A Generational Accounts Approach to Long-Term Public Finance in ...
A Generational Accounts Approach to Long Term Public Finance in the UK
Mark Chandler Mike G Phelps
A Generational Accounts Approach to Long-Term Public Finance in the UK 1.
Introduction
1.1
A long-term view of public finances is important given that most people are concerned for their welfare beyond the next few years. Residents of the UK, both those with their own children and others, may also be concerned for the welfare of future generations. A certain level of provision of government services that is affordable currently, given present government revenues, may not be affordable in future. This could happen as a result of future demographic change creating an increased number of clients for health services and social care. Conversely, current pressures on public finance may ease with time if, for example, the working population were to increase due to increased participation rates.
1.2
In the UK recent budget debate has been dominated by the impact of the recession of 2008–09. It has been recognised that the recession and associated credit crunch resulted not just in short-term budget deficits but also budget deficits that would extend into the long-term if action is not taken. This has increased the focus on long-term public finances. The Government has recognised the need for independent budgetary projections. It thus created the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) to produce projections and long-term analysis that are not subject to ministerial control. The OBR has, for example, been charged with analysis of the costs of the ageing population on public finances.
1.3
The impact of current decisions across future generations is of interest both for what it can tell us about sustainability of those decisions and because of concerns with generational fairness. Sustainability may be a problem if the present value of future government receipts, given current tax rates and expected future economic growth, is less that the present value of all prospective payments (not just those to which government are legally committed), both those that benefit individuals, such as state pensions and healthcare, and collective services such as defence.
1.4
Generational fairness (between all generations, or birth cohorts, alive now and those not yet born) has become a more salient issue since the standard assumption that future generations will have a higher standard of living than current generations has come into question. Current doubts over this assumption centre on concerns over environmental pollution, the ageing population and overcrowding from an increased population. Hence the generational perspective on long-term public finances has a salience which was less acute a decade ago. Generational accounting allows the calculation of the average net tax rate on labour income which those not yet born would have to pay to sustain current plans into the future. If this rate is different from the current rate, that can be taken as an indication of unfairness between those alive now and those yet to be born.
1
2.
What are generational accounts?
2.1
Overview
2.1.1 Generational accounts is a tool that has been developed by economists to
look at the burden on future generations if current levels of taxation and services are maintained (Auerbach et al 1994). There are two important aspects. First, we work out the present value of the net tax liabilities, the amount of tax people alive today will pay after allowing for the cost of the individual services and other benefits that people receive from government, notably education, healthcare and state benefits. Most of these are agerelated, so estimates are prepared for different age groups and existing profiles across ages are extrapolated into the future. In a narrow sense, these net tax estimates are what is meant by generational accounts. 2.1.2 The other important element in using the generational accounts is the so-
called intertemporal budget constraint: everything must be paid for by somebody, either those alive now or those not yet born, and postponed payments have to be paid with interest. More formally, the present value of all non-individual government spending plus the initial value of (net) government indebtedness must equal the present value of future net tax payments, broken down between those paid by current generations and those paid by future generations (those yet to be born). This constraint is equivalent to requiring that interest on the government debt is paid from taxes rather than future borrowing. It therefore prevents debt rising for ever as a proportion of GDP, which would happen if, as is normally the case, the real interest rate on government debt exceeds the long-run growth rate in the economy. 2.1.3 Given this constraint, once we know the present value of future net tax
payments by those now alive, the present value of future collective government spending (on roads, defence, etc) and the existing government (net) debt, it is possible to work out various indicators of the effect on those yet unborn and of fiscal sustainability. We can then work out what the present value of future net payments by those yet unborn would have to be to satisfy the constraint. This could be expressed in various ways, for example as the implied change in the average tax rate on labour income for future generations necessary to sustain existing spending patterns projected into the future, assuming, say, that labour incomes grew at the same rate as longterm labour productivity growth. The answer gives an indication of intergenerational fairness. 2.1.4 Moreover, if the rate has to change to preserve balance, for example to rise,
this also gives an indication that current policy is not sustainable in the sense that current rates of benefit and tax cannot remain the same in the future without violating the budget constraint. 2.1.5 These calculations are set out in more detail in the following sections. 2.2
The starting point is age–sex profiles…
2.2.1 Breakdowns of expenditure and revenue by age and sex must first be
calculated. Expenditure on individual services, such as healthcare, and on social security and welfare benefits are broken down by age and sex of
2
recipient. Revenues are broken down by age and sex of taxpayer. These breakdowns are interesting in their own right as they give a picture of the distribution of the benefits and costs of particular programmes, benefits or taxes. An example of the age profile for males of higher education expenditure is shown below. It shows the percentage of total expenditure on higher education spent on services to male students of each age with separate lines for full-time and part-time students.
