Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Output, employment, and price effects of U.S. narrative tax changes: a factor-augmented vector autoregression approach

  • Published:
Empirical Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper examines the short- and medium-run effects of U.S. federal personal income and corporate income tax cuts on a wide array of economic policy variables in a data-rich environment. Using a panel of U.S. macroeconomic data set, made up of 132 quarterly macroeconomic series for 1959–2018, we estimate factor-augmented vector autoregression (FAVARs) models where an extended narrative tax changes dataset combined with unobserved factors. The narrative approach classifies if tax changes are exogenous or endogenous. This paper identifies narrative tax shocks in the vector autoregression model using the sign restrictions with the Uhlig's (J Monet Econ 52(2):381–419, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmoneco.2004.05.007) penalty function. Empirical findings show a significant expansionary effect of tax cuts on the macroeconomic variables. Cuts in personal and corporate income taxes cause a rise in output, investment, employment, and consumption; however, the effects of corporate tax cuts have relatively smaller effects on output and consumption but show immediate and higher effects on fixed investment and price levels. We validate the model's specification and the identification of tax shocks through a reliability test based on the Median-Target method. Additionally, sensitivity analysis employing the local projection vector autoregression model, number of iterations of the algorithm, and incorporating diverse factor specifications reaffirms tax cuts' persistent and expansionary effects. Our contribution to the narrative tax literature lies in providing empirical evidence that aligns with the notion that reductions in personal taxes demonstrate a higher efficacy as a fiscal policy tool when compared to reductions in corporate income taxes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

U.S. macroeconomic series are publically available in National Income and Product Accounts (https://apps.bea.gov/iTable/?reqid=19&step=2&isuri=1&categories=survey) and Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis website.

Code availability

Updated narrative tax changes data and the replication codes are available upon a proper request to the author.

Notes

  1. Two recent studies, Alesina, Favero, and Giavazzi (2018) and Liu and Willaims (2019), also extend Mertens and Ravn’s (2013) narrative tax change without considering the Tax cut and Job Act (2017) and The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (2010). This study includes personal and corporate income tax liability changes from these two Acts and extends the dataset up to 2018.

  2. The selection is based on both the Eigen value criterion of choosing the first components with eigenvalues higher than one& the amount of explained variance where chosen components should explain 70 to 80 percent of variance (King & Jackson 1999).

  3. In an alternative estimation, I set the maximum number of factors to 20. Both PCA and ICR criteria indicate that the optimal number of factors for inclusion in the model ranges from 5 to 8. While there is a difference in the number of factors suggested by PCA and ICR, selecting the first five factors based on either criterion, out of the maximum of 20, still demonstrates that these principal components collectively account for 58% to 87% of the total variation in the dataset.

  4. While there is a disagreement between the numbers of factors suggested by PCA and ICR, choosing the number of factors based on either PCA or ICR doesn’t imply the model misspecification since the first three to seven principal components can explain 54% to 75% of the total variance of the data (Korobilis 2009; Stock and Watson 2016).

  5. To enhance the interpretability of the FAVAR model, we could consider adopting a more structural factor model approach. However, in line with the existing FAVAR literature, we aim to confine our interpretation of the remaining factors to serve as controls account for underlying joint macroeconomic interactions or forces, which aids in rendering the model more understandable and alleviate the concern related to ignoring the joint effects of all variables in a single model. Belviso and Milani (2006) have proposed an alternative approach involving the extraction of structural factors from groups of variables within the same economic category, as opposed to using a broad cross-section of macroeconomic time series. This approach provides factors with a more specific economic significance and facilitates a structural interpretation.

  6. Canova and Paustian (2011) and Paustian (2007) also show that sign restrictions perform well for the identification of volatile and unanticipated structural shocks in VAR models.

  7. In examining the impact of an unanticipated monetary policy shock, Uhlig (2005) introduced four restrictions to isolate the shock while leaving GDP and reserves unconstrained.

  8. Auerbach and Gorodnichenko (2013) have identified substantial variations in the magnitude of fiscal multipliers between recessions and expansions. Their findings show that tax cuts and government spending exhibit notably greater effectiveness during economic downturns compared to periods of economic expansion.

