Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Canada’s Looming “Fiscal Squeeze” Christopher Ragan Department of Economics McGill University and David Dodge Chair in Monetary Policy C.D. Howe Institute Halifax, May 25 2012 Outline of Talk 1. The basic demographics of aging 2. The looming “fiscal squeeze” 3. Some non-fiscal solutions? 4. Difficult decisions 2 A declining fertility rate has reduced the population growth rate ... Current fertility rate ~ 1.6 children per woman Source: Statistics Canada, medium-growth projection. The 1971 observation is omitted due to a level change in the definition of the series. 3 ... which inevitably leads to population aging. Distribution of the Population By Sex and Age Group 1970, Population: 21.7 M 2008, Population: 33.3 M 2040, Population: 41.2 M 90-94 90-94 90-94 75-79 75-79 75-79 60-64 60-64 60-64 45-49 45-49 45-49 30-34 30-34 30-34 15-19 15-19 15-19 0-4 0-4 0-4 8 6 4 2 0 2 percent of population Male Female 4 6 8 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 8 percent of population Male Female 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 percent of population Male Female Source: Office of the Chief Actuary’s 23rd Actuarial Report on the Canada Pension Plan and Statistics Canada. 4 Aging will markedly reduce the working-age share of the population ... Share of people aged 15-64 in Total Population (percent) 75 70 Historical Projected Entry of the baby boom generation into the labour market. Baby boomers gradually reaching retirement age. 65 60 55 1966 1972 1978 1984 1990 1996 2002 2008 2014 2020 2026 2032 2038 Source: Office of the Chief Actuary’s 23rd Actuarial Report on the Canada Pension Plan. 5 ... and will also cause a shift toward groups with lower LF participation rates … Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Statistics Canada, Labour Force Survey. 6 … resulting in a reduction in the aggregate labour-force participation rate. Source: Data from 1976-2009, Statistics Canada; projections from 2010-2040, Office of the Chief Actuary (2010), 25th Actuarial Report on the Canada Pension Plan. 7 Two different directions for this talk: Future path of living standards Future fiscal implications GDP/POP = (GDP/E) x (E/LF) x (LF/POP) Per capita income = (labour productivity) X (employment rate) X (LF participation rate) Past 40 years Next 40 years 8 Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Statistics Canada. 9 The looming “fiscal squeeze”: Part 1 Over the next ~30 years there will be: reduced growth in real per capita GDP (for any given rate of productivity growth) reduced growth in per capita tax base (growth rate will be cut roughly in half!) 10 The looming “fiscal squeeze”: Part 2 1. Need for more public spending: Health-Care Spending Elderly Benefits 2. Offsetting effects expected to be small: Education, children’s benefits and some social services 11 Not surprisingly, per capita health-care expenditures rise rapidly as we age ... Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Statistics Canada and the Canadian Institute for Health Information. 12 ... but “other factors” will also contribute to rising health-care costs. FYI: Source: Total public spending onandHC increased from 5.4 to 7.5 percent of GDP between 1975 and 2008. OECD (2006), Table A2.3, author’s calculations. 13 Rising elderly benefits will also put upward pressure on government spending as the population ages. Source: Office of the Chief Actuary (2008), 8th Actuarial Report on the OAS program, and author’s calculations. 14 An illustration of the fiscal squeeze: Change in ppts of GDP G/GDP 4.2 “Fiscal Squeeze” T/GDP 0 2015 2020 2030 2040 Some popular non-fiscal solutions? 1. Increase immigration rate? 2. Increase fertility rate? 3. Increase labour-force participation rate? 4. Restrain the growth of health-care spending? 5. Increase the productivity growth rate? 16 What broad fiscal choices are available? 1. Restrain spending growth - especially on non-age-related items? 2. Increase tax rates (or the “tax burden”) 3. Defer the problem - increase borrowing (public debt) 17 How much debt from policy inaction? Change in ppts of GDP G/GDP 4.2 “Fiscal Squeeze” Area = sum of increments to primary deficit T/GDP 0 2015 2020 2030 2040 But recall the dynamics of debt: Δd = x + (r-g)d The triangle on the previous page is the increment to x between 2015 and 2040. The IMF projects that there will be a primary surplus of 1.5% of GDP in 2015. What will happen to r and g? Without policy adjustments, there will be a return to the “debt wall” of the mid 1990s. Total Government Net Debt-to-GDP Ratio 110 100 90 The debt wall? 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 1990 1995 2000 r - g = 0.5 ppt 2005 2010 r - g = 1.0 ppt 2015 2020 r - g = 1.5 ppts Source: Statistics Canada (National Balance Sheet Accounts) and author’s calculations. 2025 2030 2035 2040 r - g = 2.0 ppts 20 So, some fiscal adjustment will be needed. Summary and Final Thoughts 1. A two-part “fiscal squeeze” is heading our way. 2. We must adjust soon – but we have many choices. 3. This is not about small versus big government. 4. There will be renewed Fed-Prov tensions. 5. We need to start talking about fiscal priorities! 22 Thank you. Questions? 24