EXCESSIVE DEFICIT PROCEDURE IN VISEGRAD COUNTRIES

Cover Page

Abstract


The authors state that the fiscal policies conducted by EU member states have their limits since there are supranational rules and norms. The Excessive Deficit Procedure (EDP) seems to be a topical issue, because it binds member states with budget consolidation. The Visegrad countries exercised fiscal consolidations during 2009-2013(5). They behaved differently: Hungary had the most ambitious consolidation due to substantial problems in its fiscal system, Poland and Slovakia introduced mixed measures, and the Czech Republic cut public investments and raised indirect taxes. All in all, these consolidations could be called successful enough, because they brought the countries out of the EDP. To some extent, consolidations have changed the structure of governments’ revenues and expenditures and the level of tax burden (in Slovakia) or pension system (in Hungary). Countries managed to return to a balanced budget, prevented the risk of EU sanctions and restored confidence to their fiscal systems.


About the authors

J N Komissarova

Moscow State Institute of International Relations (University)

Author for correspondence.
Email: jeanne.25@mail.ru
76, Prospekt Vernadskogo, Moscow, 119454, Russian Federation

PhD, Associate Professor of the Department of World Economy, of Moscow State Institute of International Relations (University), Moscow, Russian Federation

E A Sergeev

Moscow State Institute of International Relations (University)

Email: sergeev-ea@yandex.ru
76, Prospekt Vernadskogo, Moscow, 119454, Russian Federation

Master in Regional Sciences, Aspirant in MGIMO, Lecturer of Department if World Economy, Moscow State Institute of International Relations (University), Moscow, Russian Federation

References

  1. Alesina A. (2012). Fiscal Policy after the Great Recession. Atlantic Economic Journal. No. 40. P. 429— 435.
  2. Alesina A., Ardagna S. (1998). Tales of Fiscal Adjustment. Economic Policy. No. 13(27). P. 487—545. Belova I.N., Gusakov N.P., Strenina M.A. (2017). Mezhdunarodnye valyutno-kreditnye otnosheniya: uchebnik. M., 351 s. (In Russ).
  3. Boeckx J., Deroose M. (2016). Monetary and fiscal policies in the euro area: independent but nevertheless connected. NBB Economic Review. September 2016. P. 7—25.
  4. Burgert M., Hruzova R., Lisicky M., Monks A. (2016). “Composition Matters: Fiscal Consolidation and Economic Growth in the Czech Republic (2010—2013)”. Economic Brief. No. 012. 20 p.
  5. Darvas Z., Tschekassin O. (2015). Poor and Under Pressure: the Social Impact of Europe’s Fiscal Consolidation. Breugel Policy Contribution. No. 04. P. 14.
  6. Drynochkin A., Sergeev E. (2016). Benilyuks i Vishegradskaya gruppa: opyt sopostavleniya [Benelux and Visegrad group: a comparative analysis], Contemporary Europe. No. 6. S. 53—62. (In Russ.)
  7. EEAG (2012). The EEAG Report on the European Economy, “The Hungarian Crisis”, CESifo, Munich. P. 115—130.
  8. Goliaš P., (ed.) (2015). Public finance consolidation in V4 plus Ukraine. Compendium of countryspecific analyses. Bratislava: INEKO — Institute for economic and social reforms. 41 p.
  9. Golodova Zh., Fedyakina L., Ranchinskaya Yu. (2017). The Effectiveness of Monetary Policy in the Eurasian Economic Union. Central Asia and Caucasus. Vol. 18. No. 1. P. 100—108.
  10. Heimberger P. (2016). Did Fiscal Consolidation Cause the Double-Dip Recession in the Euro Area? Wiener Institut für Internationale Wirtschaftsvergleiche Working Paper. No. 130. 32 p.
  11. Kleis M., Moessinger M.-D. (2016). The long-run effect of fiscal consolidation on economic growth: Evidence from quantitative case studies. ZEW Discussion Paper. No. 16-047.
  12. IMF (2015). “Central, Eastern, and Southeastern Europe Reconciling Fiscal Consolidation and Growth”. Regional Economic Issues. November 2015.
  13. Matos C. (2013). The Shifting Welfare State in Hungary and Latvia. American Journal of Economics and Sociology. No. 72(4). P. 851—891.
  14. Matolsy G., Palotai D. (2016). The Interaction Between Fiscal and Monetary Policy in Hungary over the Past Decade and a Half. Financial and Economic Review. Vol. 15. No. 2. P. 5—32.
  15. Mirdala R. (2013). Lessons Learned from Tax vs. Expenditure Based Fiscal Consolidation in the European Transition Economies. William Davidson Institute Working Paper. No. 1058.
  16. OECD (2012). Restoring Public Finance, Update, OECD Publishing.
  17. Sergeev E. (2017). Fiskal’noe regulirovanie v integracionnyh ob’edineniyah: obshchaya harakteristika [Fiscal governance in Integration Groupings: General Features]. Mirovoe i nacional’noe hozyajstvo. No. 1. P. 8. URL: http://mirec.ru/upload/ckeditor/files/mirec-2017-1-sergeev.pdf (accessed: 30.11.2017). (In Russ.)
  18. Streshneva M., Prohorenko I. (2013). Upravlenie ehkonomikoj v Evropejskom soyuze: institucionalnye i politicheskie aspekty [Economic Governance in the European Union: Institutional and Political Aspects]. M.: IMEMO. 155 p. (In Russ.)

Statistics

Views

Abstract - 304

PDF (Russian) - 224

Cited-By


PlumX

Dimensions


Copyright (c) 2018 Komissarova J.N., Sergeev E.A.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies