{"title":"COVID-19、铸币税、量化宽松和财政-货币关系。","authors":"Alex Cukierman","doi":"10.1057/s41294-021-00150-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The huge fiscal expansions triggered by the corona crisis raised debt/GDP ratios to very high levels. This led some economists to reconsider the taboo on seignorage. Following a brief documentation of the crisis impact and aggregate demand policies responses the paper discusses views of academics and policymakers on seignorage. Optimal taxation considerations imply that the decision on allocating deficit financing between debt and seignorage falls within the realm of fiscal authorities-a fact that infringes on central bank (CB) autonomy. The paper explores ideas aimed at improving the tradeoff between those two principles. Implication of cross-country variations in the need to use seignorage is discussed. Comparison of the indirect contribution of quantitative easing (QE) to deficit financing with the direct contribution of seignorage implies that QE is a substitute to seignorage that preserves central bank dominance without much change in existing monetary institutions. Comparison of empirical evidence from the USA during the global financial crisis with the post-WWI German inflation supports the view that for countries experiencing deflationary pressure seignorage is more potent in moving inflation toward its target than QE. Given the current outlook temporary use of seignorage does not appear to involve a substantial risk of inflation.</p>","PeriodicalId":46161,"journal":{"name":"Comparative Economic Studies","volume":"63 2","pages":"181-199"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8043088/pdf/","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"COVID-19, Seignorage, Quantitative Easing and the Fiscal-Monetary Nexus.\",\"authors\":\"Alex Cukierman\",\"doi\":\"10.1057/s41294-021-00150-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The huge fiscal expansions triggered by the corona crisis raised debt/GDP ratios to very high levels. This led some economists to reconsider the taboo on seignorage. Following a brief documentation of the crisis impact and aggregate demand policies responses the paper discusses views of academics and policymakers on seignorage. Optimal taxation considerations imply that the decision on allocating deficit financing between debt and seignorage falls within the realm of fiscal authorities-a fact that infringes on central bank (CB) autonomy. The paper explores ideas aimed at improving the tradeoff between those two principles. Implication of cross-country variations in the need to use seignorage is discussed. Comparison of the indirect contribution of quantitative easing (QE) to deficit financing with the direct contribution of seignorage implies that QE is a substitute to seignorage that preserves central bank dominance without much change in existing monetary institutions. Comparison of empirical evidence from the USA during the global financial crisis with the post-WWI German inflation supports the view that for countries experiencing deflationary pressure seignorage is more potent in moving inflation toward its target than QE. Given the current outlook temporary use of seignorage does not appear to involve a substantial risk of inflation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46161,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Comparative Economic Studies\",\"volume\":\"63 2\",\"pages\":\"181-199\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8043088/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Comparative Economic Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41294-021-00150-7\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/4/13 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Comparative Economic Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41294-021-00150-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/4/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
COVID-19, Seignorage, Quantitative Easing and the Fiscal-Monetary Nexus.
The huge fiscal expansions triggered by the corona crisis raised debt/GDP ratios to very high levels. This led some economists to reconsider the taboo on seignorage. Following a brief documentation of the crisis impact and aggregate demand policies responses the paper discusses views of academics and policymakers on seignorage. Optimal taxation considerations imply that the decision on allocating deficit financing between debt and seignorage falls within the realm of fiscal authorities-a fact that infringes on central bank (CB) autonomy. The paper explores ideas aimed at improving the tradeoff between those two principles. Implication of cross-country variations in the need to use seignorage is discussed. Comparison of the indirect contribution of quantitative easing (QE) to deficit financing with the direct contribution of seignorage implies that QE is a substitute to seignorage that preserves central bank dominance without much change in existing monetary institutions. Comparison of empirical evidence from the USA during the global financial crisis with the post-WWI German inflation supports the view that for countries experiencing deflationary pressure seignorage is more potent in moving inflation toward its target than QE. Given the current outlook temporary use of seignorage does not appear to involve a substantial risk of inflation.
期刊介绍:
Comparative Economic Studies is a journal of the Association for Comparative Economic Studies (ACES). It aims to publish papers that address several objectives: that provide original political economy analysis from a comparative perspective, that are an accessible source for state-of-the-art comparative economics thinking, that encourage cross-fertilization of ideas, that debate directions for future research in comparative economics, and that can provide materials and insights that are relevant for teaching, public policy debate and the media. Comparative Economic Studies welcome both submissions that are explicitly comparative and case studies of single countries or regions. The journal is interested in papers that investigate how economic systems respond to economic transitions, crises and to structural change, brought about by globalization, demographics, institutions, technology, politics, and the environment. While maintaining its position as an important outlet for work on Central Europe and the Former Soviet Union, the scope of Comparative Economic Studies encompasses other areas as well (European Union, Asia, Latin America, and Africa).