Fiscal Policy: Economic Effects

May 16, 2019 – January 21, 2021 R45723

Fiscal Policy: Economic Effects
January 21, 2021
Fiscal policy describes changes to government spending and revenue behavior in an effort to
influence the economy. By adjusting its level of spending and tax revenue, the government can
Lida R. Weinstock
affect economic outcomes by either increasing or decreasing economic activity. For example,
Analyst in Macroeconomic
when the government runs a budget deficit, it is said to be engaging in fiscal stimulus—spurring
Policy
economic activity—and when the government runs a budget surplus, it is said to be engaging in a

fiscal contraction—slowing economic activity.

The government can use fiscal stimulus to spur economic activity by increasing government
spending, decreasing tax revenue, or a combination of the two. Increasing government spending tends to encourage economic
activity either directly through the purchase of additional goods and services from the private sector or indirectly by the
transfer of funds to individuals who may then spend that money. Decreasing tax revenue tends to encourage economic
activity indirectly by increasing individuals’ disposable income, which can lead to those individuals consuming more goods
and services. This sort of expansionary fiscal policy can be beneficial when the economy is in recession, as it lessens the
negative impacts of a recession, such as elevated unemployment and stagnant wages. However, expansionary fiscal policy
can result in rising interest rates, growing trade deficits, and accelerating inflation, particularly if applied during healthy
economic expansions. These side effects from expansionary fiscal policy tend to partly offset its stimulative effects.
The government can use contractionary fiscal policy to slow economic activity by decreasing government spending,
increasing tax revenue, or a combination of the two. Decreasing government spending tends to slow economic activity as the
government purchases fewer goods and services from the private sector. Increasing tax revenue tends to slow economic
activity by decreasing individuals’ disposable income, likely causing them to decrease spending on goods and services. As
the economy exits a recession and begins to grow at a healthy pace, policymakers may choose to reduce fiscal stimulus to
avoid some of the negative consequences of expansionary fiscal policy—such as rising interest rates, growing trade deficits,
and accelerating inflation—or to manage the level of public debt.
Prior to the “Great Recession” of 2007-2009, the federal budget deficit was about 1% of gross domestic product (GDP) in
2007. During the recession, the budget deficit grew to nearly 10% of GDP in part due to additional fiscal stimulus applied to
the economy. The budget deficit began shrinking in 2010, falling to about 2% of GDP by 2015. In contrast to the typical
pattern of fiscal policy, the budget deficit began growing again in 2016, rising to nearly 5% of GDP in 2019 despite relatively
strong economic conditions. This change in fiscal policy is notable, as expanding fiscal stimulus when the economy is not
depressed can result in rising interest rates, a growing trade deficit, and accelerating inflation.
The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused a historically severe recession. Several relief bills were
enacted in response, including the Coronavirus Preparedness and Response Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2020 (P.L.
116-123); the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (P.L. 116-127); the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security
(CARES) Act (P.L. 116-136); and the Paycheck Protection Program and Health Care Enhancement Act (P.L. 116-139).
These measures significantly increased the deficit, which totaled $3.1 trillion in FY2020 and amounted to 14.9% of GDP, the
largest share since the end of World War II. Additional coronavirus relief was included in the Consolidated Appropriations
Act, 2021 (P.L. 116-260).
Congressional Research Service

