Center for Business and Economic Research - Ball State University


CBER Data Center
Projects and PublicationsEconomic IndicatorsWeekly CommentaryCommunity Asset InventoryManufacturing Scorecard

About

Commentaries are published weekly and distributed through the Indianapolis Business Journal and many other print and online publications. Disclaimer

RSS Feed

Disclaimer

The views expressed in these commentaries do not reflect those of Ball State University or the Center for Business and Economic Research.

Recent

Two Key Economic Lessons in One BillHoosiers face trade-offs and opportunity costs in the wake of SEA1.

Time to Fix Economic Development PolicyAllocating tax dollars to land development won’t cause economic growth.

The Unanticipated Effects of SB1Businesses, governments and households may all feel the effects.

The Stupidest of PoliciesThis whipsawing of tariff rates has unnerved financial markets, which on Wednesday, were toying with a liquidity crisis.

View archives

Top Tags

jobs and employment 261
economics 201
state and local government 188
education 186
economic development 171
indiana 171
budget and spending 145
taxes 144
law and public policy 142
workforce and human capital 139
Browse all tags
Reporter / Admin Login

July 11, 2011

Debt Limits and Budget Cuts

The debate over the debt ceiling seems a bit more complicated than it need be.  Fundamentally, it is quite simple.  Each year Congress passes a budget based on estimates of tax dollars collected and the cost of such things as Medicaid, national security, etc.  Along with this budget, Congress usually allows the treasury to borrow extra money to make these payments.  This borrowing limit sets the debt ceiling. 

The U.S. Treasury handles the accounts and reports on tax shortfalls, or excess spending needs.  If there is a big imbalance, then Congress must authorize the Treasury to borrow more money.  That is where we are now.  The Treasury needs to borrow more money otherwise it won’t be able to pay doctors and soldiers for the aforementioned Medicaid and defense.   But that isn’t really the worry.  It is those who have lent us money who rightfully feel themselves to be at risk if the U.S. does not make interest payments on the loans.

Not surprisingly, if the U.S. fails to pay the interest on the money it has borrowed, future lenders will be less eager to lend us money.  Thus interest rates on these loans will rise and the cost of our debt will increase from its already astonishingly high 18 cents on every dollar of tax revenue.  This should be most unwelcomed, but it is only half the story. 

The cost of continued borrowing will also rise if Congress does not dramatically cut spending.   To be sure, Congress can also raise tax rates, but it is not at all certain that over the long run higher tax rates will actually boost tax revenues.  What is abundantly clear is that federal spending is much higher than is currently sustainable.

The fight in Congress is about how much and from what part of spending must be cut.  The positions are familiar and lack any of the serendipity of that accompanies a debate based on longstanding principles. Obama voted against raising the debt ceiling when the roles were reversed—a flip-flopping matched by both parties. 

Agreement on the level and scope of cuts are likely.  The real disagreement centers on any consideration of tax increases, and even what might be considered a tax increase.  In this arena I think the Republicans risk making a significant policy error that will haunt them for years to come.

Obama has proposed the elimination of dozens of tax loopholes and subsidies.  Many of the tax loopholes and subsidies proposed by Obama are part of the road to fiscal solvency. We currently subsidize oil companies to drill for oil, pay farmers not to grow corn and thousands of other silly tax games.  Eliminating these programs is not a tax increase, and fiscally conservative members of Congress should be able to find hundreds more examples to eliminate.

Without real expenditure cuts, the cost of borrowing will rise, regardless of what happens to our debt ceiling.  This is a prime time to also clean up our tax code in the process.

Link to this commentary: https://commentaries.cberdata.org/577/debt-limits-and-budget-cuts

Tags: budget and spending, bailout and debt, taxes


About the Author

Michael Hicks cberdirector@bsu.edu

Michael J. Hicks, PhD, is the director of the Center for Business and Economic Research and the George and Frances Ball distinguished professor of economics in the Miller College of Business at Ball State University. Note: The views expressed here are solely those of the author, and do not represent those of funders, associations, any entity of Ball State University, or its governing body.

© Center for Business and Economic Research, Ball State University

About Ball State CBER Data Center

Ball State CBER Data Center is one-stop shop for economic data including demographics, education, health, and social capital. Our easy-to-use, visual web tools offer data collection and analysis for grant writers, economic developers, policy makers, and the general public.

Ball State CBER Data Center (cberdata.org) is a product of the Center for Business and Economic Research at Ball State University. CBER's mission is to conduct relevant and timely public policy research on a wide range of economic issues affecting the state and nation. Learn more.

Terms of Service

Center for Business and Economic Research

Ball State University • Whitinger Business Building, room 149
2000 W. University Ave.
Muncie, IN 47306-0360
Phone:
765-285-5926
Email:
cber@bsu.edu
Website:
www.bsu.edu/cber
Facebook:
www.facebook.com/BallStateCBER
Twitter:
www.twitter.com/BallStateCBER
Close