Source: Treasury 2009, p. 8. 2.2.2 Given the corresponding profiles for all individually attributable taxes and
government spending, the sum of the expenditure profiles is subtracted from the sum of the tax profiles to obtain the net tax age profile. This shows tax paid by an individual, at each age, net of individual benefits received, both monetary and in-kind. Note that this calculation excludes services consumed collectively such as defence. The net tax profile will typically have negative values during childhood and at the end of life as little or no tax is paid but healthcare and social care benefits are received. It will tend to peak with positive values in the middle of life as individuals in their peak earning and spending years pay relatively high taxes and receive fewer benefits. 2.3
…which are then combined with ONS population projections...
2.3.1 To project future spending, the spending per head on a resident of a certain
age and sex are combined with projections of the numbers of residents with that age and sex each year into the future. The Office for National Statistics (ONS) publishes detailed population projections for years up to 75 years into the future. 2.3.2 The figure below shows a graphical presentation of the population distribution
by age for males and females in 2008 with a superimposed line showing the projection of this distribution for 2033.
3
Source: ONS 2009, p. 4 2.3.3 In addition to these central, or principal, projections ONS also produces
projections based on alternate assumptions concerning future changes in life expectancy, fertility and migration. 2.3.4 For generational accounts, the way these projections are used is slightly
different to that illustrated above. In generational accounts, the word generation refers to a cohort of individuals born in the same year. For each birth cohort, or generation, the population projections allow us to see how many of those born in a particular year are still alive at a certain point in the future. 2.4
…enabling construction of total net taxation profiles for each generation…
2.4.1 Multiplying the average net taxation of an individual within a particular
generation at any year in the future by the number of persons alive from that generation at that point in the future gives us the total net taxation paid by that generation in that year. Thus, we are able to see the total net taxation paid by a generation at each year as they age into the future. Combining this total net taxation profile for the generation with an appropriate discount rate, we find the present value of the net taxation paid by that generation over its lifetime, where the lifetime of the generation is the number of years that at least one member of the generation is still alive. 2.4.2 We can take this present value over the whole lifetime of a generation or over
a part of the lifetime starting from a certain age. Typically, the present value for a young adult is higher than that of a newborn since the young adult will no longer receive the education and healthcare they received in childhood but still has almost their entire tax bill ahead of them. This is illustrated in the table below.
4
Source: Cardarelli et al 2000, p. F563. 2.4.3 In the example shown in the above table, the present value of income tax
payments over the remaining lifetime is higher at age 15 than at age 0. This is because at age 15 the same tax payments remain but there is less time remaining before each payment and so they are discounted less. Also noticeable is the continuous fall in the present value of remaining education benefits from the age of 5 as the amount of the service that remains to be received falls. The net effect of the various taxes and transfers is that the present value of remaining net taxes (GA) reaches a peak at age 25, when most tax remains to be paid but many services have already been received. It then declines so that by age 55 the present value of remaining transfers is higher than that of remaining tax payments and GA becomes negative. GA continues to decline until it reaches a minimum at age 65. From that point on, the present value of remaining pensions declines and thus GA rises although it remains negative. 2.5
…that can then be plugged into the constraint that the present value of revenue has to be equal to the present value of spending
2.5.1 The present values of net taxation arrived at above for each generation can
then be compared with the future spending path of the government on nonage-specific programmes. These are the programmes of spending on services that are consumed collectively, such as defence. Since they are consumed collectively, the level of provision does not depend on the age or sex profile of the population. Generational accounts make assumptions about the spending growth on non-age-specific programmes into the future and also assume that the current stock of outstanding government debt has to be serviced in the long-term. The intertemporal budget constraint states that the present value of revenue has to be equal to the present value of spending plus initial debt. In terms of the generational accounts, this means that the present value of future net tax payments by all the generations has to be equal to the present value of non-age-related spending plus debt.