Fiscal Policy: Economic Effects

he federal government has two major tools for affecting the macroeconomy (in this case,
the whole, or aggregate, U.S. economy): fiscal policy and monetary policy. These policy
T interventions are generaly used to either increase or decrease economic activity to counter
the business cycle’s impact on unemployment, income, and inflation. This report focuses on fiscal
policy. For more information related to monetary policy, refer to CRS Report RL30354, Monetary
Policy and the Federal Reserve: Current Policy and Conditions, by Marc Labonte.
What Is Fiscal Policy?
Fiscal policy describes changes to government spending and revenue behavior in an effort to
influence economic outcomes. The government can impact the level of economic activity (often
measured by gross domestic product [GDP]) in the short term by changing its level of spending
and tax revenue. Expansionary fiscal policy—an increase in government spending, a decrease in
tax revenue, or a combination of the two—is expected to spur economic activity, whereas
contractionary fiscal policy—a decrease in government spending, an increase in tax revenue, or a
combination of the two—is expected to slow economic activity. When the government’s budget is
running a deficit (when spending exceeds revenues), fiscal policy is said to be expansionary.
When it is running a surplus (when revenues exceed spending), fiscal policy is said to be
contractionary.
From a policymaker’s perspective, expansionary fiscal policy is general y used to boost GDP
growth and the economic indicators that tend to move with GDP, such as employment and
individual incomes. However, expansionary fiscal policy also tends to affect interest rates and
investment, exchange rates and the trade balance, and the inflation rate in undesirable ways,
limiting the long-term effectiveness of persistent fiscal stimulus. Contractionary fiscal policy can
be used to slow economic activity if policymakers are concerned that the economy may be
overheating, which can cause a recession. The magnitude of fiscal policy’s effect on GDP wil
also differ based on where the economy is within the business cycle—whether it is in a recession
or an expansion.1
Expansionary Fiscal Policy
During a recession, aggregate demand (overal spending) in the economy fal s, which general y
results in slower wage growth, decreased employment, lower business revenue, and lower
business investment. As seen during the current recession caused by the Coronavirus Disease
2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, recessions often lead to serious negative consequences for both
individuals and businesses.2 The government can replace some of the lost aggregate demand and
limit the negative impacts of a recession on individuals and businesses with the use of fiscal
stimulus by increasing government spending, decreasing tax revenue, or a combination of the
two. Government spending takes the form of both purchases of goods and services, which directly
increase economic activity, and transfers to individuals, which indirectly increase economic
activity as individuals spend those funds. Decreased tax revenue via tax cuts indirectly increases
aggregate demand in the economy. For example, an individual income tax cut increases the

1 T he economy shifts from periods of increasing economic activity, known as economic expansions, to periods of
decreasing economic activity, known as recession s. For more information, see CRS In Focus IF10411, Introduction to
U.S. Econom y: The Business Cycle and Growth , by Lida R. Weinstock.
2 For more information on the causes of recessions, see CRS Insight IN10853, What Causes a Recession?, by Marc
Labonte.
Congressional Research Service

1

Fiscal Policy: Economic Effects

amount of disposable income available to individuals, enabling them to purchase more goods and
services. Standard economic theory suggests that in the short term, fiscal stimulus can lessen the
negative impacts of a recession or hasten a recovery.3 However, the ability of fiscal stimulus to
boost aggregate demand may be limited due to its interaction with other economic processes,
including interest rates and investment, exchange rates and the trade balance, and the rate of
inflation.
Potential Offsetting Effects to Expansionary Fiscal Policy
Investment and Interest Rates
To engage in fiscal stimulus by either increasing spending or decreasing tax revenue, the
government must increase the size of its deficit and borrow money to finance that stimulus. This
can lead to an increase in interest rates and subsequent decreases in investment and some
consumer spending.4 This rise in interest rates may therefore offset some portion of the increase
in economic activity spurred by fiscal stimulus.
At any given time, there is a limited supply of loanable funds available for the government and
private parties to borrow from—a global pool of savings. If the government begins to borrow a
larger portion of this pool of savings, it increases the demand for these funds. As demand for
loanable funds increases, without any corresponding increase in the supply of these funds, the
price to borrow these funds (also known as interest rates) increases. Rising interest rates general y
depress economic activity, as they make it more expensive for businesses to borrow money and
invest in their firms. Similarly, individuals tend to decrease so-cal ed interest-sensitive
spending—spending on goods and services that require a loan, such as cars, homes, and large
appliances—when interest rates are relatively higher.5 The process through which rising interest
rates diminish private sector spending is often referred to as crowding out.6 However, the degree
to which crowding out occurs is partial y dependent on where the economy is within the business
cycle: either in a recession or in a healthy expansion.
During a recession, crowding out tends to be smal er than during a healthy economic expansion
due to already depressed demand for investment and interest-sensitive spending. Because demand
for loanable funds is already depressed during a recession, the additional demand created by
government borrowing does not increase interest rates as much and therefore does not crowd out
as much private spending as it would during an economic expansion.7
In addition to fiscal policy, the government can influence the business cycle through the use of
monetary policy. Federal monetary policy is largely implemented by the Federal Reserve, an
independent government agency charged with maintaining stable prices and maximum
employment through its monetary policy. The Federal Reserve can influence interest rates
throughout the economy by adjusting the federal funds rate, a very short-term interest rate faced

