Journal of Social and Economic Development

, Volume 17, Issue 2, pp 148–166 | Cite as

Ricardian equivalence and twin deficits hypotheses in the euro area

Research Paper

Abstract

This paper analyzes two fundamental hypotheses of fiscal policy literature: the well-known Keynesian Twin Deficits and the Ricardian Equivalence. Using yearly data for the 1970–2010 years, we studied the Euro Area countries. A key requirement of sustained economic growth states that the current account deficit and the budget deficit should be under control. During the last decades a major controversy has emerged on the sign of fiscal multiplier, that is, positive (Keynesian or conventional view), zero (Ricardian view), or negative (expectational view). The empirical findings of our study show mixed results. In fact, for the static panel data, fixed effects and random effects estimates are in line with the Ricardian approach; while Pooled OLS and Prais–Winsten (GLS) reach the opposite conclusion, since the government budget/GDP ratio coefficient is positive and statistically significant (somewhere in the range of 0.14–0.18 %). Moreover, the estimates of two sub-groups constructed with the Index of Globalization confirm the Ricardian hypothesis. In regard to the dynamic panel data, the Anderson–Hsiao IV estimators indicate that only the first lag of government budget has a positive and significant effect on trade deficit, while the more reliable GMM methods seem to be consistent with the Ricardian view. The Common Correlated Effects Mean Group estimates show that RE holds for 1970–1991 years, while in the second sub-period results are in line with the Keynesian view. Finally, FMM estimates produce three homogeneous groups, confirming previous results. Yet, mixture models provide empirical support to TD hypothesis, with effects differentiated among clusters.

