. All times are London time.

Middle East & Africa
International economy
Brussels briefing
News headlines
News in depth
Markets data & tools
Comment & analysis
Technology zone
Your money
Arts & Weekend
Jobs & education
In today's FT
Site services
FT Reports
Creative Business
World reports
Business reports

News in depth
   Aftermath of war
 Summer school
 WMD guide
 Science briefing

   Martin Wolf
 Lucy Kellaway
 Quentin Peel
 Amity Shlaes
 Gerard Baker

   Iraq's WMD: Was war justified?
 EU referendum
 UK house prices
 China's economic growth

Partner sites
 CBS MarketWatch
 Les Echos
 FT Deutschland
 The New York Times
 Investors Chronicle

World / Europe Print article | Email
Towards a superior stability pact
By Mickey Levy
Published: September 29 2003 20:23 | Last Updated: September 29 2003 20:23

Europe's policymakers are in a bind: core European nations face recessionary conditions and dismal long-term prospects that cry out for aggressive fiscal reform. But the eurozone stability and growth pact caps deficits at 3 per cent of gross domestic product and thus severely constrains governments' ability to enact the necessary pro-growth tax cuts. Instead, the fiscal debate has involved counter-productive budget trickery, diplomatic disharmony and disregard for the pact that harms its credibility. It is particularly ironic that Germany, France and Italy constitute nearly half of the member nations that drafted the recent Group of Seven communiqué urging pro-growth fiscal reforms, while their own reform efforts are thwarted by self-imposed, misguided rules. With important budget debates looming, the stability pact must be reformed and refocused.

Germany now faces recession and possibly deflation, while France and Italy are not faring much better. This underperformance is not new: Europe's economies have grown more slowly than the US since 1980, and the recent weakness has contributed to rising global imbalances and widening growth differentials within the EU.

The European Central Bank's monetary policy is often blamed, but Europe's biggest problem is low potential growth resulting from excessive government spending and taxation, unsustainably generous pensions and a wide array of burdensome regulations and institutional structures.

Recent deregulation initiatives in the labour, product and capital markets have generated positive results, but significant cuts in government spending and taxes are essential for growth.

Relying on a deficit-GDP ratio to guide fiscal policy - and coordinate policies across EU nations - allows the tail to wag the dog. A focus on deficits (and the stock of debt) has its place, but it is frequently a distraction from the underlying spending and tax structures, the shares of the economy they represent and their implications for the allocation of national resources and household and business decisions. Consider the following: Germany's deficit is about 4 per cent of GDP - not quite as large as the US ratio - but its spending and taxes as a share of GDP are roughly 50 per cent higher than in the US. Obviously, these two nations have different fiscal policies, with different economic implications.

Not surprisingly, research shows that higher government spending is inversely correlated with economic growth, and higher tax burdens harm both economic growth and job creation. By contrast, the impact of deficits on economic growth and jobs is ambiguous, depending on a host of factors. So why rely on deficits as the exclusive fiscal policy trigger? The Maastricht Treaty imposed the deficit limitation to promote fiscal responsibility and rein in government debt. Along with the other criteria, the deficit cap successfully contributed to a convergence toward narrower budget imbalances, lower inflation and interest rates. But in recent years the deficit cap has not led to lower spending and taxes. Rather than promoting fiscal responsibility, it has been an obstacle to fiscal reform. Moreover, the deficit cap is rigid, so when tax receipts fall and spending rises, during economic slumps, it may lead to destructive pro-cyclical policies.

The pact should be altered to make it easier to enact the pro-growth initiatives highlighted by the G7, particularly tax cuts. As well as allowing the deficit cap to fluctuate to reflect economic conditions, the pact should be modified by adding several new fiscal guidelines that would cap government spending and taxes - the true sources of Europe's malaise. These caps should be set well below EU nations' current average ratios of spending and tax ratios to GDP. They should be phased in over a number of years, as the Maastricht criteria were. A formula that eased the deficit ratio in response to tax cuts would also be established.

This would be radical, but these changes would address the most pressing economic and fiscal issues facing EU nations. Pension reform is a necessary component of spending reduction, but it must be implemented over a long period to allow older workers to adjust. Tax cuts, on the other hand - particularly reductions in marginal tax rates that stimulate economic growth and job creation - cannot wait.

This new formulation would provide incentives and flexibility to fiscal policymakers and re-establish the credibility of the pact. I am aware of the fierce political opposition to pension reform and fiscal restraint. Technical details would need to be ironed out. Some EU nations face high government debt-GDP ratios, and even temporary increases in deficits may be perceived as negative. However, Europe can learn from the dramatic fiscal reforms in the US in the early 1980s, which lifted economic performance and standards of living. Fiscal reform that increases potential growth and jobs is the best way to reduce the long-term problems of high deficits and debt - and the most positive strategy for reducing global imbalances.

The writer is chief economist of Bank of America

email this EMAIL THIS print this PRINT THIS most popular MOST POPULAR  
Related stories
A necessary bureaucratic tool for Europe  Oct 03 2003 20:31
Smaller EU countries dig their heels in  Sep 21 2003 22:03 Requires subscription
IMF review lays blame for eurozone woes  Sep 16 2003 18:46 Requires subscription
Britain to set out its limits on EU defence  Sep 02 2003 21:59 Requires subscription
European drought hurts Agco profits  Oct 03 2003 20:44
UK heat-related deaths top 2,000  Oct 03 2003 18:53
Surprise at London's alignment with Paris and Berlin  Oct 02 2003 20:33
Telecom Italia to compete with Wanadoo  Oct 02 2003 20:29
Global arts guide L-P  Oct 02 2003 18:43
Richard Tomkins: Arrivederci baby  Oct 02 2003 17:56
Requires subscription = requires subscription to FT.com
Search & quotes

  • Power searchRequires subscription
  • My portfolio

  • Editor's choice
      Chirac defends EU pact breach as promoting jobs Requires subscription

    Brussels warns France over stability pact Requires subscription

    France set to get off the EU hook for flouting rules Requires subscription

    Trichet warns Paris on budget deficit Requires subscription

    France under growing eurozone pressure Requires subscription

    Related stories
      A necessary bureaucratic tool for Europe

    Smaller EU countries dig their heels inRequires subscription

    IMF review lays blame for eurozone woesRequires subscription

    Britain to set out its limits on EU defenceRequires subscription

    European drought hurts Agco profits

    Email & tools
       News by email
     Personal office
     Download news ticker
     Currency converter

    Research tools
       Analyst reports
     FT Research Centre
     Free annual reports
     Market research
     Growth companies
     D&B business reports

      Home World | Business | Markets news | Markets data & tools | Industries | Lex | Your money | Comment & analysis | Reports | Arts & Weekend | Sport | Jobs & education | In today's FT | Media inquiries Contact us | Help