3 Chad Stone, “Fiscal Stimulus Needed to Fight Recessions,” Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, April 16, 2020,
https://www.cbpp.org/research/economy/fiscal-stimulus-needed-to-fight-recessions.
4 Laurence Ball and Gregory Mankiw, “ What Do Budget Deficits Do?,” National Bureau of Economic Research
(NBER), Working Paper no. 5263, September 1995.
5 Ball and Mankiw, “ What Do Budget Deficits Do?”
6 Benjamin M. Friedman, Crowding Out or Crowding In? Economic Consequences of Financing Government Deficits,
Brookings Institution, https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/1978c_bpea_friedman.pdf.
7 Alan J. Auerbach and Yuriy Gorodnichenko, “Measuring the Output Responses to Fiscal Policy,” American
Econom ic Journal: Economic Policy, vol. 4, no. 2 (May 2012).
Congressional Research Service

2

Fiscal Policy: Economic Effects

by banks. Decreasing interest rates reduces the cost to businesses and individuals of borrowing
funds to make new investments and purchases. Conversely, increasing interest rates raises the
cost to businesses and individuals of borrowing funds to make new investments and purchases.
The Federal Reserve can conduct monetary policy in a complementary nature to fiscal policy,
offsetting the rise in interest rates by decreasing the federal funds rate. Alternatively, the Federal
Reserve can pursue a policy that offsets stimulus, pushing interest rates up by increasing the
federal funds rate.8
Exchange Rates and the Trade Balance
As discussed above, fiscal stimulus can cause interest rates to rise. As domestic rates rise relative
to foreign rates, investors tend to seek out U.S. investments because the relatively high interest
rates mean relatively high returns on investment. However, as foreign capital flows into the
United States, this can push rates back down as the supply of loanable funds increases, potential y
offsetting the initial rise in rates caused by the stimulus.
Nonetheless, increased demand for U.S. investment from foreign investors also means that the
demand for the dollar would increase as foreign investors exchanged various foreign currencies
for dollars that they could then invest. This increased demand for dollars increases the value of
the dollar, referred to as appreciation. When the dollar appreciates it becomes more expensive
relative to other currencies—it takes more foreign currency to “purchase” one dollar—and,
therefore, U.S. goods and services become more expensive relative to foreign goods and services,
causing exports to decrease and imports to increase. The end result is general y an increase in the
U.S. trade deficit, as exports decrease and imports from abroad increase in the United States.9 An
increasing trade deficit, al else equal, means that consumption and production of domestic goods
and services are fal ing, partly offsetting the increase in aggregate demand caused by the
stimulus.
As discussed above, however, during a recession interest rates are less likely to rise, or are likely
to increase to a lesser degree, due to an already depressed demand for investment and spending
within the economy.10 Without rising interest rates, or if they increase to a lesser degree, the
associated increase in the trade deficit is also likely to be smal er. In addition, if the Federal
Reserve engages in similarly stimulative monetary policy, it may be able to mitigate some of the
anticipated increase in the trade deficit by further preventing an increase in interest rates.11
Inflation
The goal of fiscal stimulus is to increase aggregate demand within the economy. However, if
fiscal stimulus is applied too aggressively or is implemented when the economy is already
operating near full capacity, it can result in an unsustainably large demand for goods and services
that the economy is unable to supply. When the demand for goods and services is greater than the
available supply, prices tend to rise, a scenario known as inflation. A rising inflation rate can
introduce distortions into the economy and impose unnecessary costs on individuals and
businesses, although economists general y view low and stable inflation as a sign of a wel -

