For a land-locked nation without many natural resources, Switzerland is remarkably successful.
One reason for the country’s success is pro-market policy. Switzerland routinely scores in the top 5 according to both Economic Freedom of the World and Index of Economic Freedom.
More specifically, I’m a big fan of the country’s fiscal policy, especially the “Debt Brake,” which was imposed when voters overwhelmingly adopted the provision (84.7 percent approval) early this century.
There’s always been a debate, however, whether Switzerland’s good outcomes are because of the debt brake, or because of some random reason, such as the sensibility of Swiss voters.
Three academic economists, Michele Salvi, Christoph Schaltegger, and Lukas Schmid, investigated this issue in a study for Kyklos, a scholarly journal published by the University of Basel.
A prominent means to prevent excess debt accumulation is the use of fiscal rules. In fact,fiscal rules focus on securing solvency of governments by concentrating on the intertemporal budget constraint. …there is a strong positive association between constrained fiscal discretion and improved fiscal performance.
…Our paper presents evidence on the effect of a fiscal rule with a strict enforcement mechanism… We analyze the consequences of the centrally imposed balanced budget rule on public debt in Switzerland. …the Swiss debt containment rule stands out as a clearly defined fiscal rule with a constitutional basis that constrains deviating from a balanced budget in the long-term. …The rule consists of a simple mechanism stating that expenditure may not exceed revenues over the course of an economic cycle. …The debt containment rule brings a“top-down”element into the budgeting process, which has a strong disciplinary appeal and leads to more accurate budgeting. …one key aspect is the fact that the debt containment rule sets a clear expenditure ceiling.
The key parts from the above excerpt are “expenditure may not exceed” and “clear expenditure ceiling.”
Those statements ratify my oft-made point that the debt brake is really a spending cap. And spending caps are far and away the only effective macro-fiscal rule.
The policy certainly has generated good results for Switzerland. Here’s what the authors found when thy crunched numbers to compare the country’s current fiscal trajectory with what would have happened without a spending cap.
To construct the counterfactual outcome of the debt ratio for Switzerland without a debt containment rule, we select a control group…countries expected to be driven by a similar structural process as Switzerland. …Due to the availability of comprehensive debt data, the observation period is restricted to last from 1980 until 2010. …we divide the time period into a pre-treatment period from 1980 to 2002 and a postintervention period from 2003 to 2010. …Figure 2 displays the central government debt ratio for Switzerland and its synthetic counterpart during the study period. …In 2003, the two debt ratio curves start to diverge. …it appears that the introduction of the debt containment rule led to a substantial and persistent decrease in the debt ratio in Switzerland.
And here’s the relevant set of charts from the study.
Here’s one more sentence I want to cite since it echoes the argument I’ve made to my Keynesian friends about how they also should support a Swiss-style spending cap.
The debt containment rule has made a significant contribution to switching from a procyclical to a cyclically appropriate fiscal policy.
Simply stated, the political tradeoff embedded in the debt brake is that politicians get to modestly increase spending during a downturn, even though revenues are falling, but they also can only enact modest spending increases during growth years, even if revenue is growing much faster.
By the way, you will have noticed that the study focused on how the debt brake helped to reduce red ink.
Regular readers know that I’m far more interested in focusing on the real fiscal problem, which is excessive government spending.
So I’ll close by looking at some additional evidence from Switzerland. Here’s a chart, based on IMF data, showing that the growth rate of spending fell sharply after the debt brake was adopted.
I looked at the 2003-2010 period, since it matched the years in the study discussed above.
But I also calculated the spending growth rate for 2003-2019 and confirmed that the debt brake’s success hasn’t just been a temporary phenomenon.
P.S. Click here for a short presentation on the debt brake, as well as similar presentations on Hong Kong’s spending cap and Colorado’s TABOR spending cap.
[…] I agree with him, but the real benefit of the debt brake is that it restrains spending. […]
[…] this month, I wrote separate columns about the spending cap in Switzerland (the “debt brake“) and the spending cap in Colorado […]
[…] this month, I wrote separate columns about the spending cap in Switzerland (the “debt brake“) and the spending cap in Colorado […]
[…] There’s plenty of academic evidence for Switzerland’s debt brake. But what’s more surprising are that pro-spending cap studies from […]
[…] There’s plenty of academic evidence for Switzerland’s debt brake. But what’s more surprising are that pro-spending cap studies from […]
[…] There’s plenty of academic evidence for Switzerland’s debt brake. But what’s more surprising are that pro-spending cap […]
[…] it has specific policies that warm my heart, such as a very successful spending cap (sort of like the Taxpayer Bill of Rights in Colorado) as well as a retirement system based on […]
[…] it has specific policies that warm my heart, such as a very successful spending cap (sort of like the Taxpayer Bill of Rights in Colorado) as well as a retirement system based on […]
[…] it has specific policies that warm my heart, such as a very successful spending cap (sort of like the Taxpayer Bill of Rights in Colorado) as well as a retirement system based on […]
[…] as the “debt brake,” the rule was approved by 84.7 percent of voters back in 2001 and took effect with the 2003 […]
[…] as the “debt brake,” the rule was approved by 84.7 percent of voters back in 2001 and took effect with the 2003 […]
[…] on the left ever tries to produce an alternative explanation for the success of Switzerland’s spending […]
[…] and Kwarteng also should have announced a spending cap, modeled on either the Swiss Debt Brake or Colorado’s […]
