The Impact of Standardised fiscal rules index on the Yield on Ten-Year Government Bonds in the Visegrád Group Countries in 2005–2016

Open access

Abstract

Purpose: The article analyzes the possible methods of public debt management, which not only aim to meet regulatory requirements but also obtain a market premium in the form of an optimal level of the yield on government bond yields that will be profitable for the issuer. The study analyzes the situation in the public finance sector in the countries that form the Visegrád Group (V4). The authors evaluate the main regulatory requirements of EU law in the area of numerical fiscal rules and their impact on the yield on basic securities such as ten-year government bonds, which directly influences the cost of servicing long-term public debt.

Methodology: The study uses desk research method for theoretical reasoning to verify the research hypothesis. The study seeks to answer the question of whether the application of national and EU fiscal rules in V4 budgetary frameworks contributes to lower yields on ten-year bonds and thereby reduces the cost of public debt. The authors utilize time series and cause-effect analysis as well as quantitative research for the systematization of statistical information and regression analysis for the examination of statistical dependencies.

Findings: The basic parameters subject to financial assessment within the fiscal rules index are (1) the deficit of public finance sector and (2) public debt with its servicing costs. In 2005–2016, the ratio of the public finance sector deficit to GDP was shaped in such a way that most V4 countries required the institution of excessive deficit procedures and further disciplinary regulations. The assessment of the situation in the public finance sector in the area of budget deficit and public debt does not translate into the yield on government bonds of non-Eurozone countries. Model-based testing indicates that the financial markets – when deciding to evaluate or purchase government bonds of non-Eurozone countries – failed to acknowledge the implementation of fiscal rules in these countries and its possible effects.

Originality: The study focuses on a unique comprehensive analysis of national fiscal rules employed in individual V4 countries and their impact on the yield on government bonds throughout the entire EU membership of the V4. What holds the greatest cognitive value in this article is the answer to the question of whether Eurozone membership impacts the valuation of a country’s public debt.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Alińska A. and Kosycarz E. (2017). Implementacja i przestrzeganie reguł fiskalnych w wybranych państwach Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej. Studia Prawno-ekonomiczneCIII: 173–191 https://doi.org/10.26485/SPE/2017/103/10

  • Annett A. (2006). Enforcement and the Stability and Growth Pact: How Fiscal Policy Did and Did Not Change Under Europe’s Fiscal Framework. IMF Working Paper 2006/116 https://doi.org/10.5089/9781451863765.001

  • Alesina A. and Perotti P. (1995). Fiscal Expansions and Fiscal Adjustments in OECD Countries. NBER Working Paper No. 5214 Issued in August 1995 NBER Program(s): Monetary Economics http://www.nber.org/papers/w5214.

  • Baxa J. and Paulus M. (2016). New Fiscal Rules for the Czech Republic. Occasional Paper: 1/2016 https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/147516/1/861490215.pdf

  • Brender A. and Drazen A. (2004). Political Budget Cycles in New versus Established Democracies NBER Working Paper No. 10539 Issued in June 2004 http://www.nber.org/papers/w10539

  • Darvas Z. (2009). The impact of the crisis on budget policy in Central and Eastern Europe. Bruegel Working Paper 2009/05.

  • Dixit A. and Lambertini L. (2001). Monetary-Fiscal Policy Interactions and Commitment Versus Discretion in a Monetary Union. European Economic Review45(4): 977–987 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0014-2921(01)00134-9

  • Council Directive 2011/85/EU of 8 November 2011 on requirements for budgetary frameworks of the Member States https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32011L0085

  • Egger P. and Koethenbuerger M. (2010). Government Spending and Legislative Organization: Quasi-experimental evidence from Germany. EPRU Working Paper Series 2010-09 Economic Policy Research Unit (EPRU) University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics https://ideas.repec.org/p/kud/epruwp/10-09.html

  • Fatas A. and Mihov I. (2003). On Constraining Fiscal Policy Discretion in EMU Oxford Review of Economic Policy19(1): 112–131 https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/19.1.112

  • European Commission (2010). Public Finances in EMU – 2010. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.

  • European Commission (2015). Report on Public Finances in EMU. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.

  • Fiscal Rules Database European Comission http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/db_indicators/fiscal_governance/fiscal_rules/index_en.htm (5.11. 2017).

  • Fiscal developments (2015). Economic Bulletin4 European Commission EU economic governance https://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/ecbu/eb201504.en.pdf (12.02.2018).

  • Floyd J.E. (2009). Interest Rates Exchange Rates and World Monetary Policy. Springer.