  9. For detailed information on the construction of the military news shock and the specifics of the local projection VAR, we refer the reader to Ramey and Zubairy (2018), pages 7-18, and Jorda (2005).

  10. Similar to the two-step method in a joint estimation framework, one can proceed to estimate the VAR model with appropriate lags using the estimated factors fac1, fac2, …, fac5, along with the narrative tax rate. Subsequently, IRFs are calculated over ℎ periods (saved in a matrix) for the five factors and the narrative tax rate in response to a shock in the narrative tax rate. Next, we need to estimate a coefficient matrix that relates the data to fac1, fac2, fac3, …, fac5, and the tax rate via Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regression. This process generates a weighted matrix with the correct weights for all variables. Subsequently, one can utilize this reconstructed-weighted matrix to construct the impulse responses of all underlying variables over ℎ periods in response to a shock in the federal narrative tax rates.

References

Download references

Acknowledgements

I extend my gratitude to Professor Jeremy R. Groves (for his excellent supervision), Prof. Carl Campbell, Prof. Ai-ru (Meg) Cheng and Prof. Alexander Garivaltis for their support and valuable feedback during my research at Northern Illinois University. I am thankful to the two anonymous referees and Professor Joakim Westerlund, the editor-in-chief, for their contributions to this manuscript. Special thanks to the participants of the Illinois Economics Association 49th annual meeting at DePaul University, Chicago, for their insightful comments. I also acknowledge the support from the SUST Research Center's research grant for additional data analysis during the revision stage.

Funding

No funding was received for conducting this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Masud Alam.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

There is no potential financial or non-financial conflicts of interest related to this study. I declare that I have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix

Extension of the narrative dataset

2.1 I. The Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010

On December 10, 2010, President Barack Obama signed the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act, commonly referred to as the Relief Act 2010. This legislation aimed to provide essential tax relief to American workers and encourage investments that could generate employment opportunities and spur economic growth. Many of the components of the Relief Act involved extending existing tax relief measures through 2011. For instance, Title I addressed the Temporary Extension of Tax Relief, Title II focused on the Temporary Extension of Individual AMT Relief, Title III dealt with Temporary Estate Tax Relief, and Title IV pertained to the Temporary Extension of Investment Incentives. Among the various tax extensions and modifications, the most noteworthy change concerning income tax liability was found in Title VI, known as the Temporary Employee Payroll Tax Cut. Title VI aimed to reduce the payroll tax by 2 percent, necessitating a transfer of revenue from the Treasury to various social security trust funds to compensate for the anticipated loss in revenue. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated that this revenue change, as detailed in S.A. 4753, an amendment to H.R. 4853, would amount to − 67.239 billion dollars (source: https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/111th-congress-2009-2010/costestimate/sa47530.pdf). Following Mertens and Ravn's methodology (2013), it was determined that the change in income tax liability in the first quarter of 2011 was − 67.239 billion dollars. It's noteworthy that there were no changes in tax liability associated with corporate taxes. Specifically, Subtitle C of the Act only extended fifteen business tax relief measures through 2011.

$$ \Delta T_{t}^{PI.narr} \, = \,\frac{{(Change\,\,in\,\,\,\,\,Income\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,tax\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,liabilities)_{t} }}{{(Personal\,taxable\,\,income)_{t - 1} \, }} $$
$$ \Delta T_{t}^{CI.narr} \, = \,\frac{{(Change\,\,in\,\,\,corporate\,\,\,\,\,\,income\,\,\,\,\,\,tax\,\,\,\,\,\,liabilities)_{t} }}{{(Corporate\,profits)_{t - 1} \, }} $$

Total revenue effects in 2011 related to income tax liability = − 67.239 billion.

Personal taxable income in 2010: 11,236.2 billion.

Narrative personal income tax rate in 2011Q1: (− 67.239bn /11236.2bn) *100 = − 0.5877 percent.