5
Present value of net tax of those now alive
+ Present value of net tax of generations yet to be born
= Present value of non age/sex related spending
+ Government net debt
2.5.2 There are two standard ways to assess this. In both cases, the present value
of net taxation for generations currently alive is simply taken from a table such as the one above giving the net present value of taxation for the average individual at each age combined with the numbers of people currently alive at each age. Where the approaches differ is in the treatment of generations yet to be born. 2.6
The intergenerational balance gap
2.6.1 The intergenerational balance gap is based on the simple assumption that,
when they are born, all future generations face the same present value of net taxation, adjusted for growth, as current newborns. In that case, to derive today’s present value of net tax payments by future generations we simply have to discount them by the number of years in the future that they are born and combine them with the numbers of people we project to be born in each generation and the growth in labour income. If we do this for all yet to be born generations, we arrive at the total present value of net tax payments by future generations. 2.6.2 Taking the above approach, we can then sum the present value of net tax
payments by future generations with the present value of net tax payments by currently alive generations and see how this differs from the present value of future intergenerational balance non-age-related spending commitments. This difference is the gap and can be expressed as a proportion of current GDP. It gives an indication of whether there is a fiscal sustainability problem if people in the future are treated in the same way as current newborns. 2.7
The intertemporal budget gap
2.7.1 The alternative approach makes a different assumption about the tax
payments of future generations. Future generations could be treated in the same way, i.e with the same relative profiles as all of those now alive, instead of just current newborns. This gives the intertemporal budget gap. It will be smaller than the generational balance gap if future newborns are treated less favourably, in terms of their net lifetime taxes, than current newborns. This could arise, for example, because of announced future change to benefit levels. For example if benefits are indexed to prices instead of earnings the (growth-adjusted) net lifetime tax payments of the generation born in ten years time will be higher than those born tomorrow (because labour income will have grown but benefits will not have risen commensurately. This gap therefore answers the question of whether more adjustment is needed for sustainability even given that future generations are to be treated in some respects differently from those alive now. 2.7.2 Given either of these gaps we can ask how big a change in a given fiscal
variable would be needed to bring the intertemporal budget into balance. A standard example of this in the literature is to ask how big a rise in the basic rate of income tax would be required to keep expected future tax rates constant?
6
3.
The work being done by ONS and NIESR
3.1
A series of articles published in the Economic and Labour Market Review in July 2009 argued that new approaches are needed to develop financial statistics for policy. In particular, one recommendation was that ONS should develop measures of public sector liabilities (Maitland-Smith 2009). Hence, at the end of 2009 ONS commissioned the National Institute for Economic and Social Research (NIESR) to produce a set of generational accounts for the UK. These results are being delivered to the Office for Budget Responsibility and the Treasury to assist with the 2010 Comprehensive Spending Review. The model constructed by NIESR allows for changing assumptions and data to be incorporated to produce new estimates as required.
