The Maastricht Criteria and Optimal Monetary and Fiscal Policy Mix for the EMU Accession Countries

Lipinska, Anna (2008): The Maastricht Criteria and Optimal Monetary and Fiscal Policy Mix for the EMU Accession Countries.

Abstract

The Maastricht convergence criteria set constraints on both monetary and fiscal policies in the EMU Accession Countries. This paper uses a DSGE model of a two sector small open economy with distortionary taxes to address the following question: How do the Maastricht convergence criteria modify an optimal monetary and fiscal policy mix in an economy facing domestic and external shocks? We find that targets of the unconstrained optimal monetary and fiscal policy are similar to those of the optimal monetary policy alone. The constrained policy is characterised by additional elements that penalize fluctuations of monetary and fiscal variables around the new targets which are different from the steady state of the unconstrained optimal monetary policy. Under the chosen parameterization (which aims to reflect the Czech Republic economy) the optimal monetary and fiscal policy violates three Maastricht criteria: on the CPI inflation rate, the nominal interest rate and deficit to GDP ratio. Both the stabilization component and deterministic component of the con- strained policy are different from the unconstrained optimal policy. Since monetary criteria play a dominant role in affecting the stabilization process of the constrained policy, CPI inflation and the nominal interest are characterised by a smaller variability (than under the unconstrained policy) at the expense of a higher variability of deficit to GDP ratio. The constrained policy is characterised by a deflationary bias which results in targeting the CPI inflation rate and the nominal interest rate that are lower by 1.3% (in annual terms) than the CPI inflation rate and the nominal interest rate in the countries taken as a reference. The constrained policy is also characterised by targeting surplus to GDP ratio at around 3.7%. As a result the policy constrained by the Maastricht convergence criteria induces additional welfare costs that amount to 60% of the initial deadweight loss associated with the optimal policy.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Optimal monetary and fiscal policy, Maastricht convergence criteria, EMU accession countries
• Subjects: E - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics > E5 - Monetary Policy, Central Banking, and the Supply of Money and Credit > E58 - Central Banks and Their Policies; E - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics > E5 - Monetary Policy, Central Banking, and the Supply of Money and Credit > E52 - Monetary Policy; F - International Economics > F4 - Macroeconomic Aspects of International Trade and Finance > F41 - Open Economy Macroeconomics; E - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics > E6 - Macroeconomic Policy, Macroeconomic Aspects of Public Finance, and General Outlook > E61 - Policy Objectives ; Policy Designs and Consistency ; Policy Coordination

References

[1] Aiyagari S. R. ,Marcet A., Sargent T., Seppala J. (2002), Optimal Taxation without State-Contingent Debt, Journal of Political Economy

[2] Altissimo F., Benigno P., Rodriguez - Palenzuela D. (2005), Inflation differentials in a currency area: facts, explanation and policy, CEPR Discussion Paper

[3] Aoki K. (2001), Optimal monetary responses to relative price changes, Journal of Monetary Economics

[4] Arratibel O., Rodriguez - Palenzuela D., Thimann C. (2002), Inflation dynamics and dual in�ation in accession countries: a new Keynesian perspective, ECB Working Paper 132

[5] Backus D. K., Kehoe P. J., Kydland F. E. (1992), International Real Business Cycles, Journal of Political Economy

[6] Balassa B. (1964), The purchasing power parity doctrine: a reappraisal, Journal of Political Economy 72

[7] Barro R. J. (1979), On the Determination of Public Debt, Journal of Political Economy

[8] Benigno G., Benigno P. (2006), Designing Targeting Rules for International Monetary Policy Cooperation, Journal of Monetary Economics, Vol. 53 Issue 3

[9] Benigno G., De Paoli B. (2006), Optimal Fiscal and Monetary Policy for a Small Open Economy, mimeo

[10] Benigno G., Thoenisen C. (2003), Equilibrium exchange rates and supply side performance, The Economic Journal 113

[11] Benigno P. (2001), Price stability with imperfect financial integration, CEPR Working Paper

[12] Benigno P. (2004), Optimal monetary policy in a currency area, Journal of International Economics, Vol. 63, Issue 2

[13] Benigno P., Lopez - Salido D. (2003), Inflation persistence and optimal monetary policy in the euro area, ECB Working Paper no. 178

[14] Benigno P., Woodford M. (2003), Optimal Monetary and Fiscal Policy: A Linear Quadratic Approach, NBER Macroeconomics Annual

[15] Benigno P., Woodford M. (2005), Inflation Stabilisation and Welfare: the case of a distorted steady state, Journal of the Europeand Economic Association

[16] Buiter W., Grafe C. (2002), Anchor, float or abandon the ship: exchange rate regimes for accession coun- tries, CEPR Discussion Paper 3184

[17] Canzoneri M., Cumby R., Diba B. (1999), Relative labour productivity and the real exchange rate in the long run: Evidence from a panel of OECD countries, Journal of International Economics 47

[18] Chari V.V., Kehoe P., McGrattan E. (2002), Can sticky price models generate volatile and persistent real exchange rates?, Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 69, No. 3

[19] Cipriani M. (2001), The Balassa-Samuelson effect in transition economies, mimeo, IMF, September

[20] Coricelli F. (2002), Exchange rate policy during transition to the European Monetary Union, Economics of Transition 10 (2)

[21] Coricelli, F, Jazbec B. (2001), Real exchange rate dynamics in transition economies, CEPR Discussion Paper, no 2869

[22] Corsetti G., Dedola L., Leduc S. (2003), International risk sharing and the transmission of productivity shocks, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Working Paper No. 03-19