8 For further information regarding monetary policy, see CRS Report RL30354, Monetary Policy and the Federal
Reserve: Current Policy and Conditions, by Marc Labonte.
9 Olivier Blanchard, Macroeconomics, 5th ed. (Upper Saddle River NJ: Pearson Education, 2009), pp. 450 -451.
10 Auerbach and Gorodnichenko, “Measuring the Output Responses to Fiscal Policy.”
11 For further information regarding monetary policy, see CRS Report RL30354, Monetary Policy and the Federal
Reserve: Current Policy and Conditions, by Marc Labonte.
Congressional Research Service

3

Fiscal Policy: Economic Effects

managed economy.12 As such, rising inflation rates can hinder the effectiveness of fiscal stimulus
on economic activity by imposing additional costs on individuals and interfering with the
efficient al ocation of resources in the economy.
The Federal Reserve has some ability to limit inflation by implementing contractionary monetary
policy. If the Federal Reserve observes accelerating inflation as a result of additional fiscal
stimulus, it can counteract this by increasing interest rates. The rise in interest rates results in a
slowing of economic activity, neutralizing the fiscal stimulus, and may help to slow inflation as
wel .
Inflation has general y remained low despite relatively high deficit spending during the 11-year
expansion between the Great Recession and the current COVID-19-induced recession. This
indicates that in the near term, the size of this potential offsetting benefit could be relatively smal
and even prove counter to the Federal Reserve’s monetary policy strategy of targeting an average
of 2% inflation over time.13
Fiscal Expansion Multipliers
Economists attempt to evaluate the overal impact of fiscal stimulus on the economy by
estimating fiscal multipliers, which measure the ratio of a change in economic output to the
change in government spending or revenue that causes the change in output.14 A fiscal multiplier
greater than one suggests that for each dollar the government spends or each dollar taxes are cut
or transfers are increased, the economy grows by more than one dollar. A multiplier may be larger
than one if the initial government stimulus results in further spending by private actors. For
example, if the government increases spending on infrastructure projects as part of its stimulus,
directly increasing aggregate demand, numerous contractors and construction workers wil likely
receive additional income as a consequence. If those workers then spend a portion of their new
income within the economy, it further increases aggregate demand. Alternatively, a fiscal
multiplier of less than one suggests that for each dollar the government spends, the economy
grows by less than one dollar, suggesting the expansionary power of the fiscal stimulus is being
partly offset by the contractionary pressures discussed above.
Estimates of fiscal multipliers vary depending on the form of the fiscal stimulus and on which
economic model the economist uses to measure the multiplier.15 For example, a 2012 academic
research article estimated fiscal multipliers for various forms of stimulus using several different
prominent economic models from the Federal Reserve Board, the European Central Bank, the
International Monetary Fund, the European Commission, the Organization for Economic Co-
operation and Development, the Bank of Canada, and two models developed by academic

12 See, for example, Richard G. Anderson, “ Inflation’s Economic Cost: How Large? How Certain?,” Federal Reserve
Bank of St. Louis, July 2006, https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/regional-economist/july-2006/inflations-
economic-cost -how-large-how-certain.
13 In August 2020, the Federal Reserve announced a change to its monetary policy strategy statement and that instead
of targeting an inflation rate of 2%, it would target an average rate of 2%. For more information, see Board of
Governors of the Federal Reserve System, “ Guide to Changes in the Statement on Longer-Run Goals and Monetary
Policy Strategy,” https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/guide-to-changes-in-statement-on-longer-run-goals-
monetary-policy-strategy.htm; and CRS Insight IN11499, The Federal Reserve’s Revised Monetary Policy Strategy
Statem ent, by Marc Labonte.
14 Nicoletta Batini et al., Fiscal Multipliers: Size, Determinants, and Use in Macroeconomic Projections, International
Monetary Fund, September 2014, https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/tnm/2014/tnm1404.pdf.
15 For more information on different types of models used to estimate fiscal multipliers, see CRS Report R46460,
Fiscal Policy and Recovery from the COVID-19 Recession, by Jane G. Gravelle and Donald J. Marples.
Congressional Research Service