References Auerbach A, Gokhale J and Kotlikoff L (1994) ‘Generational Accounting: A Meaningful Way to Evaluate Fiscal Policy’, The Journal of Economic Perspectives 8, pp 73–94. Cardarelli R, Sefton J and Kotlokoff L (2000) ‘Generational Accounting in the UK’, The Economic Journal 110, pp F547–F574. HM Treasury (2009) ‘Long-term Public Finance Report: An Analysis of Fiscal Sustainability’, December, available at: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100407010852/http://www.hmtreasury.gov.uk/prebud_pbr09_longtermfinances.htm Maitland-Smith F (2009) ‘Government Financial Liabilities Beyond Public Sector Net Debt’, Economic and Labour Market Review 3, pp 43–50. Office for National Statistics (2009) ‘National Population Projections, 2008 Based’, 21 October 2009, available at: www.statistics.gov.uk/statbase/Product.asp?vlnk=8519
7
Copyright and reproduction A National Statistics publication © Crown copyright 2009 National Statistics are produced to high professional standards
Published with the permission of the Office of Public Sector
set out in the Code of Practice for Official Statistics. They are
Information (OPSI)
produced free from political influence. You may use this publication (excluding logos) free of charge in any format for research, private study or internal circulation
About us
within an organisation providing it is used accurately and not in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as
The Office for National Statistics
Crown copyright and you must give the title of the source
The Office for National Statistics (ONS) is the executive office of
publication. Where we have identified any third party copyright
the UK Statistics Authority, a non-ministerial department which reports directly to Parliament. ONS is the UK government’s
material you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.
single largest statistical producer. It compiles information about
For re-use of this material you must apply for a Click-Use Public
the UK’s society and economy, and provides the evidence-base
Sector Information (PSI) Licence from:
for policy and decision-making, the allocation of resources, and
Office of Public Sector Information, Crown Copyright Licensing and Public Sector Information, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 4DU
public accountability. The Director-General of ONS reports directly to the National Statistician who is the Authority's Chief Executive and the Head of the Government Statistical Service.
The Government Statistical Service The Government Statistical Service (GSS) is a network of professional statisticians and their staff operating both within the Office for National Statistics and across more than 30 other government departments and agencies.
Contacts This publication For information about the content of this publication, contact Mike G Phelps Tel: 01633 456380 Email: [email protected] Other customer enquiries ONS Customer Contact Centre Tel: 0845 601 3034 International: +44 (0)845 601 3034 Minicom: 01633 812399 Email: [email protected] Fax: 01633 652747 Post: Room 1015, Government Buildings, Cardiff Road, Newport, South Wales NP10 8XG www.ons.gov.uk Media enquiries Tel: 0845 604 1858 Email: [email protected]
Tel: 020 8876 3444 www.opsi.gov.uk/click-use/index.htm
Mark Chandler Mike G Phelps
A Generational Accounts Approach to Long-Term Public Finance in the UK 1.
Introduction
1.1
A long-term view of public finances is important given that most people are concerned for their welfare beyond the next few years. Residents of the UK, both those with their own children and others, may also be concerned for the welfare of future generations. A certain level of provision of government services that is affordable currently, given present government revenues, may not be affordable in future. This could happen as a result of future demographic change creating an increased number of clients for health services and social care. Conversely, current pressures on public finance may ease with time if, for example, the working population were to increase due to increased participation rates.
1.2
In the UK recent budget debate has been dominated by the impact of the recession of 2008–09. It has been recognised that the recession and associated credit crunch resulted not just in short-term budget deficits but also budget deficits that would extend into the long-term if action is not taken. This has increased the focus on long-term public finances. The Government has recognised the need for independent budgetary projections. It thus created the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) to produce projections and long-term analysis that are not subject to ministerial control. The OBR has, for example, been charged with analysis of the costs of the ageing population on public finances.
1.3
The impact of current decisions across future generations is of interest both for what it can tell us about sustainability of those decisions and because of concerns with generational fairness. Sustainability may be a problem if the present value of future government receipts, given current tax rates and expected future economic growth, is less that the present value of all prospective payments (not just those to which government are legally committed), both those that benefit individuals, such as state pensions and healthcare, and collective services such as defence.
1.4
Generational fairness (between all generations, or birth cohorts, alive now and those not yet born) has become a more salient issue since the standard assumption that future generations will have a higher standard of living than current generations has come into question. Current doubts over this assumption centre on concerns over environmental pollution, the ageing population and overcrowding from an increased population. Hence the generational perspective on long-term public finances has a salience which was less acute a decade ago. Generational accounting allows the calculation of the average net tax rate on labour income which those not yet born would have to pay to sustain current plans into the future. If this rate is different from the current rate, that can be taken as an indication of unfairness between those alive now and those yet to be born.