Keywords

Fiscal policy Ricardian equivalence Twin deficits Causality Euro area Panel data 

JEL Classification

E62 F32 F41 H62 

References

  1. Abel AB (1986) The failure of Ricardian equivalence under progressive wealth taxation. J Publ Econ 30(1):117–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Akbostanci E, Tunç Gİ (2002) Turkish Twin deficits: an error correction model of trade balance, economic research center working papers, 01/06Google Scholar
  3. Anderson TW, Hsiao C (1981) Estimation of dynamic models with error components. J Am Stat Assoc 76:598–606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Andreoni J (1989) Giving with impure altruism: applications to charity and Ricardian equivalence. J Polit Econ 97(6):1447–1458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Anoruo E, Ramchander S (1998) Current account and fiscal deficits: evidence from five developing economies of Asia. J Asian Econ 9(3):487–501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Arellano M, Bond S (1991) Some tests of specification for panel data: monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. Rev Econ Stud 58:277–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Arellano M, Bover O (1995) Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error-components models. J Econom 68:29–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Arora HK, Dua P (1993) Budget deficits, domestic investment, and trade deficits, contemporary policy issues. 11:29–44Google Scholar
  9. Aschauer DA (1985) Fiscal policy and aggregate Demand. Am Econ Rev 75:117–127Google Scholar
  10. Attanasio OP, Picci L, Scorcu AE (2000) Saving growth, and investment: a macroeconomic analysis using a panel of countries. Rev Econ Stat 82(2):182–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Baharumshah AZ, Lau E (2009) Structural breaks and the twin deficits hypothesis: evidence from East Asian countries. Econ Bull 29(4):2517–2524Google Scholar
  12. Barro RJ (1974) Are government bonds net wealth? J Polit Econ 82:1095–1117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Barsky RB, Mankiw NG, Zeldes SP (1986) Ricardian consumers with Keynesian propensities. Am Econ Rev 76(4):676–691Google Scholar
  14. Bartolini L, Lahiri A (2006) Twin deficits twenty years later. Curr Issues Econ Finance 12(7):1–7Google Scholar
  15. Becker T (1997) An investigation of Ricardian equivalence in a common trends model. J Monet Econ 39:405–431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Bernheim BD (1987) Ricardian equivalence: an evaluation of theory and evidence. In: Fischer S (ed.), NBER macroeconomics annual 1987, 2, The MIT PressGoogle Scholar
  17. Bernheim BD, Bagwell K (1988) Is everything neutral? J Political Econ 96(2):308–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Blanchard OJ (1985) Debt, deficits, and finite horizons. J Polit Econ 93:223–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Blundell R, Bond S (1998) Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models. J Econom 87:115–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Bohn H (1992) Endogenous government spending and Ricardian equivalence. Econ J 102(412):588–597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Brennan G, Buchanan JM (1980) The logic of the Ricardian equivalence theorem. FinanzArchiv 38(1):4–16Google Scholar
  22. Buchanan JM (1976) Barro on the Ricardian equivalence theorem. J Polit Econ 84:337–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Buchanan JM (1986) The economic consequences of the deficit. Economia delle scelte pubbliche 3:149–156Google Scholar
  24. Buchanan JM, Wagner R, Burton J (1978) The consequences of Mr. Keynes. Institute of Economic Affairs, LondonGoogle Scholar
  25. Bussière M, Fratzscher M, Müller GJ (2005) Productivity shocks, budget deficits and the current account, ECB Working Paper, 509Google Scholar
  26. Chinn M, Prasad ES (2003) Medium-term determinants of current accounts in industrial and developing countries: an empirical exploration. J Int Econ 59:47–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Congressional Budget Office (1989), Policies for reducing the current account deficit, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  28. Cuddington JT, Vinals JM (1986) Budget deficits and the current account: an intertemporal disequilibrium approach. J Int Econ 21(1–2):1–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Daly V, Siddiki JU (2009) The twin deficits in OECD countries: cointegration analysis with regime shifts. Appl Econ Lett 16:1155–1164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Deb P, Trivedi PK (1997) Demand for medical care by the elderly: a finite mixture approach. J Appl Econom 12:313–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Detken C (1999) Fiscal policy effectiveness and neutrality results in a non Ricardian world, ECB Working Paper, 3Google Scholar
  32. Dewald WG, Ulan M (1990) The twin-deficit illusion. Cato J 9(3):689–707Google Scholar
  33. Edwards S (2002) Does the current account matter? In: Edwards S, Frankel JA (eds) Preventing currency crises in emerging markets. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Efremidze L, Tomohara A (2011) Have the implications of twin deficits changed? Sudden stops over decades. Int Adv Econ Res 17(1):66–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Egwaikhide FO (1999) Effects of budget deficit on trade balance in Nigeria: a simulation exercise. Afr Dev Rev 11(2):265–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Elmendorf DW, Mankiw NG (1998) Government debt, harvard institute of economic research working papers, 1820Google Scholar
  37. Enders W, Lee B-S (1990) Current account and budget deficits: twins or distant cousins? Rev Econ Stat 72(3):373–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Evans P (1988) Are consumers Ricardian? Evidence for the United States. J Political Econ 96(5):983–1004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Feldstein MS (1982) Government deficits and aggregate demand. J Monet Econ 9:1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Feldstein MS (1992) The budget and trade deficits aren’t really twins, NBER working paper, 3966Google Scholar
  41. Forte F, Magazzino C (2011) optimal size government and economic growth in EU countries, economia politica. J Anal Inst Econ XXVIII(3):295–321Google Scholar
  42. Forte F, Magazzino C (2013) Twin deficits in the European countries. Int Adv Econ Res 19(3):289–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Ganchev GT, Stavrova E, Tsenkov V (2012) Testing the twin deficit hypothesis: the case of central and Eastern European countries. Int J Contemp Econ Adm Sci 2(1):1–21Google Scholar
  44. García A, Ramajo J (2004) Budget deficit and interest rates: empirical evidence for Spain. Appl Econ Lett 11(11):715–718CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Ghatak A, Ghatak S (1996) Budgetary deficits and Ricardian equivalence: the case of India, 1950–1986. J Publ Econ 60:267–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Giorgioni G, Holden K (2003a) Does the Ricardian equivalence proposition hold in less developed countries? Int Rev Appl Econ 17(2):209–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Giorgioni G, Holden K (2003b) Ricardian equivalence, expansionary fiscal contraction and the stock market: a VECM approach. Appl Econ 35(12):1435–1443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Gruber JW, Kamin SB (2007) Explaining the global pattern of current account imbalances. J Int Money Finance 26(4):500–522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Hashemzadeh N, Wilson L (2006) the dynamics of current account and budget deficits in selected countries if the middle East and North Africa. Int Res J Finance Econ 5:111–129Google Scholar