  • Gadomski W. (2016). Kraje Wyszehradzkie bliższe politycznie niż gospodarczohttps://www.obserwatorfinansowy.pl/tematyka/makroekonomia/kraje-wyszehradzkie-blizszepolitycznie-niz-gospodarczo

  • Galbraith J.K. (2015). The End of Normal: The Great Crisis and the Future of Growth Free Press Simon & Schuster 2015 New York https://www.amazon.com/End-Normal-Crisis-Future-Growth/dp/1451644930

  • Grauwe P. de and Foresti P. (2015) Fiscal Rules Financial Stability and Optimal Currency Areas CESIFO Working Paper No. 5390 https://econpapers.repec.org/paper/cesceswps/_5f5390.htm

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF) (2010). From Stimulus to Consolidation: Revenue and Expenditure Policies in Advanced and Emerging Economies. Washington.

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF) (2016). Fiscal Monitor: Debt – Use It Wisely. Washington.

  • Klepacki J. (2017). Rynek obligacji państwowych w dobie ujemnych stóp procentowych. Finanse Rynki Finansowe Ubezpieczenia1(85): 541–553 https://doi.org/10.18276/frfu.2017.1.85-43

  • Kołodko G.W. (2014). Nowy pragmatyzm czyli ekonomia i polityka dla przyszłości Ekonomista2http://www.pte.pl/pliki/2/12/Nowypragmatyzm.pdf

  • Mączyńska E. (2016). Inkluzywność jako cecha przyszłego ładu społeczno-gospodarczego. W: M. Bałtowski (ed.) Ekonomia przyszłości. Wokół nowego pragmatyzmu Grzegorza W. Kołodko. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN http://dx.doi.org/10.17951/h.2017.51.5.241

  • Mielus P. (2011). Przekształcenia na rynku papierów skarbowych w dobie kryzysu finansowego. W: A. Alińska (ed.) Sektor finansów publicznych w warunkach światowego kryzysu finansowego. Warszawa: CeDeWu.

  • Moździerz A. (2015). Strengthening the Post-crisis Fiscal Rules – the Case of Spain Slovakia and Sweden. EQUILIBRIUM Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy10(2) http://dx.doi.org/10.12775/EQUIL.2015.012

  • OECD (2007). Economic Outlook June 2007 Chapter IV. Fiscal Consolidation: Lessons from past experience. Paris: OECD.

  • OECD (2009). Economic Outlook March 2009 Chapter III. The Effectiveness and Scope of Fiscal Stimulus. Paris: OECD http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/economics/oecd-economic-outlook_16097408

  • OECD Economic Outlook 100 databasehttps://stats.oecd.org/index.aspx?DataSetCode=EO

  • OECD The state of public finances 2015: strategies for budgetary consolidation and reform in OECD countryhttp://www.oecd.org/gov/the-state-of-public-finances-2015-9789264244290-en.htm

  • Postuła M. (2017). Finanse publiczne w architekturze współczesnej gospodarki. Teoria a polska praktyka gospodarcza. Warszawa: Difin.

  • Poterba J.M. (1994). State Responses to Fiscal Crises: The Effects of Budgetary Institutions and Politics. Journal of Political Economy102(4): 799–821 https://doi.org/10.1086/261955

  • Prasad E. and Sorkin I. (2009). Assessing the G–20 Stimulus Plans: A Deeper Lookhttps://www.brookings.edu/articles/assessing–the–g–20–stimulus–plans–a–deeper–look/ (5.03.2017).

  • Rogoff C. and Reinhart K. (2010). Growth in a Time of Debt. American Economic Review: Papers & Proceedings100: 573–578 https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/rogoff/files/growth_in_time_debt_aer.pdfhttps://doi.org/10.1257/aer.100.2.573

  • Schick A. (2010). Post-Crisis Fiscal Rules: Stabilising Public Finance while Responding to Economic Aftershocks OECD Journal on Budgeting 2010/2https://www.oecd.org/gov/budgeting/48170224.pdf

  • Roubini N. and Sachs J. (1989). Political and economic determinants of budget deficits in the industrial democracies European Economic Review33(5): 903–933 https://econpapers.repec.org/article/eeeeecrev/v_3a33_3ay_3a1989_3ai_3a5_3ap_3a903-933 htm https://doi.org/10.1016/0014-2921(89)90002-0

  • Shiller R.J. (2016). Finanse a dobrobyt społeczny. Warszawa: PTE http://www.pte.pl/pliki/2/1/Shiller_spis_tresci_wstep.pdf

  • Shi M. and Svensson J. (2006). Political budget cycles: Do they differ across countries and why? Journal of Public Economicshttps://www.jakobsvensson.com/uploads/9/9/1/0/99107788/pbc_jpubec.pdf

  • Van der Ploeg LH Liu AY and Borst P. (1984). Structure of the growing telomeres of Trypanosomes https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6319026

  • Veblen T. (2008). Teoria klasy próżniaczej. Warszawa: Muza. World Economic Outlook Database https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2017/02/weodata/index.aspx (12.02.2018).

  • http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/PL/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52011DC0818 (12.02.2018).

Search
Journal information
Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 147 99 1
PDF Downloads 78 47 0