4

link to page 8 Fiscal Policy: Economic Effects

economists. The authors found varying estimates (see Table 1) for different forms of fiscal
stimulus ranging from 1.59 for cash transfers to low-income individuals to 0.23 for reduced labor
income taxes.16 Based on these estimates, increasing government spending on consumption by
1% of GDP would result in a 1.55% increase in GDP, and decreasing labor income taxes by 1%
of GDP would result in a 0.23% increase in GDP.
Table 1. Average First-Year Fiscal Multipliers for Stimulus in Selected Models
Fiscal Stimulus
Multiplier
Government Investment
1.59
Government Consumption
1.55
Targeted Transfers
1.30
Consumption Taxes
0.61
General Transfers
0.42
Corporate Income Taxes
0.24
Labor Income Taxes
0.23
Source: Gunter Coenen et al., “Effects of Fiscal Stimulus in Structural Models,” American Economic Journal:
Macroeconomics, vol. 4, no. 1 (January 2012), p. 46.
Note: Multipliers are averages across the seven models of the first-year effects on real GDP of fiscal stimulus
lasting for two years, assuming no change in monetary policy for two years.
The magnitude of fiscal multipliers likely depends on where the economy is in the business cycle.
As discussed above, during a recession fiscal stimulus is less likely to result in offsetting
contractionary effects—such as rising interest rates, trade deficits, and inflation—resulting in a
larger increase in economic activity from fiscal stimulus. Therefore, multipliers are expected to be
smal er during expansions when stimulus is more likely to result in the crowding out of private
consumption, investment, and net exports. Accordingly, many models estimate much larger
multipliers during recessions than expansions.17
Considerations Regarding Persistent Fiscal Stimulus
Persistently applying fiscal stimulus can negatively affect the economy in the long term through
three main avenues. First, persistent, large budget deficits can result in a rising debt-to-GDP ratio
and lead to an unsustainable level of debt.18 Second, persistent fiscal stimulus—particularly
during economic expansions—can limit long-term economic growth by crowding out private
investment. Third, rising public debt wil require a growing portion of the federal budget to be
directed toward interest payments on the debt, potential y crowding out other, more worthwhile
sources of government spending.
Some economic research has suggested that relatively high public debt negatively impacts
economic growth. For example, one academic research paper suggested that for developed

16 Gunter Coenen et al., “Effects of Fiscal Stimulus in Structural Models,” American Economic Journal:
Macroeconom ics, vol. 4, no. 1 (January 2012), pp. 22-68.
17 Auerbach and Gorodnichenko, “Measuring the Output Responses to Fiscal Policy.”
18 Assuming annual budget deficits exceed the annual increase in GDP, the debt -to-GDP ratio will rise over time.
Congressional Research Service

5

Fiscal Policy: Economic Effects

countries, a 10 percentage point increase in the debt-to-GDP ratio is associated with a 0.15 to 0.20
percentage point decrease in per capita real GDP growth.19
Unsustainable Public Debt
As noted, persistent fiscal stimulus can result in a rising debt-to-GDP ratio and lead to an
unsustainable level of public debt.20 A rising debt-to-GDP ratio can be problematic if the
perceived or real risk of the government defaulting on that debt begins to rise. As the perceived
risk of default begins to increase, investors wil demand higher interest rates to compensate
themselves.
The tipping point at which public debt becomes unsustainable is difficult to predict. A continual y
rising debt-to-GDP ratio is likely to lead to an unsustainable level of debt over time. The
threshold at which a nation’s debt becomes unsustainable depends on a number of factors, such as
the denomination of the debt, political circumstances, and, potential y most importantly,
underlying economic conditions. A change in these circumstances may shift a nation’s debt to be
unsustainable without the underlying amount of debt changing at al . To date, it does not appear
that the United States has an immediate concern with respect to unsustainability given that
interest rates are historical y low,21 although the unpredictability of interest rates has led to some
cal s for caution.22 The debt-to-GDP ratio in FY2020 was the highest since World War II and is
projected to remain high, at least in the short-term, given the ongoing pandemic and recession.23
Decreased Business Investment
Persistent fiscal stimulus, and the associated budget deficits, can decrease the size of the economy
in the long term as a result of decreased investment in physical capital.24 As discussed previously,
the government’s deficit spending can result in higher interest rates, which general y lead to
lower levels of business investment. Business investment—spending on physical capital such as
factories, computers, software, and machines—is an important determinant of the long-term size
of the economy. Physical capital investment al ows businesses to produce more goods and
services with the same amount of labor and raw materials. As such, government deficits that lead
to lower levels of business investment can result in lower quantities of physical capital and
therefore may reduce the productive capacity of the economy in the long term.25
As discussed earlier, some of the increase in interest rates and decline in domestic investment
resulting from fiscal stimulus could be offset by additional capital flowing into the United States

