Skip to main content
Log in

Fiscal policy lag and equilibrium determinacy in a continuous-time New Keynesian model

  • Research Article
  • Published:
International Review of Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

It has been suggested that local equilibrium determinacy can be achieved by applying active monetary policies combined with passive fiscal policies in discrete-time New Keynesian (NK) models that include a fiscal policy rule with a time lag in the policy response. However, indeterminacy can occur even under such policies in models with money in the production function. In this paper, we first confirm that these results hold in a continuous-time NK model without a policy lag. Furthermore, we present the case of a fiscal policy lag that is capable of avoiding indeterminacy.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Introductory textbooks for NK models are provided by Woodford (2003), Galí (2008), and Walsh (2010).

  2. As a future extension, it would be interesting to examine the case wherein government expenditure enters the utility or production function with additively non-separable forms, as done in Barro’s (1990) endogenous growth models.

  3. Refer to Blanchard and Kiyotaki (1987) for details.

  4. The price revision costs can be interpreted as psychological stresses caused by price negotiations.

  5. A similar specification of the utility function can be found in Carlstrom and Fuerst (2003).

  6. Here, the price revision cost is specified in a quadratic equation consistent with that outlined by Rotemberg (1982).

  7. Although the assumption of symmetry is widely used in the whole class of Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium (DSGE) models, we should be conscious of an underlying problem of the assumption; that is, it confines the analysis to a particular and only limited conditions of an economy, where all household–firm units choose identical sequences of consumption, asset holdings, and prices. Specifically, when the products are heterogeneous, as assumed in this model, its reasonability should be examined carefully. However, this problem would exceed the scope of this study. Hence, we employ the same assumptions as in existing literature.

  8. We used Eq.  (18) for the derivations of \(P_1\) and \(P_2\).

  9. The assumption of MIUF is valid as it focuses on the precautionary motive for money demand by households; the assumption of MIPF is also justified as it focuses on the transaction motive for money demand by firms.

  10. For example, refer to Chapter 18 in Gandolfo (2010).

  11. Specifying the functional form of the utility function and parameter values, as proposed in Sect. 4.3, we calculate the value of \(\rho /P_2\) as 0.028. Thus, the case of Table 2 would be highly realistic and most relevant.

  12. Refer to Chapter 3 in Bellman and Cooke (1963).

  13. We can assume that \(\omega >0\) without losing generality because the pure imaginary roots will always be conjugated.

  14. We can ignore the term \(-\theta /i\omega _+\) as it is clearly an imaginary number.

References

  • Annicchiarico B, Giammarioli N, Piergallini A (2012) Budgetary policies in a DSGE model with finite horizons. Res Econ 66(2):111–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barro RJ (1990) Government spending in a simple model of endogenous growth. J Political Econ 98(5):S103–S125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bellman RE, Cooke KL (1963) Differential-difference equations. Academic Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Benhabib J, Schmitt-Grohé S, Uribe M (2003) Backward-looking interest-rate rules, interest-rate smoothing, and macroeconomic instability. J Money Credit Bank 35(6):1379–1412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beretta E, Kuang Y (2002) Geometric stability switch criteria in delay differential systems with delay dependent parameters. SIAM J Math Anal 33(5):1144–1165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blanchard OJ, Kiyotaki N (1987) Monopolistic competition and the effects of aggregate demand. Am Econ Rev 77(4):647–666

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlstrom CT, Fuerst TS (2003) Comment on “backward-looking interest-rate rules, interest-rate smoothing, and macroeconomic instability” by Jess Benhabib. J Money Credit Bank 35:1413–1423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deng W, Yujiang W, Li C (2006) Stability analysis of differential equations with time-dependent delay. Int J Bifurc Chaos 16(2):465–472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feenstra RC (1986) Functional equivalence between liquidity costs and the utility of money. J Monet Econ 17(2):271–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman M (1948) A monetary and fiscal framework for economic stability. Am Econ Rev 38(3):245–264

    Google Scholar 

  • Galí J (2008) Monetary policy, inflation, and the business cycle: an introduction to the New Keynesian framework. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Gandolfo G (2010) Economic dynamics, 4th edn. Springer, NewYork

