Liquidity

(b) per capita consumption grows at the rate of 2%.

Advanced Macro and Money (WS09/10) Problem Set 4

Graduate Macro Theory II: Fiscal Policy in the RBC Model

Macroeconomics 2. Lecture 6 - New Keynesian Business Cycles March. Sciences Po

Unemployment Fluctuations and Nominal GDP Targeting

Sentiments and Aggregate Fluctuations

Consumption- Savings, Portfolio Choice, and Asset Pricing

A Note on Competitive Investment under Uncertainty. Robert S. Pindyck. MIT-CEPR WP August 1991

Dynamic Macroeconomics

Expansion of Network Integrations: Two Scenarios, Trade Patterns, and Welfare

1 The Solow Growth Model

6. Deficits and inflation: seignorage as a source of public sector revenue

State-Dependent Fiscal Multipliers: Calvo vs. Rotemberg *

STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT ALBANY Department of Economics. Ph. D. Comprehensive Examination: Macroeconomics Fall, 2010

Economics 301 Final Exam. Prof. Daniel. December 17, Answer all questions. Each question is worth 20 points. LABEL EVERYTHING!!!

Global Currency Hedging

Class Notes on Chaney (2008)

Economics 2450A: Public Economics Section 1-2: Uncompensated and Compensated Elasticities; Static and Dynamic Labor Supply

Review Seminar. Section A

Money in an RBC framework

General Examination in Macroeconomic Theory SPRING 2016

Overshooting of Exchange Rate and New Open Economy Macroeconomics : Some Implications for Japanese Yen and Korean Won

1 Dynamic programming

A dynamic model with nominal rigidities.

The Role of Physical Capital

1 Business-Cycle Facts Around the World 1

Problem set Fall 2012.

Columbia University. Department of Economics Discussion Paper Series. Simple Analytics of the Government Expenditure Multiplier.

Macroeconomics of the Labour Market Problem Set

Question 1: Productivity, Output and Employment (20 Marks)

Lecture 15 Dynamic General Equilibrium. Noah Williams

The science of monetary policy

Online Appendix (Not intended for Publication): Federal Reserve Credibility and the Term Structure of Interest Rates

Economics 2450A: Public Economics Section 7: Optimal Top Income Taxation

Final Term Papers. Fall 2009 (Session 03a) ECO401. (Group is not responsible for any solved content) Subscribe to VU SMS Alert Service

STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT ALBANY Department of Economics. Ph. D. Comprehensive Examination: Macroeconomics Fall, 2016

UNIVERSITY OF OSLO DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT ALBANY Department of Economics. Ph. D. Preliminary Examination: Macroeconomics Fall, 2009

Microeconomic Foundations of Incomplete Price Adjustment

Volume 29, Issue 1. Juha Tervala University of Helsinki

1 Ricardian Neutrality of Fiscal Policy

EconS Micro Theory I 1 Recitation #9 - Monopoly

Real Wage Rigidities and Disin ation Dynamics: Calvo vs. Rotemberg Pricing

This paper is not to be removed from the Examination Halls UNIVERSITY OF LONDON

Lecture Notes. Macroeconomics - ECON 510a, Fall 2010, Yale University. Fiscal Policy. Ramsey Taxation. Guillermo Ordoñez Yale University

Teaching Inflation Targeting: An Analysis for Intermediate Macro. Carl E. Walsh * First draft: September 2000 This draft: July 2001

Linear Capital Taxation and Tax Smoothing

ECON Micro Foundations

Lecture 12 Ricardian Equivalence Dynamic General Equilibrium. Noah Williams

ECO 209Y MACROECONOMIC THEORY AND POLICY LECTURE 3: AGGREGATE EXPENDITURE AND EQUILIBRIUM INCOME

Equilibrium with Production and Labor Supply

14.02 Principles of Macroeconomics Solutions to Problem Set # 2

1 Multiple Choice (30 points)

Topic 3, continued. RBCs

Transcription:

