Budget Policy
Introduction:
According
to Paul A. Samuelson, a budget shows, for a given year, the
planned expenditures of government programmes and the expected revenues from
tax systems. The budget typically
contains a list of specific programmes (i.e. education, welfare, defence,
etc.), as well as tax sources (i.e., individual income tax, social-insurance
taxes, etc.).
According
to John F. Due, a budget may be defined as a financial plan that
serves as the basis for expenditure decision-making and for subsequent control.
A 'budget
surplus' occurs when all taxes and other revenues exceed government
expenditures for a year. A 'budget
deficit' is incurred when expenditures exceed taxes. When revenues and expenditures are equal
during a given period, the government has a 'balanced budget'.
When the
government incurs a budget deficit, it must borrow from the public to pay its
bills. To borrow, the government issues
bonds, which are IOUs that promise to pay money at some time in the future. The government debt (sometimes called the
public debt) consists of the total or accumulated borrowings by the government
from various sources including public, banks, businesses, foreigners, and other
non-federal entities.
Functions
of Budget Policy:
According
to Musgraves, the major functions of the Public Finance or the
governmental programmes can be grouped into three major classes, relating to
allocation of resources, to efficiency in the use of resources and attaining
economic stability and growth, and redistribution of income. These are discussed as follows:
(a)
Allocative Function: The allocative function or activity arises out of the failure of the
market mechanism to adjust the outputs of various goods in accordance with the
preferences of society with the goal of maximising per capita real income. Allocative function refers to the process by
which total resource use is divided between private and social goods and by
which the mix of social goods is chosen.
This is done by the budgetary policy.
The budget policy ensures the optimum allocation of resources which will
result on production and determination of public and private goods on optimum
quantity or level. Also it will cause
to remove the evils or shortcomings of price mechanism. As in price mechanism, the motive of profit
maximisation is so strong that public and social welfare is altogether ignored,
and the production of social goods and services, i.e., libraries, parks,
schools, hospitals, etc., are avoided.
Because in production of such goods and services the entrepreneur earns
limited profit. Therefore, in these
circumstances the government intervention becomes very necessary.
But to
determine an optimum quantity of public goods is to some extent a difficult
task because no one wants to pay the price for public goods rather they wants
to be as a 'free rider'. But this
problem is solved through decision of taxes or expenditures. Such decision may be centralised or non-centralised.
Thus the
problem of optimum allocation of resources for the production of social goods
is resolved through budget policy.
(b)
Distributive Function: The budgetary policy also affects the distribution of income in the
community. The tax and expenditure
measures are adopted to modify the existing distribution with a view to
reducing economic inequalities. In this
way optimal income distribution is brought about.
Through
budgetary policy, the resource distribution and the optimum distribution of
income and wealth can be ensured.
Through government measures such steps can be taken whereby the
resources can be diverted to the poor and depressed segments of the
society. To remove inequalities,
government mostly levies heavy taxes on rich people's income and provides
subsidies on the goods of basic needs, i.e., food, housing, education, health,
etc.
(c)
Stabilisation Function: The budgetary policy can also be used to maintain a high level of
employment, a reasonable degree of price level stability, an appropriate rate
of economic growth and stability in the balance of payments.
In the
stabilisation function of budget policy, we see the performance of the
economy. In this function we trace the
measures that how can the objectives of full employment be obtained. This function also ensures that inflation or
deflation is controlled, and the GDP growth rate is higher or at least stable.
Importance
of Budget:
(a)
Assessment of Economic Conditions: Budget provides us the economic conditions of
the concerned country, for example, if economy is growing, it means that all the
sectors of the economy are growing. If
the production of the economy is increases the incomes of the people will also
increase. Thus when government assess
the economic position of the economy and increase the expenditures, they will
have multiplier effects pushing the level of income and employment.
(b)
Financial Resources' Information: From budget, we come to know the financial
position of the country, as it tells us about the total revenues, total
expenditures, surplus or deficit.
Moreover, it also tells us about how much revenue from direct and
indirect taxes, from fees and surcharges to be earned. It also tells us about the extent of
development expenditure to be spent on public sector development.
(c)
Assessment of Budget Conditions: Through budget, the government can also assess
the surplus or deficit in monetary terms to be attained next year. If the budget is deficit, the government
will have to decide how these deficits could be met. Moreover, it could be observed from budget whether the provinces
will be able to meet their expenditures or they will have to depend upon
federal government.