19 Manmohan S. Kumar and Jaejoon Woo, Public Debt and Growth, International Monetary Fund, Working Paper, vol.
10, no. 174 (July 2010).
20 Public debt is the money that the government owes to its creditors, which include private citizens, institutions,
foreign governments, and other parts of the federal government. For more information on the public debt, see CRS
Report R44383, Deficits, Debt, and the Econom y: An Introduction , by Grant A. Driessen.
21 Olivier Blanchard, Reexamining the Economic Costs of Debt, Peterson Institute for International Economics,
November 20, 2019, https://www.piie.com/commentary/testimonies/reexamining-economic-costs-debt.
22 John Cochrane, “Debt Denial,” The Grumpy Economist, December 9, 2020, https://johnhcochrane.blogspot.com/
2020/12/debt-denial.html.
23 U.S. Congressional Budget Office (CBO), Monthly Budget Review: Summary for Fiscal Year 2020, November 9,
2020, p. 1.
24 Depending on the size of the capital stock and the debt -to-GDP level, particularly when both are initially relatively
low, deficit -financed government investment, such as infrastructure projects, may lead to a higher capital stock overall
and therefore increase the productive capacity of the economy.
25 Ball and Mankiw, “ What Do Budget Deficits Do?”
Congressional Research Service

6

Fiscal Policy: Economic Effects

from abroad. The inflow of capital from abroad can be beneficial if it al ows for additional
investment in the U.S. economy. However, in exchange for these capital flows, the United States
would be sending a portion of its national income to foreigners in the form of interest payments.
With a larger portion of the capital stock owned by foreigners, rather than Americans, a larger
portion of the U.S. national income would be sent abroad.
Crowding Out Government Spending
Rising public debt may also be of concern due to its associated interest payments. Al else equal,
an increase in the level of public debt wil result in an increase in interest payments that the
government must make each year. Rising interest payments may displace government spending
on more worthwhile programs. In 2019, interest payments on the debt were $375 bil ion. Despite
a roughly 25% increase in the amount of debt held by the public in FY2020,26 interest payments
are down 8.5% from 2019, at $337 bil ion, due in large part to lower interest rates.27
Withdrawing Fiscal Stimulus
As the economy shifts from a recession and into an expansion, broader economic conditions wil
general y improve, whereby unemployment fal s and wages and private spending increases. With
improving economic conditions, policymakers may choose to begin withdrawing fiscal stimulus
by decreasing the size of the deficit or potential y by applying contractionary fiscal policy and
running a budget surplus. As discussed in the previous section, policymakers may choose to
withdraw fiscal stimulus for a number of reasons. First, persistent fiscal stimulus when the
economy is near full capacity can exacerbate the negative consequences of fiscal stimulus, such
as decreasing investment, rising trade deficits, and accelerating inflation. Second, decreasing the
size of the budget deficit slows the growth of public debt.
The government can withdraw fiscal stimulus by increasing taxes, decreasing spending, or a
combination of the two. When the government raises individual income taxes, for example,
individuals have less disposable income and decrease their spending on goods and services in
response. The decrease in spending reduces aggregate demand for goods and services, slowing
economic growth temporarily. Alternatively, when the government reduces spending, it reduces
aggregate demand in the economy, which again temporarily slows economic growth. As such,
when the government reduces the deficit, regardless of the mix of fiscal policy choices used to do
so, aggregate demand is expected to decrease in the near term. However, withdrawing fiscal
stimulus is expected to result in lower interest rates and more investment, a depreciation of the
U.S. dollar and a shrinking trade deficit, and a slowing inflation rate.28 These effects tend to spur
additional economic activity, partly offsetting the decline resulting from withdrawing fiscal
stimulus. Whether the decrease in aggregate demand is problematic for overal economic
performance depends on the overal state of the economy at that time.