2.2 The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 2010

The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012

In 2012, the American Taxpayer Relief Act (ATRA) played a pivotal role in addressing the U.S. "fiscal cliff" issue and officially came into effect on January 1, 2013. This legislation represented a bipartisan budget compromise measure and introduced several modifications to the tax code. These changes had a direct impact on the long-term fiscal outlook of the United States and encompassed alterations to both individual and corporate income tax responsibilities. The key provisions of the 2012 ATRA pertaining to personal and corporate income taxes included the reinstatement of tax deductions and credits for individuals and couples, the allowance for deductions related to contributions of food inventory by taxpayers, the deduction for income associated with domestic production activities in Puerto Rico, the reduction of built-in gains for S corporations, and tax incentives designed to encourage investment in empowerment zones. According to the Congressional Budget Office's (CBO) estimate for 2013 (source: https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/112th-congress-2011-2012/costestimate/american-taxpayer-relief-act0.pdf), the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, which was enacted on January 1, 2013, had revenue effects of − 5.901 billion dollars due to changes in individual income taxes (Title II) and − 63.033 billion dollars due to changes in corporate income taxes (Title III).

Total revenue effects in 2013 related to personal income tax changes = -5.901 billion.

Personal taxable income in 2012: 12,620. 8 billion.

Narrative personal income tax rate: (− 5.901 bn/12620.8 bn) *100 = − 0.046 percent.

Total revenue effects in 2013 related to corporate income tax changes = − 63.033 billion.

Corporate taxable income in 2012: 1925.7 billion.

Narrative corporate income tax rate: (− 63.033 billion /1925.7 bn) *100 = − 3.27 percent.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 2010

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), commonly known as Obamacare, was enacted in March 2010 and signed into law on March 23, 2010. Its primary objective was to make health insurance more affordable and accessible to a broader segment of the American population. To finance the ACA's provisions, several tax changes were implemented. The ACA raised personal income tax rates by 0.9 percent on individual wages exceeding specific income thresholds. Additionally, it introduced a 3.8 percent increase in the net investment income tax for both individuals and corporations. Most of the ACA's tax provisions took effect either in January 2013 or 2014. Projections regarding the revenue impact of the ACA were uncertain because they relied heavily on forecasts related to the ACA's provisions and tax code alterations' implementation. The provision of coverage and the implementation of taxes were also marked by considerable uncertainty. In accordance with the criteria set forth by Mertens and Ravn (2013), the incorporation of tax provisions from the Affordable Care Act (ACA) into our dataset raises concerns regarding anticipation effects, given that the time gap between policy announcement and implementation dates exceeds 90 days. Nevertheless, adhering to the exogenity approach outlined by Romer and Romer (2009), we classify ACA's tax code changes as inherently exogenous due to their ideological motivations.

Furthermore, the implementation of the Affordable Care Act, commonly known as Obamacare, encountered uncertainties and challenges even after being signed into law in 2010. Ongoing opposition from specific political factions persisted, resulting in legal and political challenges. Some adversaries sought to repeal or undermine the legislation, generating uncertainty about its future and even the possibility of its full implementation. Given the uncertainty surrounding the ACA's future implementation, we presume a minimal anticipation effect and consequently include the associated tax code changes in 2013.

In March 2010, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) estimated that the enactment of the ACA (H.R. 6079) could lead to a net reduction in federal budget deficits of $143 billion over the period of 2010–2019 (source: testimony delivered by CBO’s Director on March 30, 2011; https://www.cbo.gov/publication/45447). Although the revenue effects were predominantly linked to increased income tax rates on individual wages and the net investment income tax, specific information about the revenue attributable to personal and corporate income tax changes was not available. Consequently, this study apportions the entire $4 billion in revenue using the proportion of personal and corporate income tax revenue's share in the total increased revenue for 2013.

According to the CBO’s updated budget analysis, individual income tax revenue increased by $184.2 billion, while corporate tax revenue increased by $31 billion in 2013 (source: https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/113th-congress-2013-2014/reports/45010-outlook2014feb0.pdf, p. 9–10). The contribution of individual income tax to the total revenue was calculated as 85 percent (184.2/184.2 + 31), and corporate tax accounted for 15 percent. This resulted in a revenue effect related to personal income tax liability changes of $3.4 billion and $0.6 billion for the corporate tax liability change. These figures are utilized in this study to compute the narrative tax rates associated with the ACA act.

Revenue change related to the personal income tax change in 2013: 3.4 billion.

Personal taxable income in 2012: 12,620.8 bn.

Narrative PI tax rate: 3.4 bn /12620. 8 bn = 0.0269 percent.

The revenue change related to the CI tax change in 2013 was 0.6 billion.