  50. Higgins M, Klitgaard T (1998) Viewing the current account deficit as a capital inflow. Curr Issues Econ Finance 4:13Google Scholar
  51. Himarios D (1995) Euler equation tests of Ricardian equivalence. Econ Lett 48:165–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Hooper P, Mann CL (1987) The US external deficits: its causes and persistence, prepared for the US trade deficit: causes, consequences, and cures, conference at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. LouisGoogle Scholar
  53. Ibrahim SB, Kumar FY (1996) Comovements in budget deficits, money, interest rates, exchange rates and the current account balance: some empirical evidence. Appl Econ 28:117–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Islam MF (1998) Brazil’s twin deficits: an empirical examination. Atl Econ J 26(2):121–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Keynes JM (1936) The general theory of interest, employment and money. Macmillan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  56. Khalid AM (1996) Ricardian equivalence: empirical evidence from developing economies. J Dev Econ 51:413–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Khalid AM, Guan TW (1999) Causality tests of budget and current account deficits: cross-country comparisons. Emp Econ 24:389–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Kim C-H, Kim D (2006) Does Korea have twin deficits? Appl Econ Lett 13(10):675–680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Kim S, Roubini N (2008) Twin deficit or twin divergence? Fiscal policy, current account, and real exchange rate in the US. J Int Econ 74:362–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Kormendi RC (1983) Government Debt, Government spending, and private sector behavior. Am Econ Rev 73:994–1010Google Scholar
  61. Kosteletou, N.E. (2013), Financial Integration, Euro and the Twin Deficits of Southern Eurozone Countries, Panoeconomicus, 2, s.i., 161–178Google Scholar
  62. Kouassi E, Mougoué M, Kymn KO (2004) Causality tests of the relationship between the twin deficits. Emp Econ 29:503–525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Magazzino C (2012a) The twin deficits phenomenon: evidence from Italy. J Econ Coop Dev 33(3):65–80Google Scholar
  64. Magazzino C (2012b) Fiscal Policy Consumption and Current Account in the European Countries. Econ Bull 32(2):1330–1344Google Scholar
  65. Mann CL (2002) Perspectives on the US account deficit and sustainability. Curr J Econ Perspect 16:131–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Marashdeh H, Saleh AS (2006) Revisiting budget and trade deficits in Lebanon: a Critique, University of Wollongong, Faculty of Commerce—Economics Working Papers, 06–07Google Scholar
  67. Margani P, Ricciuti R (2004) Equivalenza Ricardiana in economia aperta: un’analisi empirica, SIEP Working Paper, 390Google Scholar
  68. Marinheiro CF (2001) Ricardian equivalence: an empirical application to the Portuguese economy, CES Discussion Paper, 01–12Google Scholar
  69. McLachlan GJ, Peel D (2000) Finite mixture models. Wiley, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Miller SM, Russek FS (1989) Are the twin deficits really related? Contemp Policy Issues 7:91–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Mohammadi H (2000) Budget deficits and the foreign trade balance: a cross-country study. Economia Internazionale, LIII, pp 85–95Google Scholar
  72. Mohammadi H (2004) Budget deficits and the current account balance: new evidence from panel data. J Econ Finance 28(1):39–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Nelson C, Plosser C (1982) Trends and random walks in macroeconomics time series: some evidence and implications. J Monet Econ 10:139–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Nickel C, Vansteenkiste I (2008) Fiscal policies, the current account and ricardian equivalence, ECB Working Paper, 935Google Scholar
  75. Onafowora OA, Owoye O (2006) An empirical investigation of budget and trade deficits: the case of Nigeria. J Dev Areas 39(2):153–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Parikh A, Rao B (2006) Do fiscal deficits influence current accounts? A case study of India. Rev Dev Econ 10(3):492–505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Pattichis C (2004) Budget and trade deficits in Lebanon. Appl Econ Lett 11(2):105–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Pesaran MH (2006) Estimation and inference in large heterogeneous panels with a multifactor error structure. Econometrica 74(4):967–1012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Pesaran MH, Smith RP (1995) Estimating long-run relationships from dynamic heterogeneous panels. J Econom 68:79–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Pesaran MH, Shin Y, Smith RP (1999) Pooled mean group estimation of dynamic heterogeneous panels. J Am Stat Assoc 94(446):621–634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Piersanti G (2000) Current account dynamics and expected future budget deficits: some international evidence. J Int Money Finance 19:255–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Ratha A (2010), Twin deficits or distant cousins? Evidence from India, St. Cloud State University, Economics Faculty Working Papers, 5Google Scholar
  83. Reitschuler G, Crespo Cuaresma J (2004) Ricardian equivalence revisited: evidence from OECD countries. Econ Bull 5(16):1–10Google Scholar
  84. Ricardo D (1888) Essay on the funding system. In: McCulloch JR The works of David Ricardo. With a notice of the life and writings of the author, John Murray, LondonGoogle Scholar
  85. Ricciuti R (2003) Assessing Ricardian equivalence. J Econ Surv 17(1):55–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Roodman D (2009) How to do xtabond2: an introduction to difference and system GMM in Stata. Stata J 9(1):86–136Google Scholar
  87. Saleh AS, Nair M, Agalewatte T (2005) The twin deficits problem in Sri Lanka: an econometric analysis. South Asia Econ J 6(2):221–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Seater JJ (1993) Ricardian equivalence. J Econ Lit 31(1):142–190Google Scholar
  89. Vamvoukas GA (1997) Have large budget deficits caused increasing trade deficits? evidence from a developing country. Atl Econ J 25:1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Vamvoukas GA (1999) The twin deficits phenomenon: evidence from Greece. Appl Econ 31(9):1093–1100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Windmeijer F (2005) A finite sample correction for the variance of linear efficient two-step GMM estimators. J Econom 126:25–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Zietz J, Pemberton DK (1990) The US budget and trade deficits: a simultaneous equation model. South Econ J 57:23–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute for Social and Economic Change 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Sapienza, University of RomeRomeItaly
  2. 2.Italian Society of Public EconomicsPaviaItaly
  3. 3.Roma Tre UniversityRomeItaly
  4. 4.Italian Economic AssociationAnconaItaly

Personalised recommendations