26 U.S. Department of the T reasury, Debt Position and Activity Report for September 2019 and September 2020,
https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/pd_debtposactrpt.htm.
27 CBO, Monthly Budget Review: Summary for Fiscal Year 2020, November 9, 2020, p. 5.
28 Blanchard, Macroeconomics, pp. 450-451.
Congressional Research Service

7

link to page 7 link to page 7 link to page 8 Fiscal Policy: Economic Effects

Potential Offsetting Effects to Withdrawing Fiscal Stimulus
Investment and Interest Rates
Withdrawing fiscal stimulus is likely to put downward pressure on domestic interest rates, which
encourages additional spending and investment, increasing economic activity. When the
government decreases its budget deficit, the demand for loanable funds decreases because the
government reduces the amount of those funds it is borrowing. The decrease in demand for
loanable funds decreases the price to borrow those funds (i.e., interest rates decline). Declining
interest rates encourage increased business investment into new capital projects and consumer
spending into durable goods by reducing the cost of borrowing.29
Exchange Rates and the Trade Balance
Withdrawing fiscal stimulus would also be expected to result in a depreciation of the U.S. dollar
and an improved trade balance with the rest of the world. Assuming the shrinking deficit causes a
decline in U.S. interest rates relative to interest rates abroad, individuals in the United States and
abroad would rather make financial investments outside of the United States to benefit from those
higher interest rates. Individuals shifting their investments outside the United States must first
exchange their U.S. dollars for foreign currency, which decreases the value of the U.S. dollar
relative to foreign currencies. As the U.S. dollar depreciates, foreign goods and services become
relatively more expensive for U.S. residents, and U.S. goods and services become relatively less
expensive for foreign individuals.30 This general y results in an improved trade balance as foreign
demand for U.S. goods and services (exports) increases and domestic demand for foreign goods
and services (imports) decreases. An increase in net exports additional y directly increases the
size of the U.S. economy, at least partial y negating the decrease in aggregate demand caused by
the withdrawal of stimulus.
Inflation
When fiscal stimulus is withdrawn, aggregate demand for goods and services in the economy also
tends to shrink, which is expected to slow inflation. Economists general y view relatively low and
stable inflation as beneficial for economic growth, because businesses and consumers are
relatively certain about the future price of goods and can make efficient decisions with respect to
investment and consumption over time.31
Fiscal Contraction Multipliers
The ultimate impact on the economy of withdrawing fiscal stimulus depends on the relative
magnitude of its effects on aggregate demand, interest rates and investment, exchange rates and
the trade deficit, and inflation. The same fiscal multipliers discussed earlier in the “Fiscal
Expansion Multiplier” section can be used to estimate the impact of withdrawing fiscal stimulus
by simply reversing the sign for each multiplier. As shown in Table 1, decreasing government
spending on consumption by 1% of GDP is expected to reduce real GDP by 1.55% after the first

29 Ball and Mankiw, “ What Do Budget Deficits Do?”
30 Ball and Mankiw, “ What Do Budget Deficits Do?”
31 See, for example, Anderson, “ Inflation’s Economic Cost: How Large? How Certain?”
Congressional Research Service

8

link to page 13 Fiscal Policy: Economic Effects

year compared to no change in fiscal policy. Alternatively, increasing labor income taxes by 1%
of GDP is expected to reduce real GDP by 0.23% after the first year.32
Again, monetary policy can be used alongside fiscal policy to affect the overal impact on the
economy. For example, the Federal Reserve could lower interest rates to spur aggregate demand
as the federal government withdraws fiscal stimulus in an effort to offset the decline in aggregate
demand resulting from the shrinking deficit. This could al ow the government to withdraw fiscal
stimulus without decreasing aggregate demand or economic activity.
Fiscal Policy Stance
As shown in Figure 1, the federal government has general y been running a budget deficit for
much of the past 60 years—save for two short periods in the 1960s and 1990s. This suggests that
the federal government has been applying some level of fiscal stimulus to the economy for over
half a century, although the level of stimulus has increased and decreased over time. However,
simply examining the overal budget deficit to judge the level of fiscal stimulus can be
misleading, as the levels of federal spending and revenue differ over time automatical y due to
changes in the state of the economy, rather than deliberate choices made each year by Congress.
During economic expansions, tax revenue tends to increase and spending tends to decrease
automatical y, as rising incomes and employment result in higher average incomes and therefore
greater individual and corporate income tax revenues. Federal spending on income support
programs, such as food stamps and unemployment insurance, tends to fal as fewer people need
financial assistance and unemployment claims fal during economic expansions. The combination
of rising tax revenue and fal ing federal spending tends to improve the government’s budget
deficit. The opposite is true during recessions, when federal spending rises and revenue shrinks.
These cyclical fluctuations in revenue and spending are often referred to as automatic
stabilizers.33 Therefore, when examining fiscal policy, it is often beneficial to estimate the budget
deficit excluding these automatic stabilizers, referred to as the structural deficit, to get a sense of
the affirmative fiscal policy decisions made each year by Congress.