Corporate taxable income in 2012: 1925.7 bn.

Narrative CI tax rate: 0.6 billion /1925.7 bn = 0.0.0311 percent.

2.3 The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) of 2017 brought significant changes to individual and corporate income tax liabilities and introduced numerous amendments to existing U.S. tax laws. It entailed reductions in individual income taxes across all income tax brackets and streamlined the top corporate tax rate from 35 percent to a single, flat rate of 20 percent. Additionally, the TCJA established a maximum rate of 25 percent for corporations and businesses. The legislation also doubled nearly all child tax credits and increased the standard deduction. According to the Joint Committee on Taxation's (JCT) estimation, the TCJA was expected to have a revenue impact of approximately $1,438 billion over the period from 2018 to 2027 (source: https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/115th-congress-2017-2018/costestimate/hr1.pdf, p. 2).

In terms of specific revenue figures for 2018, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) baseline budget projections indicated revenue estimates of -65 billion dollars for personal income taxes and -94 billion dollars for corporate income taxes (source: https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2019-04/53651-outlook-2.pdf, p. 94, Table A-1).

Revenue change related to the personal income tax change in 2018 was: − 65 billion.

Personal taxable income in 2017: 15,420.8 bn.

Narrative personal tax rate: − 65 bn /15420.8 bn = − 0.4163 percent.

Revenue change related to the corporate income tax change in 2018 was: − 94 billion.

Corporate taxable income in 2017: 2036.3 bn.

Narrative corporate income tax rate: − 94 billion/2036.3 bn = − 4.61 percent.

II. List of narrative tax changes (1950–2018)

Tax code/changes

Narrative PIT

Narrative CIT

Internal Revenue Code of 1954

Changes in Depreciation Guidelines and Revenue Act of 1962

(Two corporate tax liability has changed in quarter 2 and 3)

No

Revenue Act of 1964

Public Law 90–26 (Restoration of the Investment Tax Credit) 1967

No

Reform of Depreciation Rules 1971 (only corporate tax liability changed in quarter 1)

Revenue Act of 1971 (Both personal income tax and corporate tax liability changed in quarter 4)

Tax Reform Act of 1976

Tax Reduction and Simplification Act of 1977

Revenue Act of 1978

Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981

Deficit Reduction Act of 1984

Tax Reform Act of 1986

Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987

Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990

Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993

No

Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003

The Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010

No

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 2010

The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017

III. List of narrative tax changes announcement and effective dates (1950–2018)

Tax code/changes

Announcement Date

Effective as Law (Signed into law by President)

Internal Revenue Code of 1954

March 9, 1954

August 16, 1954

Changes in Depreciation Guidelines and Revenue Act of 1962

(Two corporate tax liability has changed in quarter 2 and 3)

May 10, 1962

Oct 16, 1962

Revenue Act of 1964

January 1963

February 26, 1964

Public Law 90-26 (Restoration of the Investment Tax Credit) 1967

March 9, 1967

June 13, 1967

Reform of Depreciation Rules 1971 (only corporate tax liability changed in quarter 1)

Revenue Act of 1971 (Both personal income tax and corporate tax liability changed in quarter 4)

January 26, 1971

January 19, 1972

Tax Reform Act of 1976

September 1976

October 4, 1976

Tax Reduction and Simplification Act of 1977

February 16, 1977

May 23, 1977

Revenue Act of 1978

July 1978

November 6, 1978

Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981

July 23, 1981

August 13, 1981

Deficit Reduction Act of 1984

Oct 1983

July 18, 1984

Tax Reform Act of 1986

December 3, 1985

October 22, 1986

Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987

Oct 1987

December 22, 1987

Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990

Oct 1990

November 5, 1990

Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993

May 25, 1993

August 10, 1993

Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003

February 27, 2003

May 28, 2003

The Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010

March 16, 2010

December 17, 2010

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 2010

September 17, 2009

March 23, 2010

The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012

July 24, 2012

January 2, 2013

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017

November 2, 2017

January 1, 2018

IV. List of macroeconomic variables

5.1 Group 1: National income and product accounts (NIPA)

  1. 1.

    Real Gross Domestic Product, 3 Decimal (Billions of Chained 2012 Dollars)

  2. 2.