[…] and Kwarteng also should have announced a spending cap, modeled on either the Swiss Debt Brake or Colorado’s […]
[…] but I have been telling them that they need to pursue a spending limit amendment (like the Swiss “Debt Brake” or Article 107 of Hong Kong’s Basic Law) rather than a balanced budget […]
[…] but I have been telling them that they need to pursue a spending limit amendment (like the Swiss “Debt Brake” or Article 107 of Hong Kong’s Basic Law) rather than a balanced budget […]
[…] but I have been telling them that they need to pursue a spending limit amendment (like the Swiss “Debt Brake” or Article 107 of Hong Kong’s Basic Law) rather than a balanced budget […]
[…] but I have been telling them that they need to pursue a spending limit amendment (like the Swiss “Debt Brake” or Article 107 of Hong Kong’s Basic Law) rather than a balanced budget […]
[…] I have been telling them that they need to pursue a spending limit amendment (like the Swiss “Debt Brake” or Article 107 of Hong Kong’s Basic Law) rather than a balanced budget […]
[…] thanks to the nation’s very effective spending cap, you can see from this OECD chart that Switzerland is in a far stronger position than […]
[…] thanks to the nation’s very effective spending cap, you can see from this OECD chart that Switzerland is in a far stronger position than […]
[…] add a fourth point. governments (such as Switzerland) with successful spending caps have a very good track record of budget surpluses. The same can’t […]
[…] add a fourth point. governments (such as Switzerland) with successful spending caps have a very good track record of budget surpluses. The same […]
[…] close by observing that Barbados never would have gotten into trouble if it had a Swiss-style spending cap. If government spending had been allowed to grow only 3 percent each year starting in […]
[…] P.S. A spending cap also could be modeled on Switzerland’s very successful “debt brake.” […]
[…] P.S. A spending cap also could be modeled on Switzerland’s very successful “debt brake.” […]
[…] actually has a spending cap in its constitution, and similar fiscal rules also exist in Hong Kong and the state of […]
[…] spending cap (called “the debt brake“) is probably the best system in the world. It does have an escape clause for emergencies, so the government did increase spending during the […]
[…] spending cap (called “the debt brake“) is probably the best system in the world. It does have an escape clause for emergencies, so the government did increase spending during the […]
[…] the aforementioned chart 2, and there are a lot of depressing numbers, though notice how Switzerland does better than other […]
[…] Foundation, I explained (with a frozen look) why spending caps (such as Switzerland’s “debt brake“) are better than balanced budget […]
[…] on the left ever tries to produce an alternative explanation for the success of Switzerland’s spending […]
[…] The United States needs a constitutional spending cap, sort of like the “debt brake” that has been producing positive results in Switzerland for the past two decades. […]
[…] actually has a spending cap in its constitution, and similar fiscal rules also exist in Hong Kong and the state of […]
[…] actually has a spending cap in its constitution, and similar fiscal rules also exist in Hong Kong and the state of […]
[…] the aforementioned chart 2, and there are a lot of depressing numbers, though notice how Switzerland does better than other […]
[…] there was a brief indirect mention of the nation’s spending cap, which also has been a big […]
[…] there was a brief indirect mention of the nation’s spending cap, which also has been a big […]
[…] something like TABOR. Or, they can demonstrate their worldliness by copying Switzerland’s “debt brake,” which is another constitutional provision to limit […]
[…] on the left ever tries to produce an alternative explanation for the success of Switzerland’s spending […]
[…] on the left ever tries to produce an alternative explanation for the success of Switzerland’s spending […]
[…] like TABOR. Or, they can demonstrate their worldliness by copying Switzerland’s “debt brake,” which is another constitutional provision to limit […]
[…] the aforementioned chart 2, and there are a lot of depressing numbers, though notice how Switzerland does better than other […]
[…] the aforementioned chart 2, and there are a lot of depressing numbers, though notice how Switzerland does better than other […]
[…] travel to Switzerland, which is a sensible country (at least by standards of the modern world) with all sorts of admirable […]
[…] Switzerland and Hong Kong (as well as Colorado) have constitutional spending caps, which would be the ideal […]
[…] Switzerland and Hong Kong (as well as Colorado) have constitutional spending caps, which would be the ideal […]
[…] Switzerland and Hong Kong (as well as Colorado) have constitutional spending caps, which would be the ideal […]
[…] For what it’s worth, the U.S. would be in great shape today if, back in 2000, lawmakers had adopted a Swiss-style spending cap. […]
[…] perhaps he could adopt an a la carte approach, picking the best of the best from around the world (Switzerland’s fiscal rule, Monaco’s tax system, Chile’s private pension regime, […]
A splendid article. The spending constraint must also have an important influence on the nature of government spending. For instance, a focus on what citizens regard as essential rather than a focus on the preferences of politicians.
Reblogged this on boudica.us.
The best incentive for legislators is your courage to cast a Libertarian vote. Once a politician loses by a margin narrower than the Libertarian vote slice, their party moves to change the platform and laws to avoid repeating that outcome.
We are getting to the point where a debt break is necessary, but the incentives for legislators are all in the other direction.
To resolve this, we should have a bonus for complying with the debt break. For example, a bonus of 2x salary would cost ~$250 million. Discretionary Spending alone is over $1T. Money well spent, unless excesses are allowed, because “the money is necessary for this emergency”. Heard that one before. Bonuses must be for absolute total spending. If they want to give extra money out, they should be willing to pass on a ~$250K bonus.
If a debt brake is in place, we have less risk of a monetary blowout, which could happen at any time, given one more QE special.