1
2.
What are generational accounts?
2.1
Overview
2.1.1 Generational accounts is a tool that has been developed by economists to
look at the burden on future generations if current levels of taxation and services are maintained (Auerbach et al 1994). There are two important aspects. First, we work out the present value of the net tax liabilities, the amount of tax people alive today will pay after allowing for the cost of the individual services and other benefits that people receive from government, notably education, healthcare and state benefits. Most of these are agerelated, so estimates are prepared for different age groups and existing profiles across ages are extrapolated into the future. In a narrow sense, these net tax estimates are what is meant by generational accounts. 2.1.2 The other important element in using the generational accounts is the so-
called intertemporal budget constraint: everything must be paid for by somebody, either those alive now or those not yet born, and postponed payments have to be paid with interest. More formally, the present value of all non-individual government spending plus the initial value of (net) government indebtedness must equal the present value of future net tax payments, broken down between those paid by current generations and those paid by future generations (those yet to be born). This constraint is equivalent to requiring that interest on the government debt is paid from taxes rather than future borrowing. It therefore prevents debt rising for ever as a proportion of GDP, which would happen if, as is normally the case, the real interest rate on government debt exceeds the long-run growth rate in the economy. 2.1.3 Given this constraint, once we know the present value of future net tax
payments by those now alive, the present value of future collective government spending (on roads, defence, etc) and the existing government (net) debt, it is possible to work out various indicators of the effect on those yet unborn and of fiscal sustainability. We can then work out what the present value of future net payments by those yet unborn would have to be to satisfy the constraint. This could be expressed in various ways, for example as the implied change in the average tax rate on labour income for future generations necessary to sustain existing spending patterns projected into the future, assuming, say, that labour incomes grew at the same rate as longterm labour productivity growth. The answer gives an indication of intergenerational fairness. 2.1.4 Moreover, if the rate has to change to preserve balance, for example to rise,
this also gives an indication that current policy is not sustainable in the sense that current rates of benefit and tax cannot remain the same in the future without violating the budget constraint. 2.1.5 These calculations are set out in more detail in the following sections. 2.2
The starting point is age–sex profiles…
2.2.1 Breakdowns of expenditure and revenue by age and sex must first be
calculated. Expenditure on individual services, such as healthcare, and on social security and welfare benefits are broken down by age and sex of
2
recipient. Revenues are broken down by age and sex of taxpayer. These breakdowns are interesting in their own right as they give a picture of the distribution of the benefits and costs of particular programmes, benefits or taxes. An example of the age profile for males of higher education expenditure is shown below. It shows the percentage of total expenditure on higher education spent on services to male students of each age with separate lines for full-time and part-time students.
Source: Treasury 2009, p. 8. 2.2.2 Given the corresponding profiles for all individually attributable taxes and
government spending, the sum of the expenditure profiles is subtracted from the sum of the tax profiles to obtain the net tax age profile. This shows tax paid by an individual, at each age, net of individual benefits received, both monetary and in-kind. Note that this calculation excludes services consumed collectively such as defence. The net tax profile will typically have negative values during childhood and at the end of life as little or no tax is paid but healthcare and social care benefits are received. It will tend to peak with positive values in the middle of life as individuals in their peak earning and spending years pay relatively high taxes and receive fewer benefits. 2.3
…which are then combined with ONS population projections...
2.3.1 To project future spending, the spending per head on a resident of a certain
age and sex are combined with projections of the numbers of residents with that age and sex each year into the future. The Office for National Statistics (ONS) publishes detailed population projections for years up to 75 years into the future. 2.3.2 The figure below shows a graphical presentation of the population distribution
by age for males and females in 2008 with a superimposed line showing the projection of this distribution for 2033.