    Consumption Real Personal Consumption Expenditures (Billions of Chained 2012 Dollars)

  3. 3.

    Real personal consumption expenditures: Durable goods (Billions of Chained 2012 Dollars)

  4. 4.

    Real Personal Consumption Expenditures: Services (Billions of 2012 Dollars),

  5. 5.

    Real Personal Consumption Expenditures: Nondurable Goods (Billions of 2012 Dollars)

  6. 6.

    Investment Real Gross Private Domestic Investment, (Billions of Chained 2012Dollars)

  7. 7.

    Real private fixed investment (Billions of Chained 2012 Dollars)

  8. 8.

    Real Gross Private Domestic Investment: Fixed Investment: Nonresidential: Equipment (Billions of Chained 2012 Dollars)

  9. 9.

    Real private fixed investment: Nonresidential (Billions of Chained 2012 Dollars)

  10. 10.

    Real private fixed investment: Residential (Billions of Chained 2012 Dollars)

  11. 11.

    Shares of gross domestic product: Gross private domestic investment: Change in private inventories (Percent)

  12. 12.

    Real Government Consumption Expenditures & Gross Investment (Billions of Chained 2012 Dollars)

  13. 13.

    Real Government Consumption Expenditures and Gross Investment: Federal (Percent Change from Preceding Period)

  14. 14.

    Real Gov Receipts Real Federal Government Current Receipts (Billions of Chained 2012 Dollars)

  15. 15.

    Real government state and local consumption expenditures (Billions of Chained 2012 Dollars)

  16. 16.

    Real Exports of Goods & Services (Billions of Chained 2012 Dollars)

  17. 17.

    Real Imports of Goods & Services (Billions of Chained 2012 Dollars)

  18. 18.

    Real Disposable Personal Income (Billions of Chained 2012 Dollars)

  19. 19.

    Nonfarm Business Sector: Real Output (Index 2012 = 100)

  20. 20.

    Business Sector: Real Output (Index 2012 = 100)

  21. 21.

    Manufacturing Sector: Real Output (Index 2012 = 100)

5.2 Group 2: Industrial production

  1. 1.

    Industrial Production Index (Index 2012 = 100)

  2. 2.

    Industrial Production: Final Products (Market Group) (Index 2012 = 100)

  3. 3.

    Industrial Production: Consumer Goods (Index 2012 = 100)

  4. 4.

    Industrial Production: Materials (Index 2012 = 100)

  5. 5.

    Industrial Production: Durable Materials (Index 2012 = 100)

  6. 6.

    Industrial Production: Nondurable Materials (Index 2012 = 100)

  7. 7.

    Industrial Production: Durable Consumer Goods (Index 2012 = 100)

  8. 8.

    Industrial Production: Durable Goods: Automotive products (Index 2012 = 100)

  9. 9.

    Industrial Production: Nondurable Consumer Goods (Index 2012 = 100)

  10. 10.

    Industrial Production: Business Equipment (Index 2012 = 100)

  11. 11.

    Industrial Production: Consumer energy products (Index 2012 = 100)

  12. 12.

    Capacity Utilization: Total Industry (Percent of Capacity)

  13. 13.

    Capacity Utilization: Manufacturing (SIC) (Percent of Capacity)

  14. 14.

    Industrial Production: Manufacturing (SIC) (Index 2012 = 100)

  15. 15.

    Industrial Production: Residential Utilities (Index 2012 = 100)

  16. 16.

    Industrial Production: Fuels (Index 2012 = 100)

5.3 Group 3: Employment and unemployment

  1. 1.

    All Employees: Total nonfarm (Thousands of Persons)

  2. 2.

    All Employees: Total Private Industries (Thousands of Persons)

  3. 3.

    All Employees: Manufacturing (Thousands of Persons)

  4. 4.

    All Employees: Service-Providing Industries (Thousands of Persons)

  5. 5.

    All Employees: Goods-Producing Industries (Thousands of Persons)

  6. 6.

    All Employees: Durable goods (Thousands of Persons)

  7. 7.

    All Employees: Nondurable goods (Thousands of Persons)

  8. 8.

    All Employees: Construction (Thousands of Persons)

  9. 9.

    All Employees: Education & Health Services (Thousands of Persons)

  10. 10.