(d)
Expenditures' Distribution: What will be the proportion of expenditures on different sectors of the
economy, this will be assessed through government budget. Moreover, the relative importance of
different sector of the economy can also be judged from budget.
(e)
Assessment of Income and Wealth Distribution: The budget gives us knowledge regarding income
distribution in the country. Thus
government can mobilise the resources through different policies and tools,
i.e., taxes, expenditures, rebates, subsidies, etc., to the needy sectors and
sections of the society through budget.
Thus inequalities can be removed, when the assessment is easy regarding
the incomes and wealth distribution in the economy.
(f)
Indication of Economic Policies and Strategies: Budget also provides us knowledge regarding
economic policies and strategies of the government. As from budget estimates, we can see whether the government is
spending more on developmental purposes or on non-developmental purposes,
whether the tax policy is encouraging or discouraging the entrepreneurs,
etc. Similarly, it also assess whether
the government preferences regarding expenditures are confined to one area or
various sectors of the economy.
(g)
Indication of Foreign Trade Sector: From the budget, we can see the direction of
foreign trade of the economy, whether the government is providing facilities
and rebates to exporters or import substitution strategy is being
followed. The budget tells us whether
the foreign loans are being used and what will be their repercussions on the
economy.
(h)
Importance for Consumers: Budget is a great matter of concern for the consumers, because the
incidence of tax imposed by the government is on final consumers. Government generally imposes direct taxes
(i.e., income tax, and corporate tax) on individual and corporate incomes; and
avoids indirect taxes (i.e., sales tax) on consumer goods as it directly affects
the consumers' purchasing power.
(i)
Importance for the Producers: In under-developed countries, the entrepreneurs and the producers
largely depend on the fiscal announcements in the budget policy. Government's tax cuts can boost the
investment level in the economy; and encourage the private sector to come
forward and invest in order to improve the employment level and the
productivity level in the economy. Tax
exemptions, rebates, tax holidays, and reduced import duties on industrial
goods can achieve the employers' confidence in the economy and provide them the
opportunity to achieve cheaper raw material and lower cost of production.
(j)
Importance for the Employees: The working class of the society has also a keen interest in the
government's announcements regarding increase in salaries of government
employees and the overall increase in wage rates and pensions. The employees wait for the budget in
anticipation of an increase in wages, salaries, and pensions with the fall in
taxes.
Operation
of Budgetary Process:
A budget is
designed to improve adjustment of government activities in terms of the
preferences of society by facilitating the comparison of conflicting programs
and methods in the attainment of the goals as defined by preferences and to facilitate
attainment of greater efficiency in the use of governmental resources. This, especially for the federal government,
is an extremely complex one, particularly in establishing priorities for
competing goals, for example, priorities for defence and the elimination of
poverty. The task is extremely complex,
even with the aid of the most modern systems analysis and computers.
As a
consequence of these complexities, the operation of budgetary process has
inevitably developed many shortcuts in order to be workable, which take several
forms:
(a)
Specialisation:
The various agencies play a key role in determination of actual expenditure
levels; each is concerned only with its own specialised work, with which its
officials are familiar. The budgetary authority
examines the requests. Furthermore, the
government considers the direct needs of the particular activity as well as
other activities.
(b)
Fragmentation:
the overall budget is fragmented into small pieces for most of the work, both at
the level of preparation and at the committee level.
(c)
Incremental Nature of Action: Existing programmes are not reviewed in detail each year. No one considers each year the questions of
antitrust regulations, restructuring of postal department, etc. The presumption is that existing activities
will continue unless there is strong evidence that their existence should be
reconsidered.
Programme
Budget / Traditional Budget vs. Programme Budget:
A primary
function of the budget system is to facilitate evaluation of proposals and to
compare the relative merits of various requests. Unfortunately, the traditional presentation of budget lacks the
fulfilment of this task. Following are
the disadvantages of a traditional budget:
(i) The usual budget is organised on
the basis of agencies, without any related work coordination among them.
(ii) The budgets are organised in such a
fashion as to stress inputs, without reference to outputs. The relationships between inputs and
accomplishments are not established.
(iii) The typical budget is on a strictly
one-year basis, without regard to future prospects or commitments arising out
of the proposals included in this year's budget.