[23] Corsetti G., Pesenti P. (2001), Welfare and Macroeconomic Interdependence, The Quarterly Journal of Economics

[24] de Broek M., Sloek T.(2001), Interpreting real exchange rate movements in transition countries, IMF Working Paper 01/56

[25] De Paoli B. (2004), Monetary policy and welfare in a small open economy, CEP Discussion Paper 639

[26] Devereux M. B. (2003), A macroeconomic analysis of EU accession under alternative monetary policies, Journal of Common Market Studies vol.41 no.5

[27] Domowitz I., Hubbard G., Peterson B. (1988), Market structure and cyclical �uctuations in U.S. manufac- turing, Review of Economics and Statistics

[28] Duarte M., Wolman A. (2002), Regional inflation in a currency union: fiscal policy vs. fundamentals, ECB Working Paper No. 180

[29] ECB (2006), Convergence report, ECB, Frankfurt

[30] Egert B., Drine I., Lommatzsch K., Rault C. (2002), The Balassa-Samuelson e¤ect in central and eastern Europe: myth or reality, William Davidson Institute working paper, no. 483

[31] Ferreira Lopes A. (2006), The costs of EMU for transition countries, mimeo

[32] Ferrero A. (2005), Fiscal and Monetary Rules for a Currency Union, ECB Working Paper No. 502

[33] Fidrmuc J., Korhonen I. (2003), Similarity of supply and demand shocks between the euro area and the CEECs, Economic Systems 27

[34] Fischer C. (2002), Real currency appreciation in accession countries: Balassa-Samuelson and investment demand, Deutsche Bundesbank discussion paper, no. 19/02

[35] Froot K., Rogoff K., (1995), Perspectives on PPP and long - run real exchange rates, Handbook of Inter- national Economics vol. 3, Gene Grossman and Kenneth Rogo¤ (eds.)

[36] Gali J., Gertler M., Lopez - Salido D. (2001), European in�ation dynamics, European Economic Review 45

[37] Gali J., Monacelli T. (2005), Monetary policy and exchange rate volatility in a small open economy, Review of Economic Studies

[38] Gali J., Monacelli T. (2008), Optimal Monetary and Fiscal Policy in a Currency Union, mimeo

[39] Giannoni M., Woodford M. (2003), Optimal inflation targeting rules, NBER Working Paper No. W9939

[40] Halpern L., Wyplosz C. (2001), Economic transformation and real exchange rates in the 2000s: the Balassa-Samuelson connection, Economic Survey of Europe, no. 1, Geneva, United Nations Economic Commission for Europe

[41] Laxton D., Pesenti P. (2003), Monetary rules for small open, emerging economies, Journal of Monetary Economics 50 pp. 1109-1146

[42] Lipinska A. (2008), The Maastricht Convergence Criteria and the Optimal Monetary Policy for the EMU Accession Countries, ECB Working Paper forthcoming

[43] Liu Z., Pappa E. (2005), Gains from international monetary policy coordination: Does it pay to be different?, European Central Bank Working Paper No. 514

[44] Maastricht Treaty (1994), European Commission webpage

[45] Marimon R., Zilibotti F. (1998), Actual versus virtual unemployment in Europe: is Spain different?, European Economic Review 42

[46] Martins J., Scarpetta S., Pilat D. (1996), Mark - up pricing, market structure and the business cycle, OECD Economic Studies 27

[47] Mihaljek D., Klau M. (2004), The Balassa - Samuelson effect in central Europe: a disaggregated analysis, BIS Working Paper 143

[48] Morrison C. (1994), The cyclical nature of markups in Canadian manufacturing: a production theory approach, Journal of Applied Econometrics 9

[49] Natalucci F., Ravenna F. (2007), Monetary Policy Choice in Emerging Market Economies: the Case of High Productivity Growth, Journal of Money, Credit and Banking (forthcoming)

[50] National Bank of Hungary (2002), Adopting the Euro in Hungary: Expected Benefits, Costs and Timing, NBH Occasional Paper No. 24

[51] National Bank of Poland (2004), A Report on the Costs and Benefits of Poland's Adoption of the Euro

[52] Obstfeld M., Rogo¤ K. (1999), New directions for stochastic open economy models, NBER Working Paper 7313

[53] Pappa E., Vassilotos V. (2006), The Unbearable Tightness of Being in a Monetary Union: Fiscal Restric- tions and Regional Stability, IGIER working paper series No.294

[54] Ravenna F. (2005), The European Monetary Union as the commitment device for new EU member states, ECB Working Paper no. 516

[55] Rotemberg J., Woodford M. (1997), An optimization-based framework for the evaluation of monetary policy, in Ben S. Bernanke and Julio J. Rotemberg (eds.), NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1997

[56] Rotemberg J., Woodford M. (1999), Interest rate rules in an estimated sticky price model, NBER Working Paper

[57] Smets F., Wouters R. (2004), An estimated stochastic dynamic general equilibrium model of the euro area, Journal of the European Economic Association, Vol. 1, Issue 5

[58] Stahl H. (2003), Price rigidity in German manufacturing, unpublished manuscript

[59] Stockman A., Tesar L. (1994), Tastes in a two - country model of the business cycle: explaining international comovement, American Economic Review vol. 85, No. 1

[60] Schmitt-Grohe S., Uribe M. (2004), Optimal Fiscal and Monetary Policy under Sticky Prices, Journal of Economic Theory

[61] Sutherland A. (2002), A simple second-order solution method for dynamic general equilibrium models" CEPR Discussion Paper No 3554

[62] Woodford M. (2001), Fiscal requirements for price stability, Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 33: 669-728

[63] Woodford M. (2003), Interest and prices: Foundations of a theory of monetary policy, Princeton University Press