    All Employees: Financial Activities (Thousands of Persons)

  11. 11.

    All Employees: Information Services (Thousands of Persons)

  12. 12.

    All Employees: Professional & Business Services (Thousands of Persons)

  13. 13.

    All Employees: Leisure & Hospitality (Thousands of Persons)

  14. 14.

    All Employees: Other Services (Thousands of Persons)

  15. 15.

    All Employees: Mining and logging (Thousands of Persons)

  16. 16.

    All Employees: Trade, Transportation & Utilities (Thousands of Persons)

  17. 17.

    All Employees: Government (Thousands of Persons)

  18. 18.

    All Employees: Retail Trade (Thousands of Persons)

  19. 19.

    All Employees: Wholesale Trade (Thousands of Persons)

  20. 20.

    All Employees: Government: Federal (Thousands of Persons)

  21. 21.

    All Employees: Government: State Government (Thousands of Persons)

  22. 22.

    All Employees: Government: Local Government (Thousands of Persons)

  23. 23.

    Civilian Employment (Thousands of Persons)

  24. 24.

    Civilian Labor Force Participation Rate (Percent)

  25. 25.

    Civilian Unemployment Rate (Percent)

  26. 26.

    Business Sector: Hours of All Persons (Index 2012 = 100)

  27. 27.

    Manufacturing Sector: Hours of All Persons (Index 2012 = 100)

  28. 28.

    Nonfarm Business Sector: Hours of All Persons (Index 2012 = 100)

  29. 29.

    Average Weekly Hours of Production and Nonsupervisory Employees: Manufacturing (Hours)

  30. 30.

    Weekly Hours of Production and Nonsupervisory Employees: Total private (Hours)

  31. 31.

    Help-Wanted Index

5.4 Group 4: Housing

  1. 1.

    Housing Starts: Total: New Privately Owned Housing Units Started (Thousands of Units)

  2. 2.

    Housing Starts: 5-Unit Structures or More (Thousands of Units)

  3. 3.

    New Private Housing Units Authorized by Building Permits (Thousands of Units)

  4. 4.

    Housing Starts in Midwest Census Region (Thousands of Units)

  5. 5.

    Housing Starts in Northeast Census Region (Thousands of Units)

  6. 6.

    Housing Starts in South Census Region (Thousands of Units)

  7. 7.

    Housing Starts in West Census Region (Thousands of Units)

  8. 8.

    All-Transactions House Price Index for the United States (Index 1980 Q1 = 100)

  9. 9.

    S&P/Case-Shiller 10-City Composite Home Price Index (Index January 2000 = 100)

  10. 10.

    S&P/Case-Shiller 20-City Composite Home Price Index (Index January 2000 = 100)

5.5 Group 5: Prices

  1. 1.

    Personal Consumption Expenditures: Chain-type Price Index (Index 2012 = 100)

  2. 2.

    Personal Consumption Expenditures Excluding Food and Energy (Chain-Type Price Index) (Index 2012 = 100)

  3. 3.

    Gross Domestic Product: Chain-type Price Index (Index 2012 = 100)

  4. 4.

    Gross Private Domestic Investment: Chain-type Price Index (Index 2012 = 100)

  5. 5.

    Business Sector: Implicit Price Deflator (Index 2012 = 100)

  6. 6.

    Personal consumption expenditures: Goods (chain-type price index)

  7. 7.

    Personal consumption expenditures: Durable goods (chain-type price index)

  8. 8.

    Personal consumption expenditures: Services (chain-type price index)

  9. 9.

    Personal consumption expenditures: Nondurable goods (chain-type price index)

  10. 10.

    Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: All Items (Index 1982–84 = 100)

  11. 11.

    Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: All Items Less Food & Energy (Index 1982–84 = 100)

  12. 12.

    Producer Price Index by Commodity for Finished Goods (Index 1982 = 100)

  13. 13.

    Producer Price Index for All Commodities (Index 1982 = 100)

5.6 Group 6: Earnings and productivity

  1. 1.

    Real Average Hourly Earnings of Production and Nonsupervisory Employees: Total Private (2012 Dollars per Hour)

  2. 2.

    Real Average Hourly Earnings of Production and Nonsupervisory Employees: Construction (2012 Dollars per Hour)

  3. 3.