The
programme budget is the replacement of the traditional budget, in which emphasis
is given on performance. The local
governments and to some extent the federal governments have also been
introducing program features into their budgets. Following are the features of a programme budget:
(i) The programme approach
stresses the end product, such as eliminating poverty, increasing
employment, increasing agricultural production yield, or aggressive approach
regarding the achievement of the community goals, rather than the inputs of
various types of materials and manpower.
(ii) The programme budgeting
stresses the relationship between various outputs or programmes and the inputs
necessary to produce them, facilitating the use of techniques to
analyse alternative programmes that will attain the goals and various
alternative means of implementing them.
(iii) The programme approach seeks
to be all-inclusive, recognising all contributions that the activity
makes and all costs incurred, regardless of the organisational structure.
(iv) It provides a more useful
basis for evaluation of agency requests by department, and the Federal
Government by concentrating on end products instead of inputs and by providing
better information on costs and all benefits.
Planning-Programming-Budgeting
Systems (PPBS):
The
Planning-Programming-Budgeting Systems (PPBS) seek to integrate long-range
planning of governmental activities and programming of specific activities with
annual budgeting, making use of the programme-budget structure and of various
quantitative techniques in the evaluation of proposals. Systems analysis and cost-benefit techniques
are employed, with quantification of costs and benefits to aid in the selection
of the best alternatives. This approach
seeks to aid in defining the goals and in choosing among the goals, in
specifying alternative programmes to attain the goals, in choosing the best
alternatives, and, subsequently, in measuring performance. Planning is extended forward for several
years, rather than focusing attention on the current year. Programming involves the statement of the
relationship of inputs and outputs, under various alternatives, to accomplish
the desired objectives.
The
Planning-Programming-Budgeting Systems (PPBS) are extensively used in all
federal units especially in defence.
Cost-Benefit
Analysis:
Governments
presumably consider both the benefits and the costs of programmes. But this consideration has often been
haphazard, with little serious effort to quantify benefits or to include all
costs and benefits. Governments'
decision making is sometimes dominated by the 'absolute needs' approach, i.e.,
certain expenditure is imperative and must be undertaken regardless of
cost. Sometimes it is dominated by the
'money first' approach, i.e., only a certain amount of revenue is available for
the purpose and expenditures are therefore confined to this amount.
In recent
decades, to some extent concurrently with the development of programme
budgeting and PPBS activities, systematic analysis of benefits and costs has
increased in importance. The first
major applications were in the field of water resources (i.e., building up
canals, dams, etc.), characterised by long-term investments and strong pressure
groups.
'Cost-benefit
analysis' can be
defined as a systematic examination of the benefits and costs of a particular
governmental programme, setting out the factors that should enter into the
evaluation of the desirability of the programme and frequently analysing
several alternatives for the attainment of the objective. Cost-benefit analysis is designed to ascertain
the optimal alternative for the attainment of the desired goals, and to rank
other alternatives.
Elements
in a Cost-Benefit Study: Cost-benefit studies are typically undertaken within a particular
governmental department as a preliminary to budget preparations, or as a
continuing program to ascertain optimal expenditure patterns and budget
recommendations. A cost-benefit study
involves several major steps:
(i)
Statement of Objectives: Obviously, the goals of the particular programmes must be defined. The goal may be very specific, such as that
of an irrigation project, with the immediate objective of bringing 2,000 acres
under cultivation by providing adequate water.
The goal may be long term, such as to increase the country's potential
food supply, may be much less well defined, especially in a situation of crop
surpluses. Other projects have multiple
goals; dams may have flood control, irrigation, navigation, electric generation
and recreational objectives. The more
sharply the goal can be defined, the greater the contribution that cost-benefit
analysis can make to decision-making.
(ii)
Statement of Alternatives: With many types of activities, there are various alternative ways of
attaining the goals: different locations for irrigation facilities, different
timing for parts of the project, different methods of construction. Cost-benefit analysis seeks to ascertain
relative benefits and costs of the major alternatives.
(iii)
Analysis of Benefits: With objectives defined and alternatives established, analysis proceeds
to a consideration of the benefits.
With many activities, this analysis involves determination of the
physical units of 'output' from the activity and valuation of these units. Only those benefits should be included that
alter the physical conditions of production or consumption for common persons
or businesses; and those benefits should not be included in the benefits that
reflect changes in prices and incomes arising out of the use of activities.
(iv)
Analysis of Costs: Analysis of costs involves the same type of problem as that of
benefits, although costs are more easily calculable. The direct costs included both capital costs and operating costs
over the years. Indirect costs include
those created for other governmental agencies, and overall costs to society not
directly borne by the government. These
are in a sense negative benefits.