Symbiosis of Monetary and Fiscal olicies in a Monetary Union Λ by Avinash Dixit, rinceton University and Luisa Lambertini, UCLA First draft August 3, 999 This draft February 20, 2002 A Appendix: Microfounded model We consider a two-country general equilibrium monetary model of the Blanchard and Kiyotaki (987) type, popularized by Obstfeld and Rogoff (996, chapter 0). There are N goods in the global economy, which are imperfect substitutes, and money. Each good is produced by a producer who acts as a monopolistic competitor facing a downward sloping demand curve and chooses the nominal price and the level of production of her good. roduction makes only use of labor and, since labor supply is elastic, production is endogenously determined. Each producer is also a consumer, who derives utility from the consumption of all goods and real money balances but derives disutility from the effort put in production. For simplicity of notation only, we assume that the two countries have equal population; hence, N=2 goods are produced in country and the other N=2 in country 2. The two countries are in a monetary union; hence, there is a single currency circulating and a common central bank that decides monetary policy. roducer-consumer (producer for short) j in country i has the following utility function ψ! fl ψ! fl ψ! Cj;i Mj;i = di U j;i = (Y j;i ) fi ; fl 2 (0; ); d i > 0; fi ; (A.) fl fl fi Λ We thank Michael Woodford, Roel Beetsma the editors and two anonymous referees for useful suggestions. Dixit thanks the National Science Foundation and Lambertini thanks the UCLA Senate for financial support.

where j =;:::;N=2;i=; 2andthe variable C j;i is a real consumption index C j;i = N " N X # (C z;j;i ) ; >; (A.2) z= where C z;j;i is the j th individual consumption of good z in country i. The price deflator for nominal money is the consumption-based money price index corresponding to the consumption index (A.2) = " N ψ N X!# z ; (A.3) z= where z is the price of good z. The interpretation of equations (A.) to (A.3) is completely standard see Blanchard and Kiyotaki (987). roducer j in country i has the following budget constraint: NX z C z;j;i + M j;i = j;i Y j;i ( fi i ) T i + M j;i I j;i ; z= (A.4) which says that nominal consumption expenditure plus the demand for money must equal nominal income. It is assumed that taxes fi i are proportional to sales; individuals also pay lump-sum taxes T i and have an initial holding of money, M j;i. Hence, nominal income is equal to nominal after-tax revenues from selling the produced good, minus lump-sum taxes, plus the initial money holding. Both fi i and T i can be either positive ornegative. There is a government ineach country that runs fiscal policy and a central bank that runs monetary policy for both countries. The government of country i has the budget constraint: N=2 X I g;i j= j;i Y j;i fi i + N 2 T i = χ i NG i +( χ i )X i : (A.5) χ i is an indicator function that is equal to if government revenues are used to purchase the goods produced in the economy, and equal to 0 otherwise. Tax revenues, either from sale and/or lump-sum taxation, can be used either to purchase the per-capita amount G i of the same composite good consumed by private individuals (χ i = ), or they can be rebated This implies that the government in country i chooses consumption G z;i so as to max G i = N " N X z= # G ; >; z;i subject to its budget constraint. Hence, the government's demand for good z will have the same form of the individual demand for good z. 2

back the consumers (χ = 0;X i = 0), or simply wasted (χ i = 0 and X i > 0). Notice that money supply does not enter the government budget constraints: the monetary and the fiscal authorities does not share (A.5) and the monetary authority is truly policy independent. The solution of this model is briefly sketched here. The first order condition with respect to C z;j;i and M j;i, respectively, imply C z;j;i = z fli j;i N ; M j;i =( fl)i j;i : (A.6) (A.7) As usual, the demand for each good is linear in wealth and depends on its relative price with elasticity. The demand for money is also linear in wealth. Let W fli=(n)+ 2 i= χ i G i, where I I + I 2, with I i = N=2 j= I j;i. Hence, χ i G i is country i's government demand for goods. The demand facing producer z can be obtained by aggregating individual demand over consumers and governments 2X N=2 X Yz d = C z;j;i + G z;i = j= i= z W: (A.8) The price, and therefore output, chosen by producer j in country i is found by maximizing her indirect utility function U j;i =( fi i )W Y j;i T i + M j;i ψ! di Y fi j;i fi with respect to the relative price, which gives " # j;i = d i ( )( fi i ) W fi +(fi ) : (A.9) The higher the wealth W and the disutility ofeffort d i, the higher the relative price set by producer j in country i. Suppose the parameters d i ;;fi are stochastic with variances ff d ;ff ;ff fi, respectively; for simplicity, we normalize ff fi = and assume that these stochastic variables are independent. We also assume that the d i have equal mean. In both countries, a fraction ffi 2 (0; ) of the goods prices remain unchanged each period, while new prices are chosen for the other ffi goods; the probability thatany given price will be adjusted in any given period is assumed to be independent of the length of time since the price was changed and independent of what the good's current price may be. This implies that, in any period and in each country, a 3