32 Coenen et al., “Effects of Fiscal Stimulus in Structural Models,” p. 46.
33 CBO, How CBO Estimates Automatic Stabilizers, November 2015.
Congressional Research Service

9

link to page 13

Fiscal Policy: Economic Effects

Figure 1. Federal Budget Deficit/Surplus

Source: U.S. Congressional Budget Office, https://www.cbo.gov/publication/56095.
Note: Grey bars denote recessions as determined by the National Bureau of Economic Research. The FY2020
overal deficit as a percent of potential GDP was calculated by dividing the actual FY2020 deficit by CBO’s July
2020 estimate for potential GDP, which can be found at https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2020-07/51135-2020-
07-economicprojections.xlsx.
As shown in Figure 1, budget deficits tend to increase during and shortly after recessions
(denoted by grey bars) as policymakers attempt to buoy the economy by applying fiscal stimulus.
The budget deficit then tends to shrink as the economy enters into recovery and fiscal stimulus is
less necessary to support economic growth. However, in recent years, the federal budget has
bucked this trend. After the structural deficit peaked in 2009 at roughly 7.5% of GDP, it began to
decline through 2014, fal ing to about 2.0% of GDP. Beginning in 2016, despite relatively strong
economic conditions, the structural deficit started to rise again, nearing 5.0% of GDP in 2019.
COVID-19 has caused a deep recession in the U.S. economy,34 and several relief bil s were
enacted in response, including the Coronavirus Preparedness and Response Supplemental
Appropriations Act, 2020 (P.L. 116-123); the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (P.L. 116-
127); the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act (P.L. 116-136); and the
Paycheck Protection Program and Health Care Enhancement Act (P.L. 116-139). Most recently,
additional coronavirus relief was included in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (P.L.
116-260). Relief included direct cash transfers to consumers, forgivable loans to smal businesses,
and increased unemployment benefits, among others. The deficit totaled $3.1 tril ion in FY2020,
equal to 14.9% of nominal GDP—the highest share of GDP since the end of World War II.35 The
relief measures enacted in FY2020—which does not include P.L. 116-260—is projected to

34 For more information on the economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, see CRS Report R46606, COVID-19 and
the U.S. Econom y, by Lida R. Weinstock.
35 CBO, Monthly Budget Review: Summary for Fiscal Year 2020, November 9, 2020, p. 1.
Congressional Research Service

10

Fiscal Policy: Economic Effects

increase FY2020-FY2030 deficits by $2.6 tril ion, so its effect on the deficit is relatively short-
lived.36

Author Information

Lida R. Weinstock

Analyst in Macroeconomic Policy

Acknowledgments
This report was originally authored by Jeffrey Stupak, former CRS Analyst in Macroeconomic Policy.

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should n ot be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

36 CBO, An Update to the Budget Outlook: 2020 to 2030, September 2020, p. 33.
Congressional Research Service
R45723 · VERSION 10 · UPDATED
11

Download PDF

Download EPUB

Revision History

Jan. 21, 2021

HTML · PDF

41% changed

May. 16, 2019

HTML · PDF

Metadata

Topic areas

Economic Policy

Report Type: CRS Report

Source: CRSReports.Congress.gov, EveryCRSReport.com

Raw Metadata: JSON