3
Source: ONS 2009, p. 4 2.3.3 In addition to these central, or principal, projections ONS also produces
projections based on alternate assumptions concerning future changes in life expectancy, fertility and migration. 2.3.4 For generational accounts, the way these projections are used is slightly
different to that illustrated above. In generational accounts, the word generation refers to a cohort of individuals born in the same year. For each birth cohort, or generation, the population projections allow us to see how many of those born in a particular year are still alive at a certain point in the future. 2.4
…enabling construction of total net taxation profiles for each generation…
2.4.1 Multiplying the average net taxation of an individual within a particular
generation at any year in the future by the number of persons alive from that generation at that point in the future gives us the total net taxation paid by that generation in that year. Thus, we are able to see the total net taxation paid by a generation at each year as they age into the future. Combining this total net taxation profile for the generation with an appropriate discount rate, we find the present value of the net taxation paid by that generation over its lifetime, where the lifetime of the generation is the number of years that at least one member of the generation is still alive. 2.4.2 We can take this present value over the whole lifetime of a generation or over
a part of the lifetime starting from a certain age. Typically, the present value for a young adult is higher than that of a newborn since the young adult will no longer receive the education and healthcare they received in childhood but still has almost their entire tax bill ahead of them. This is illustrated in the table below.
4
Source: Cardarelli et al 2000, p. F563. 2.4.3 In the example shown in the above table, the present value of income tax
payments over the remaining lifetime is higher at age 15 than at age 0. This is because at age 15 the same tax payments remain but there is less time remaining before each payment and so they are discounted less. Also noticeable is the continuous fall in the present value of remaining education benefits from the age of 5 as the amount of the service that remains to be received falls. The net effect of the various taxes and transfers is that the present value of remaining net taxes (GA) reaches a peak at age 25, when most tax remains to be paid but many services have already been received. It then declines so that by age 55 the present value of remaining transfers is higher than that of remaining tax payments and GA becomes negative. GA continues to decline until it reaches a minimum at age 65. From that point on, the present value of remaining pensions declines and thus GA rises although it remains negative. 2.5
…that can then be plugged into the constraint that the present value of revenue has to be equal to the present value of spending
2.5.1 The present values of net taxation arrived at above for each generation can
then be compared with the future spending path of the government on nonage-specific programmes. These are the programmes of spending on services that are consumed collectively, such as defence. Since they are consumed collectively, the level of provision does not depend on the age or sex profile of the population. Generational accounts make assumptions about the spending growth on non-age-specific programmes into the future and also assume that the current stock of outstanding government debt has to be serviced in the long-term. The intertemporal budget constraint states that the present value of revenue has to be equal to the present value of spending plus initial debt. In terms of the generational accounts, this means that the present value of future net tax payments by all the generations has to be equal to the present value of non-age-related spending plus debt.
5
Present value of net tax of those now alive
+ Present value of net tax of generations yet to be born
= Present value of non age/sex related spending
+ Government net debt
2.5.2 There are two standard ways to assess this. In both cases, the present value
of net taxation for generations currently alive is simply taken from a table such as the one above giving the net present value of taxation for the average individual at each age combined with the numbers of people currently alive at each age. Where the approaches differ is in the treatment of generations yet to be born. 2.6
The intergenerational balance gap
2.6.1 The intergenerational balance gap is based on the simple assumption that,
when they are born, all future generations face the same present value of net taxation, adjusted for growth, as current newborns. In that case, to derive today’s present value of net tax payments by future generations we simply have to discount them by the number of years in the future that they are born and combine them with the numbers of people we project to be born in each generation and the growth in labour income. If we do this for all yet to be born generations, we arrive at the total present value of net tax payments by future generations. 2.6.2 Taking the above approach, we can then sum the present value of net tax
payments by future generations with the present value of net tax payments by currently alive generations and see how this differs from the present value of future intergenerational balance non-age-related spending commitments. This difference is the gap and can be expressed as a proportion of current GDP. It gives an indication of whether there is a fiscal sustainability problem if people in the future are treated in the same way as current newborns. 2.7
The intertemporal budget gap
2.7.1 The alternative approach makes a different assumption about the tax
payments of future generations. Future generations could be treated in the same way, i.e with the same relative profiles as all of those now alive, instead of just current newborns. This gives the intertemporal budget gap. It will be smaller than the generational balance gap if future newborns are treated less favourably, in terms of their net lifetime taxes, than current newborns. This could arise, for example, because of announced future change to benefit levels. For example if benefits are indexed to prices instead of earnings the (growth-adjusted) net lifetime tax payments of the generation born in ten years time will be higher than those born tomorrow (because labour income will have grown but benefits will not have risen commensurately. This gap therefore answers the question of whether more adjustment is needed for sustainability even given that future generations are to be treated in some respects differently from those alive now. 2.7.2 Given either of these gaps we can ask how big a change in a given fiscal
variable would be needed to bring the intertemporal budget into balance. A standard example of this in the literature is to ask how big a rise in the basic rate of income tax would be required to keep expected future tax rates constant?