fraction ffi of the prices is given from the past and constant; we denote the preset price of the z th good in country i as μ z;i and the average of such prices as E μ i. A fraction ffi of the prices is set freely after uncertainty and policy are resolved and we denote the price of the z th good in country i ~ z;i ; due to the symmetry of the model, all new freely set prices are equal. For simplicity, we set ffi ==2; then, the price level is It is convenient to define = 4 2 " 2X i= 2 4ψ E μ # E μ i + ~ z;i : (A.0)! + ψ ~z;! 3 5 (A.) as country 's relative price. Notice that country 2's relative price is equal to 2. We define aggregate output in country i as N=2 X Y i j= j;i Y j;i (A.2) so that Y = N W=2 and Y 2 = N(2 )W=2. Aggregate output in the economy is 2X Y i= Y i = WN: (A.3) Let a 0 subscript indicate the value at the steady state; we assume fi i;0 = T i;0 = G i;0 = 0. We consider the following fiscal policies in country i:. Supply Side: Reduction in distortionary taxation. The government uses distortionary taxes fi i > 0 to finance its budget; the revenues are wasted. An expansionary fiscalpolicyisareduction in fi i : x i dfi i > 0. 2. Mercantilist: roduction subsidy. The government uses lump-sum taxes T i > 0 to finance its budget; the revenues are redistributed to the producers via a production transfer fi i < 0. An expansionary fiscal policy is a reduction in fi i : x i dfi i > 0. 3. Keynesian: Balanced-budget expenditure. The government raises distortionary taxes fi i > 0 and spends the revenues to purchase the composite good G i. An expansionary fiscal policy is an increase in fi i : x i dfi i > 0. 4

Consider fiscal policy. In this case, χ i =0;X i > 0. If both countries use fiscal policy, it is easy to show that W = fl μm N n fl + fl 2 [ fi +(2 )fi 2 ] o (A.4) where M N=2 j= 2 i= M j;i. Consider now fiscal policy 2. In this case, χ i = X i = G i = 0;fi i < 0;T i > 0. Suppose both country and 2 follow fiscal policy 2. We obtain that W = fl μm ( fl) N (A.5) Consider now fiscal policy 3. In this case, χ i = and fi i > 0 as long as G i > 0. Notice that I i = = Y i ( fi i )+N μm j;i =(2 )andi g;i = = Y i fi i, so that, if both countries follow fiscal policy 3, W = fl μm ( fl) N 2 2 fi 2 2 fi : (A.6) We now proceed to find the optimal price for those producers who get a chance to update their prices. Let m = d μm= μm 0 ;ß = d= 0 ; μß j;i = d μ j;i = j;i;0;y i = dy i =Y i;0 and x i as described earlier; the log of the optimal price satisfies the following log-linear approximation " ~ß z;i =( ffi ) ß z;i + ffi # ffi μß z;i ; (A.7) where is the personal discount factor and ß z;i is the optimal price for the current period only in country i. Intuitively, the newly set price is an average of the price that is optimal in the current period and of the price that is expected to be optimal in future periods. The former depends on the realization of the current shocks; the latter depends on the expected realization of shocks and policies and, thanks to the law of large numbers, is equal to the average of the preset prices already existing in country i. We first find μß z;i that maximizes future expected indirect utility. Consider fiscal policy. Under the assumption that ( fi i )W ( ) μ j;i and d i W fi μ fi j;i fi are lognormally distributed and after several manipulations, the first order condition with respect to ~ z;i gives μß z;i = χ 0;i +μeeß +( μe)em + μ f i Ex i + μ f i Ex i (A.8) where i stands for 6= i and χ 0;i = E[ + (fi )] ( " E log d i +log 5 ψ +(fi ) log!# 2fl + N( fl)

