COVID-19, Seignorage, Quantitative Easing and the Fiscal-Monetary Nexus.

IF 1.5 Q2 ECONOMICS
Comparative Economic Studies Pub Date : 2021-01-01 Epub Date: 2021-04-13 DOI:10.1057/s41294-021-00150-7
Alex Cukierman
{"title":"COVID-19, Seignorage, Quantitative Easing and the Fiscal-Monetary Nexus.","authors":"Alex Cukierman","doi":"10.1057/s41294-021-00150-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The huge fiscal expansions triggered by the corona crisis raised debt/GDP ratios to very high levels. This led some economists to reconsider the taboo on seignorage. Following a brief documentation of the crisis impact and aggregate demand policies responses the paper discusses views of academics and policymakers on seignorage. Optimal taxation considerations imply that the decision on allocating deficit financing between debt and seignorage falls within the realm of fiscal authorities-a fact that infringes on central bank (CB) autonomy. The paper explores ideas aimed at improving the tradeoff between those two principles. Implication of cross-country variations in the need to use seignorage is discussed. Comparison of the indirect contribution of quantitative easing (QE) to deficit financing with the direct contribution of seignorage implies that QE is a substitute to seignorage that preserves central bank dominance without much change in existing monetary institutions. Comparison of empirical evidence from the USA during the global financial crisis with the post-WWI German inflation supports the view that for countries experiencing deflationary pressure seignorage is more potent in moving inflation toward its target than QE. Given the current outlook temporary use of seignorage does not appear to involve a substantial risk of inflation.</p>","PeriodicalId":46161,"journal":{"name":"Comparative Economic Studies","volume":"63 2","pages":"181-199"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8043088/pdf/","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Comparative Economic Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41294-021-00150-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/4/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

The huge fiscal expansions triggered by the corona crisis raised debt/GDP ratios to very high levels. This led some economists to reconsider the taboo on seignorage. Following a brief documentation of the crisis impact and aggregate demand policies responses the paper discusses views of academics and policymakers on seignorage. Optimal taxation considerations imply that the decision on allocating deficit financing between debt and seignorage falls within the realm of fiscal authorities-a fact that infringes on central bank (CB) autonomy. The paper explores ideas aimed at improving the tradeoff between those two principles. Implication of cross-country variations in the need to use seignorage is discussed. Comparison of the indirect contribution of quantitative easing (QE) to deficit financing with the direct contribution of seignorage implies that QE is a substitute to seignorage that preserves central bank dominance without much change in existing monetary institutions. Comparison of empirical evidence from the USA during the global financial crisis with the post-WWI German inflation supports the view that for countries experiencing deflationary pressure seignorage is more potent in moving inflation toward its target than QE. Given the current outlook temporary use of seignorage does not appear to involve a substantial risk of inflation.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

COVID-19、铸币税、量化宽松和财政-货币关系。
冠状病毒危机引发的巨额财政扩张将债务/GDP比率提高到了非常高的水平。这导致一些经济学家重新考虑铸币税的禁忌。在简要介绍了危机影响和总需求政策应对措施之后,本文讨论了学术界和政策制定者对铸币税的看法。最优税收考虑意味着在债务和铸币税之间分配赤字融资的决定属于财政当局的范畴——这一事实侵犯了中央银行(CB)的自主权。本文探讨了旨在改善这两个原则之间权衡的想法。讨论了使用铸币税需要的跨国差异的含义。将量化宽松(QE)对赤字融资的间接贡献与铸币税的直接贡献进行比较,可以发现QE是铸币税的替代品,可以在不改变现有货币制度的情况下保持央行的主导地位。将美国在全球金融危机期间的经验证据与一战后德国的通胀进行比较,可以支持这样一种观点,即对于面临通缩压力的国家来说,铸币税比量化宽松更能有效地将通胀推向目标。鉴于目前的前景,暂时使用铸币税似乎不会带来通货膨胀的重大风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
12.50%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: Comparative Economic Studies is a journal of the Association for Comparative Economic Studies (ACES). It aims to publish papers that address several objectives: that provide original political economy analysis from a comparative perspective, that are an accessible source for state-of-the-art comparative economics thinking, that encourage cross-fertilization of ideas, that debate directions for future research in comparative economics, and that can provide materials and insights that are relevant for teaching, public policy debate and the media. Comparative Economic Studies welcome both submissions that are explicitly comparative and case studies of single countries or regions. The journal is interested in papers that investigate how economic systems respond to economic transitions, crises and to structural change, brought about by globalization, demographics, institutions, technology, politics, and the environment. While maintaining its position as an important outlet for work on Central Europe and the Former Soviet Union, the scope of Comparative Economic Studies encompasses other areas as well (European Union, Asia, Latin America, and Africa).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信