    Real Average Hourly Earnings of Production and Nonsupervisory Employees: Manufacturing (2012 Dollars per Hour)

  4. 4.

    Nonfarm Business Sector: Real Compensation Per Hour (Index 2012 = 100)

  5. 5.

    Business Sector: Real Compensation Per Hour (Index 2012 = 100)

  6. 6.

    Manufacturing Sector: Real Output Per Hour of All Persons (Index 2012 = 100)

  7. 7.

    Nonfarm Business Sector: Real Output Per Hour of All Persons (Index 2012 = 100)

  8. 8.

    Business Sector: Real Output Per Hour of All Persons (Index 2012 = 100)

  9. 9.

    Business Sector: Unit Labor Cost (Index 2012 = 100)

  10. 10.

    Manufacturing Sector: Unit Labor Cost (Index 2012 = 100)

  11. 11.

    Nonfarm Business Sector: Unit Labor Cost (Index 2012 = 100)

5.7 Group 7: Interest rates

  1. 1.

    Effective Federal Funds Rate (Percent)

  2. 2.

    3-Month Treasury Bill: Secondary Market Rate (Percent)

  3. 3.

    6-Month Treasury Bill: Secondary Market Rate (Percent)

  4. 4.

    1-Year Treasury Constant Maturity Rate (Percent)

  5. 5.

    10-Year Treasury Constant Maturity Rate (Percent)

  6. 6.

    30-Year Conventional Mortgage Rate© (Percent)

  7. 7.

    Moody’s Seasoned Aaa Corporate Bond Yield© (Percent)

  8. 8.

    Moody’s Seasoned Baa Corporate Bond Yield© (Percent)

5.8 Group 8: Money and credit

  1. 1.

    St. Louis Adjusted Monetary Base (Billions of 1982–84 Dollars)

  2. 2.

    Real Institutional Money Funds (Billions of 2012 Dollars)

  3. 3.

    Real M1 Money Stock (Billions of 1982–84 Dollars)

  4. 4.

    Real M2 Money Stock (Billions of 1982–84 Dollars)

  5. 5.

    Total Reserves of Depository Institutions (Billions of Dollars)

  6. 6.

    Reserves of Depository Institutions, Nonborrowed (Millions of Dollars)

5.9 Group 9: Household balance sheets

  1. 1.

    Real Total Assets of Households and Nonprofit Organizations (Billions of 2012 Dollars)

  2. 2.

    Real Total Liabilities of Households and Nonprofit Organizations (Billions of 2012 Dollars)

  3. 3.

    Liabilities of Households and Nonprofit Organizations Relative to Personal Disposable Income (Percent)

  4. 4.

    Real Estate Assets of Households and Nonprofit Organizations (Billions of 2012 Dollars)

  5. 5.

    Real Total Financial Assets of Households and Nonprofit Organizations (Billions of 2012 Dollars)

5.10 Group 10: Stock markets

  1. 1.

    S&P’s Common Stock Price Index: Composite

  2. 2.

    S&P’s Common Stock Price Index: Industrials

  3. 3.

    S&P’s Composite Common Stock: Dividend Yield

  4. 4.

    S&P’s Composite Common Stock: Price-Earnings Ratio

5.11 Group 11: Non-household balance sheets

  1. 1.

    Federal Debt: Total Public Debt as Percent of GDP (Percent)

  2. 2.

    Real Federal Debt: Total Public Debt (Millions of 2012 Dollars)

  3. 3.

    Real Nonfinancial Corporate Business Sector Liabilities (Billions of 2012 Dollars)

  4. 4.

    Nonfinancial Corporate Business Sector Liabilities to Disposable Business Income (Percent)

  5. 5.

    Real Nonfinancial Corporate Business Sector Assets (Billions of 2012 Dollars)

  6. 6.

    Real Nonfinancial Noncorporate Business Sector Liabilities (Billions of 2012 Dollars)

  7. 7.

    Real Nonfinancial Noncorporate Business Sector Assets (Billions of 2012 Dollars)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Alam, M. Output, employment, and price effects of U.S. narrative tax changes: a factor-augmented vector autoregression approach. Empir Econ (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-024-02591-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-024-02591-2

Keywords

JEL Classification

Navigation