μe = + ff 2 (Var 0;i Var ;i )+Cov(m; fi)+cov(ß; ( )(fi )) ; E[ + ( )(fi )] E[ + (fi )] Var 0;i = Var h log d i W fi fi i h Var ;i = Var log ( fi i )W ( ) i i h ; fi μ = E + fl(fi ) 2( fl) E[ + (fi )] ; f i μ = i h fl(fi ) E 2( fl) E[ + (fi )] ; where Var 0;i ;Var ;i are constants. Now we find that ß z;i, which is the price that maximize the current period indirect utility. This is given by ß z;i = χ ;i eß +( e)m + f i x i + f i x i (A.9) with e = χ ;i = ( log d " #) i +(fi ) +(fi ) fl log ; N( fl) +( )(fi ) ; f i = +(fi ) + fl(fi ) 2( fl) [ + (fi )] ; f i = fl(fi ) 2( fl) [ + (fi )] : The price level in the economy is an average of pre-set and newly changed prices; loglinearization of (A.0) gives ß = 4 " 2X Using (A.7), we can write the price level as ß =» + 4 2 (μß z;i +~ß z;i ) i= (μß +μß 2 )+ # : (ß + ß 2 ) : (A.20) 2 It is useful to write the price level as a function of monetary and fiscal policies: ß = ß 0 + c i x i + c i x i (A.2) with ß 0 = fi +( + )(fi ) m + +(fi ) 2[ + ( + )(fi )] (μß j;i +μß j; i) c i = c i = flfi 2( fl)[ + ( +)(fi )] : A fiscal expansion in either country, consisting in a reduction of fi and therefore an increase of x, lowers prices as long as c i is negative, which requires > flfi. Output in country i is derived from (A.2) and is given by y i = μy i + b i (ß ß e )+a i x i + a i x i (A.22) 6

with a i = b i = +(fi ) fi > 0; μy i = fi 2(fi ) + 4[ + (fi )] > 0; a i = log N( ) 2d i 2(fi ) 4[ + (fi )] > 0: The first term in (A.22) is the natural rate of output; the second term is output effect of surprise inflation. The last two terms capture the effect of fiscal policy in country i and in country i on the output of country i. The first term in a i is the effect of fiscal policy on the relative price of the goods produced at home; the second term in a i is the effect of fiscal policy on the demand of the goods produced at home. Notice that a i > a i > 0 and the difference between the two coefficients is the effect of fiscal policy in country i on its relative price. The direct effect on own output of a reduction in distortionary taxation, a i, is unambiguously positive; the overall effect on own output of a reduction in distortionary taxation, namely a i + b i c i,isalsounambiguously positive. Consider now fiscal policy 2. The prices set in advance are given by (A.8) with μf i = E[ + (fi )] ; μ f i = 0: Similarly, the flexible prices in country i are as in (A.9) with f i = +(fi ) ; f i = 0: The price level in the economy is still given by (A.2), where the monetary policy variable ß 0 is as in fiscal policy and c i = c i = fl 2( fl)[ + ( + )(fi )] < 0: A fiscal expansion in either country, namely a larger production subsidy, unambiguously lowers the price level. Notice that the effect on the price level of a fiscal expansion is larger under fiscal policy than under fiscal policy 2, namely c F i c F2 i as long as ff 0. Intuitively, the deadweight losses inherent in the redistribution process reduce the impact of fiscal policy on the price level. Output in country i is given by (A.22) with b i ; μy i ;a i ;a i as in fiscal policy. The overall effect on own output of a fiscal expansion is unambiguously positive, namely a i + b i c i > 0. Consider fiscal policy 3. re-set prices in country i are as in (A.8) with μf i = E(fi +) 2E[ + (fi )] ; μ f i = E(fi ) 2E[ + (fi )] : 7

Flexible prices are as in (A.9) with e as in fiscal policy and f i = fi + 2[ + (fi )] > 0; f i = fi 2[ + (fi )] > 0: The general price level is (A.2) with ß 0 as in fiscal policy and c i = c i = fi 2[ + ( + )(fi )] > 0: An increase in government spending financed with higher distortionary taxes raises the price level. Output in country i is (A.22) with b i ; μy i as in fiscal policy andwith a i = 4[ + (fi )] 2(fi ) < 0; a i = 4[ + (fi )] 2(fi ) < 0: Notice that 0 > a i > a i : higher country i's government spending is more recessionary on country i's output than higher government i's spending. This is because higher government spending financed by higher distortionary taxation lowers labor supply and lowers aggregate demand. The overall impact on output of higher government spending, a i + b i c i, is positive as long as 2 [2fi 2 5fi +3]+(2fi 3) + fi > 0, which is satisfied for large and fi < :5. The model studied above is symmetric. In a non-symmetric case or in the case where all the stochastic shocks are country specific, namely i ;fi i and d i, the price and output equations follow similarly with different coefficients for different countries. Hence, in a more general model, c i 6= c i and b i depends on parameters specific to country i. References Blanchard, Olivier and Nobu Kiyotaki. 987. Monopolistic Competition and the Effects of Aggregate Demand." American Economic Review, 77(4), September, 647-666. Obstfeld, Maurice, and Kenneth Rogoff. 996. Foundations of International Macroeconomics. Cambridge, MA: MIT ress. 8