Defusing the Debt Time Bomb: Challenges and Solutions

P. Booth, R. Bourne
{"title":"Defusing the Debt Time Bomb: Challenges and Solutions","authors":"P. Booth, R. Bourne","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3903902","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The government’s finances are currently on an unsustainable trajectory. Whilst current levels of government debt are below the levels seen in previous periods in history, accumulating such large levels of debt during a long period of peacetime is more or less unknown. Government debt figures do not include commitments to future spending either: governments do not account in the same prudent way that companies are required to account. An ageing population means that on unchanged policies the cost of providing age-related spending such as healthcare, pensions and social care will rise substantially over the next five decades, sending overall debt on an upward trajectory. According to the government’s own Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) a permanent fiscal adjustment (tax increases and/or spending cuts) of 1.3 per cent of national income will be necessary from 2018/19 in order to ensure that the debt-to-GDP ratio falls to 20 per cent by 2063/64. However, the OBR figures make heroic assumptions about healthcare productivity and also assume that there will be a fiscal adjustment of 5.2 per cent of national income before 2018/19. In other words, spending needs to be cut by around 6.5 per cent of national income from now and for the foreseeable future to hit a government debt target of 20 per cent of national income by 2063/64. Such a measure will not create room to reverse recent tax increases. If more realistic assumptions about healthcare productivity, immigration and spending priorities are made, spending would need to be cut by 9.6 per cent of national income now and for the foreseeable future to hit a debt target of 20 per cent of national income in 50 years’ time. This is equivalent to about one quarter of all government spending or one half of all social protection spending. Other approaches to the analysis of the public finances reach similar conclusions. During its term of office, the government has taken action that has affected the long-term fiscal position detrimentally. Abolishing contracting-out of the state pension system, the implementation of the ‘triple lock’ on pension increases and ring-fencing health spending have been especially unhelpful. The government’s long-term fiscal position would be improved by following a combination of the following policies: – Restricting state benefits in various ways, for example only linking the state pension to price increases, raising significantly the state pension age and introducing user-charges in healthcare. – Various forms of deregulation aimed at raising productivity and labour market participation. – Substantial pre-funding of pensions and healthcare.","PeriodicalId":76903,"journal":{"name":"Employee benefits journal","volume":"6 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Employee benefits journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3903902","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The government’s finances are currently on an unsustainable trajectory. Whilst current levels of government debt are below the levels seen in previous periods in history, accumulating such large levels of debt during a long period of peacetime is more or less unknown. Government debt figures do not include commitments to future spending either: governments do not account in the same prudent way that companies are required to account. An ageing population means that on unchanged policies the cost of providing age-related spending such as healthcare, pensions and social care will rise substantially over the next five decades, sending overall debt on an upward trajectory. According to the government’s own Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) a permanent fiscal adjustment (tax increases and/or spending cuts) of 1.3 per cent of national income will be necessary from 2018/19 in order to ensure that the debt-to-GDP ratio falls to 20 per cent by 2063/64. However, the OBR figures make heroic assumptions about healthcare productivity and also assume that there will be a fiscal adjustment of 5.2 per cent of national income before 2018/19. In other words, spending needs to be cut by around 6.5 per cent of national income from now and for the foreseeable future to hit a government debt target of 20 per cent of national income by 2063/64. Such a measure will not create room to reverse recent tax increases. If more realistic assumptions about healthcare productivity, immigration and spending priorities are made, spending would need to be cut by 9.6 per cent of national income now and for the foreseeable future to hit a debt target of 20 per cent of national income in 50 years’ time. This is equivalent to about one quarter of all government spending or one half of all social protection spending. Other approaches to the analysis of the public finances reach similar conclusions. During its term of office, the government has taken action that has affected the long-term fiscal position detrimentally. Abolishing contracting-out of the state pension system, the implementation of the ‘triple lock’ on pension increases and ring-fencing health spending have been especially unhelpful. The government’s long-term fiscal position would be improved by following a combination of the following policies: – Restricting state benefits in various ways, for example only linking the state pension to price increases, raising significantly the state pension age and introducing user-charges in healthcare. – Various forms of deregulation aimed at raising productivity and labour market participation. – Substantial pre-funding of pensions and healthcare.
化解债务定时炸弹:挑战与解决方案
政府财政目前处于不可持续的轨道上。虽然目前的政府债务水平低于历史上以前的水平,但在长期和平时期积累如此巨额的债务或多或少是未知的。政府债务数据也不包括对未来支出的承诺:政府不像企业被要求那样审慎地核算。人口老龄化意味着,在政策不变的情况下,提供与年龄相关的支出(如医疗、养老金和社会保障)的成本将在未来50年大幅上升,使整体债务呈上升趋势。英国政府自己的预算责任办公室(OBR)表示,为了确保到2063/64年债务与gdp之比降至20%,从2018/19年度开始,有必要进行相当于国民收入1.3%的永久性财政调整(增税和/或削减支出)。然而,OBR的数据对医疗保健生产率做出了大胆的假设,并假设在2018/19年之前,财政调整幅度将达到国民收入的5.2%。换句话说,从现在开始,在可预见的未来,支出需要削减约6.5%的国民收入,以实现到2063/64年政府债务占国民收入20%的目标。这样的措施不会为扭转最近的增税创造空间。如果对医疗保健生产率、移民和支出优先事项做出更现实的假设,那么在目前和可预见的未来,支出需要削减占国民收入的9.6%,才能在50年后达到债务占国民收入20%的目标。这相当于所有政府支出的四分之一或所有社会保障支出的一半。其他分析公共财政的方法也得出了类似的结论。在其任期内,政府采取了对长期财政状况产生不利影响的行动。废除国家养老金体系的合同退出,对养老金增长实施“三重锁定”,以及对医疗支出进行“围栏”,这些都是特别无益的。政府的长期财政状况将通过以下政策组合得到改善:-以各种方式限制国家福利,例如仅将国家养老金与价格上涨挂钩,大幅提高国家养老金年龄,并在医疗保健中引入用户收费。-旨在提高生产力和劳动力市场参与度的各种形式的放松管制。-养老金和医疗保健的大量预先供资。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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