6
3.
The work being done by ONS and NIESR
3.1
A series of articles published in the Economic and Labour Market Review in July 2009 argued that new approaches are needed to develop financial statistics for policy. In particular, one recommendation was that ONS should develop measures of public sector liabilities (Maitland-Smith 2009). Hence, at the end of 2009 ONS commissioned the National Institute for Economic and Social Research (NIESR) to produce a set of generational accounts for the UK. These results are being delivered to the Office for Budget Responsibility and the Treasury to assist with the 2010 Comprehensive Spending Review. The model constructed by NIESR allows for changing assumptions and data to be incorporated to produce new estimates as required.
References Auerbach A, Gokhale J and Kotlikoff L (1994) ‘Generational Accounting: A Meaningful Way to Evaluate Fiscal Policy’, The Journal of Economic Perspectives 8, pp 73–94. Cardarelli R, Sefton J and Kotlokoff L (2000) ‘Generational Accounting in the UK’, The Economic Journal 110, pp F547–F574. HM Treasury (2009) ‘Long-term Public Finance Report: An Analysis of Fiscal Sustainability’, December, available at: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100407010852/http://www.hmtreasury.gov.uk/prebud_pbr09_longtermfinances.htm Maitland-Smith F (2009) ‘Government Financial Liabilities Beyond Public Sector Net Debt’, Economic and Labour Market Review 3, pp 43–50. Office for National Statistics (2009) ‘National Population Projections, 2008 Based’, 21 October 2009, available at: www.statistics.gov.uk/statbase/Product.asp?vlnk=8519
7
Copyright and reproduction A National Statistics publication © Crown copyright 2009 National Statistics are produced to high professional standards
Published with the permission of the Office of Public Sector
set out in the Code of Practice for Official Statistics. They are
Information (OPSI)
produced free from political influence. You may use this publication (excluding logos) free of charge in any format for research, private study or internal circulation
About us
within an organisation providing it is used accurately and not in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as
The Office for National Statistics
Crown copyright and you must give the title of the source
The Office for National Statistics (ONS) is the executive office of
publication. Where we have identified any third party copyright
the UK Statistics Authority, a non-ministerial department which reports directly to Parliament. ONS is the UK government’s
material you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.
single largest statistical producer. It compiles information about
For re-use of this material you must apply for a Click-Use Public
the UK’s society and economy, and provides the evidence-base
Sector Information (PSI) Licence from:
for policy and decision-making, the allocation of resources, and
Office of Public Sector Information, Crown Copyright Licensing and Public Sector Information, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 4DU
public accountability. The Director-General of ONS reports directly to the National Statistician who is the Authority's Chief Executive and the Head of the Government Statistical Service.
The Government Statistical Service The Government Statistical Service (GSS) is a network of professional statisticians and their staff operating both within the Office for National Statistics and across more than 30 other government departments and agencies.
Contacts This publication For information about the content of this publication, contact Mike G Phelps Tel: 01633 456380 Email: [email protected] Other customer enquiries ONS Customer Contact Centre Tel: 0845 601 3034 International: +44 (0)845 601 3034 Minicom: 01633 812399 Email: [email protected] Fax: 01633 652747 Post: Room 1015, Government Buildings, Cardiff Road, Newport, South Wales NP10 8XG www.ons.gov.uk Media enquiries Tel: 0845 604 1858 Email: [email protected]
Tel: 020 8876 3444 www.opsi.gov.uk/click-use/index.htm