Without cost-benefit analysis indirect costs are often not taken into
consideration. Air pollution provides
an excellent example.
(v)
Interest Rate:
With many governmental programmes, especially those of types that lend
themselves to cost-benefit analysis such as water and transport development,
the benefits will be obtained over a period of years. Likewise some of the costs will be incurred at the time the
programme is undertaken while others will be incurred in subsequent years. But a rupee of benefits now is worth more
than a rupee of benefits 10 years from now because of the interest phenomenon. In order to evaluate a particular project
and to compare alternatives, therefore, an interest factor must be used to
determine the present value of future benefits and costs; in other words the
stream of consumption benefits and the stream of costs must be discounted back
to the present for a comparison to be made.
(vi)
The Criteria for Judgement: With estimates of benefits and costs discounted back to present value,
the final question in cost-benefit analysis is the selection and use of
criteria for evaluation. The basic
comparison is between two streams: those of benefits and those of costs, both
discounted back to the present. The
alternative that provides the maximum excess of benefits over costs may be
regarded as the optimal one, and any particular project that is the best for
attainment of the goals and has discounted present value of benefits equal to
the discounted present value of costs is warranted.
Essentials
of A Good Budget / Balanced Budget:
Budget
policy or fiscal policy has three major objectives:
Budget
policy making depends on the economic conditions of the country. The level of expenditure on public works
depends on the level of employment in the economy. If the country is facing financial depression, the country needs
a boost in investment, which can be achieved through more development
expenditure. In any circumstances,
there are three standards of a good budget, i.e., optimal allocation of
resources, distribution of resources, and stabilisation of the economy.
A good
budget is one in which the assurance of optimal allocation of resources and
factor should be maximum so that an optimum quantity of public good is
obtained. In addition, a good budget should
be in accordance with the conditions of demand and supply. Besides these considerations a good budget
should possess the position of stability in the economy, i.e., the existence of
inflation and deflation in the economy should be minimised if not removed.
Budget
- Balanced or Unbalanced:> There are
two ways of balancing a budget, i.e., to cut the spending to match taxes or
raising taxes to match spending:
(a) Cuts in government spending
can be done in two ways:
(i) Either by reduction of purchases,
or
(ii) By reduction of personnel.
Both
options result in unemployment. Reduced
purchasing would force government suppliers to lay off people. Lay-off of
government workers likewise increases unemployment, obviously. More
unemployment means fewer incomes to tax and more demands for government
services such as unemployment compensation, food, medical aid, etc. Cutting
welfare spending likewise reduces sales for food, medical service, rent, etc.
(b) Raising taxes is
politically unpopular. However, the economic effects of raising taxes may be
less evident. Increased taxation, particularly federal taxes, takes money from
local communities. Government economists may argue that the government spends
the money back into the economy so there is not a net loss in the general
economy. At least two things mitigate against economists' theories. One is that
money spent to maintain the huge federal establishment of the country does not
circulate back to local communities. Another is that the theory contains no time
factor for how long it takes for the money to return, and how much money
inputted will be returned back. Sending
taxes to the Federal Government and expecting them back is like giving oneself
a blood transfusion from the right arm to the left and spilling half of it on
the floor.
Balancing
the budget by either methods, or any combination, would result in hardship on
the people.
This is the
most complicated and controversial issue of public finance. Every government faces heavy criticism from
social and political organisations regarding the public spending and
taxation. In a period of inflationary
pressures, fiscal policy seeks to lessen total spending, but its task is
complicated by the wage-rate problem; the reduction in total spending must be
accomplished in such a way as to minimise the additional pressure placed upon
wages and thus upon prices from the cost side.
According
to Professor Jack Winner, it is a wrong concept that government should present
a balanced budget every year without considering overall circumstances of the
economy. When the country is under
heavy debt burden, it is quite often that the government paid off her debts by
collecting more taxes. In such a
situation, a surplus budget is desirable, but collecting taxes in excess of
expenditures to reduce the debt is highly deflationary.
Rational
fiscal policy calls for deficits when an expansionary stimulus is desirable,
surpluses and debt reduction only when fiscal constraints are called for in a
full employment and inflationary situation.
From the above discussion, it would be evident that more employment,
more public welfare and a balanced budget have no mutual relationship and
cannot be attained at a time.