    Google Scholar 

  • Gliksberg B (2009) Monetary policy and multiple equilibria with constrained investment and externalities. Econ Theory 41(3):443–463

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gu K, Niculescu SI, Chen J (2005) On stability crossing curves for general systems with two delays. J Math Anal Appl 311(1):231–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gu K, Naghnaeian M (2011) Stability crossing set for systems with three delays. IEEE Trans Autom Control 56(1):11–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guerrini L, Sodini M (2013) “Dynamic properties of the Solow model with increasing or decreasing population and time-to-build technology. Abstract and applied analysis, vol 2013. Hindawi Publishing Corporation, Cairo

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumhof M, Nunes R, Yakadina I (2010) Simple monetary rules under fiscal dominance. J Money Credit Bank 42(1):63–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leeper EM (1991) Equilibria under ‘active’ and ‘passive’ monetary and fiscal policies. J Monet Econ 27(1):129–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin X, Wang H (2012) Stability analysis of delay differential equations with two discrete delays. Can Appl Math Q 20(4):519–533

    Google Scholar 

  • Matsumoto A, Szidarovszky F (2012) An elementary study of a class of dynamic systems with two time delays. Cubo (Temuco) 14(3):103–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matsumoto A, Szidarovszky F (2015a) Nonlinear multiplier-accelerator model with investment and consumption delays. Struct Change Econ Dyn 33:1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matsumoto A, Szidarovszky F (2015b) Nonlinear cournot duopoly with implementation delays, Vol. 240. IERCU Discussion Paper, 2015

  • Meng Q, Yip CK (2004) Investment, interest rate rules, and equilibrium determinacy. Econ Theory 23(4):863–878

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rotemberg JJ (1982) Sticky prices in the United States. J Political Econ 90(6):1187–1211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt-Grohé S, Uribe M (2007) Optimal simple and implementable monetary and fiscal rules. J Monet Econ 54(6):1702–1725

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsuzuki E (2014) A New Keynesian model with delay: monetary policy lag and determinacy of equilibrium. Econ Anal Policy 44(3):279–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsuzuki E (2015) Determinacy of equilibrium in a New Keynesian model with monetary policy lag. Int J Econ Behav Org Spec Issue Recent Dev Econ Theory Appl 3(2–1):15–22

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh CE (2010) Monetary theory and policy, 3rd edn. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodford M (2003) Interest and prices: foundations of a theory of monetary policy. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The author appreciates the helpful comments and suggestions received from anonymous referees and Professors Akio Matsumoto and Toichiro Asada (Chuo University).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eiji Tsuzuki.

Appendix: Direction of crossing

Appendix: Direction of crossing

Differentiating equation \(F(\lambda )=0\) with respect to \(\theta \), we obtain the following:

$$\begin{aligned} \frac{\mathrm{d}\lambda }{\mathrm{d}\theta }(1-\theta \tau 'e^{-\theta \lambda })=\lambda \tau 'e^{-\theta \lambda }, \end{aligned}$$

or equivalently,

$$\begin{aligned} \left( \frac{\mathrm{d}\lambda }{\mathrm{d}\theta }\right) ^{-1}=\frac{1}{\lambda \tau 'e^{-\theta \lambda }}-\frac{\theta }{\lambda }. \end{aligned}$$

Next, we use equation \(F(\lambda )=0\) to express \(e^{-\theta \lambda }\) as follows:

$$\begin{aligned} e^{-\theta \lambda }=\frac{r^*-\lambda }{\tau '}. \end{aligned}$$

Thus,Footnote 14

$$\begin{aligned} {\mathrm {Re}}\left. \left( \frac{\mathrm{d}\lambda }{\mathrm{d}\theta }\right) ^{-1}\right| _{\lambda =i\omega _+}&={\mathrm {Re}}\left[ \frac{1}{i\omega _+(r^*-i\omega _+)}\right] \\&=\frac{1}{{r^*}^2+\omega _+^2}>0. \end{aligned}$$

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tsuzuki, E. Fiscal policy lag and equilibrium determinacy in a continuous-time New Keynesian model. Int Rev Econ 63, 215–232 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12232-016-0250-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12232-016-0250-7

Keywords

JEL Classification

Navigation