Rising longevity, falling fertility rates, and the retirement of the baby boom generation will substantially raise age-related government spending in most advanced and many emerging market countries. This paper assesses the evolution of fiscal sustainability for each of the G-7 countries using two standard primary gap indicators. the estimated fiscal adjustment required to ensure long-run fiscal sustainability is substantial for all G-7 countries. in particular, ensuring fiscal sustainability would require an average improvement in the primary balance of about 4 percentage points of GDP. While the overall adjustment required to achieve long-run fiscal sustainability in G-7 countries is large, there are significant growth benefits to putting public finances on a sustainable footing in the near term versus delayed adjustment.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AuerbachA.J.GokhaleJ.KotlikoffL.J.1994. “Generational Accounting: A Meaningful Way to Evaluate Fiscal Policy.” Journal of Economic Perspectives8, 73–94.
2.
BlanchardO.1990. “Suggestions for a New Set of Fiscal Indicators,” OECD Working Paper No.79, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris.
3.
BollSt., RaffelhueschenB., WalliserJ., 1994. “Social Security and Intergenerational Redistribution: A Generational Accounting Perspective.” Public Choice81, 79–100.
4.
BotmanD.P.J.KumarM.S.2007. “Global Aging Pressures: Impact of Fiscal Adjustment, Policy Cooperation, and Structural Reforms.” IMF Working Paper No. 07/196, International Monetary Fund, Washington.
5.
BotmanD.P.J.MuirD.RomanovA.LaxtonD.2006. “A New-Open-Economy Macro Model for Fiscal Policy Evaluation.” IMF Working Paper 06/45, International Monetary Fund, Washington.
6.
Canadian Department of Finance, 2005. Budget. 2005, Annex 3: Canada's Demographic Challenge Ottawa.
7.
ChalkNHemmingR.2000. “Assessing Fiscal Sustainability in Theory and Practice.” IMF Working Paper 00/81, International Monetary Fund, Washington.
8.
Congressional Budget Office (CBO), 2000. The Long-Term Budget Outlook. Washington.
9.
Congressional Budget Office (CBO), 2005. The Long-Term Budget Outlook. Washington.
10.
Congressional Budget Office (CBO), 2006. Updated Long-Term Projections for Social Security. Washington.
11.
Conseil d'orientation des retraites, 2006. Troisième rapport du Conseil d'orientation des retraites: perspectives 2020 et. 2050 Paris.
12.
Economic Policy Committee of the European Union (EPC), 2001. Budgetary Challenges Posed by Ageing Populations: the Impact on Public Spending on Pensions, Health and Long-Term Care for the Elderly and Possible Indicators of the Long-Term Sustainability of Public Finances. Brussels.
13.
Economic Policy Committee of the European Union (EPC), 2006. “Impact of Ageing Populations on Public Spending.” Report No. ECFIN/CEFCPE(2006)REP/238, Brussels.
14.
European Commission (EC), 2004. “Public Finances in EMU.” European Economy No. 3/2004, Brussels.
15.
European Commission (EC), 2006a. The Impact of Ageing on Public Expenditure: Projections for the EU25 Member States on Pensions, Health Care, Long-Term Care, Education and Unemployment Transfers (2004–2050). Brussels.
16.
European Commission (EC), 2006b. Long-term Sustainability of Public Finances in the European Union. Brussels.
17.
European Commission (EC), 2007. “Public Finances in EMU.” European Economy No. 3/2007, Brussels.
18.
GiammarioliNNickelC.RotherP.VidalJ.-P.2006. “Assessing Fiscal Soundness: Theory and Practice,” Proceedings of the Banca d'Italia Public Finance Workshop on Fiscal Indicators. Banca d'Italia, Rome.
19.
HaunerD.2007. “Aging—Some Pleasant Fiscal Arithmetic.” International Advances in Economic Research13, 347–64.
20.
HellerP.S.2003. Who Will Pay?—Coping with Aging Societies, Climate Change, and Other Long-Term Fiscal Challenges. International Monetary Fund, Washington.
21.
HellerP.S.HaunerD.2006. “Fiscal Policy in the Face of Long-Term Expenditure Uncertainties.” International Tax and Public Finance13, 325–50.
22.
HM Treasury, 2002. Long-Term Public Finance Report: An Analysis of Fiscal Sustainability. London.
23.
HM Treasury, 2005. Long-Term Public Finance Report: An Analysis of Fiscal Sustainability. London.
24.
HM Treasury, 2006. Long-Term Public Finance Report: An Analysis of Fiscal Sustainability. London.
25.
IMF, 2006. Japan—Staff Report for the 2006 Article IV Consultation. International Monetary Fund, Washington.
26.
Japanese Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare, 2004. Projections for Social Security Benefits and Contributions. Tokyo.
27.
OECD, 2001. “Fiscal Implications of Age-Related Spending.” Economics Department Working Paper No.305, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris.
28.
OECD, 2005. Italy: Economic Survey. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris.
29.
OECD, 2006a. “Projecting OECD Health and Long-Term Care Expenditures: What Are the Main Drivers?” Economics Department Working Paper No.477, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris.
30.
OECD, 2006b. “Assessing Fiscal Risks through Long-Term Budget Projections,” Report No. GOV/PGS/SBO(2006)9/FINAL, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris.
31.
United Nations, 2005. World Population Prospects. United Nations, New York.
32.
WerdingM.KaltschützA.2005. Modellrechnungen zur langfristigen Tragfähigkeit der öffentlichen Finanzen. ifo Beiträge zur WirtschaftsforschungNo. 17.
