Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Economy

Argentina’s Milei Goes All in on ‘Shock’ Policies in Bid to Save Country’s Economy

Published

7 minute read

From Heartland Daily News

Originally published by The Daily Caller.

“It’s a real shift worth celebrating, given that most investors did not have confidence in his ability to reduce the deficit just a few weeks ago. If anything, perhaps he’s going overboard in some ways.”

Javier Milei, Argentina’s newly elected libertarian and self-described “anarcho-capitalist” president, is embracing sweeping reforms to save the country’s struggling economy, even in the face of overwhelming obstacles.

Despite challenges arising from lawmaker opposition and a soaring inflation rate that has plagued the country for years, Milei’s “shock” adjustment actions have improved market and investor confidence both among the Argentinian population and abroad. Milei inherited a 140% inflation rate, an impoverished population and hundreds of billions in debt when he took office in December.

Milei acknowledged on the day of his inauguration that Argentina’s economy would temporarily get worse while he embraced “shock” adjustments to start making fixes.

“They have ruined our lives … There is no money!” Milei said during his inauguration speech. “Therefore, the conclusion is that there is no alternative to adjustment and no alternative to shock … this is the last straw to begin the reconstruction of Argentina.”

One of Milei’s first actions as president was to slash Argentina’s bureaucratic ministry from 18 to nine in a bid to reduce government spending, fulfilling a promise he made on the campaign trail, according to Reuters. Milei and his supporters saw several of the agencies as ineffectual and bloated with cash, including the Ministry of Transportation and Public Works, Tourism and Sports and the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development, which were absorbed by other existing ministries, according to the CATO Institute.

Milei also allowed the value of the peso currency to plummet by 50% in December to reduce export costs while also increasing the import costs, according to The Associated Press. The goal is to close the trade gap, making Argentina a bigger global trade competitor and stem the flow of money leaving the country, which would increase the stockpile of its exhausted foreign currency reserves.

The eventual plan for Milei is to replace the peso currency entirely with the U.S. dollar, another promise he made on the campaign trail, according to NPR. The U.S. dollar is prized in Argentina because it is generally stable and holds its value longer than the peso.

Temporary tax hikes were imposed by Milei’s administration to reduce the national debt and start balancing the budget according to the AP. Argentina’s budget deficit currently sits at 3%, and Milei has promised to balance it this year, according to Reuters.

Milei sent an omnibus reform bill to Congress in December that would privatize state-owned companies and raise export taxes, and remove limits on bonds issued overseas and on debt restructure rules, according to Reuters. He also issued a separate presidential decree in December to deregulate Argentina’s economy.

These actions are already having positive impacts. Argentina’s monthly inflation slowed down to 15.3% in February, much lower than the spike in December, according to Reuter’s forecast. The country also saw a monthly budget surplus in January for the first time in over a decade.

“The Milei administration has inherited a steep stabilization task, but has already taken some important steps toward restoring fiscal sustainability, adjusting the exchange rate, and combating inflation,” U.S. Secretary of Treasury Janet Yellen said during a press conference in late February.

Argentinian citizens have deposited over $2.3 billion in dollar-denomination banks since Milei took office, restoring the entirety of the banks’ losses from the last year and signaling that the population feels stability, as withdrawals typically increase during unsteady times, according to Bloomberg. Argentina’s bonds are at four-year highs and the country’s risk index has fallen to a two-year low, according to Reuters.

“The market is becoming very optimistic about Javier Milei’s conviction,” Javier Casabal, a Buenos Aires-based fixed-income strategist at Adcap Grupo Financiero, told Reuters. “It’s a real shift worth celebrating, given that most investors did not have confidence in his ability to reduce the deficit just a few weeks ago. If anything, perhaps he’s going overboard in some ways.”

Milei still faces several roadblocks. Inflation is still at record highs and poverty continues to consume much of the Argentinian population. Major provisions in Milei’s reform bill were blocked in early February by the country’s Congress, which he has referred to as a “nest of rats,” according to Reuters

Milei vowed to Congress during a speech on March 1 that he would “speed up” his reform plans, encouraging them to join his efforts but warning that he did not need them to accomplish his goals, according to Reuters.

“We won’t back down, we’re going to keep pushing forward,” Milei said. “Whether that’s by law, presidential decree or by modifying regulations.”

Milei’s government is now considering breaking up the reform bill and passing provisions separately through Congress, according to Reuters. He is requesting lawmakers to agree to a 10-point social pact, which would include negotiations in discussions on economic reform, by May 25.

Originally published by The Daily Caller

For more public policy from The Heartland Institute.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Business

Broken ‘equalization’ program bad for all provinces

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Alex Whalen  and Tegan Hill

Back in the summer at a meeting in Halifax, several provincial premiers discussed a lawsuit meant to force the federal government to make changes to Canada’s equalization program. The suit—filed by Newfoundland and Labrador and backed by British Columbia, Saskatchewan and Alberta—effectively argues that the current formula isn’t fair. But while the question of “fairness” can be subjective, its clear the equalization program is broken.

In theory, the program equalizes the ability of provinces to deliver reasonably comparable services at a reasonably comparable level of taxation. Any province’s ability to pay is based on its “fiscal capacity”—that is, its ability to raise revenue.

This year, equalization payments will total a projected $25.3 billion with all provinces except B.C., Alberta and Saskatchewan to receive some money. Whether due to higher incomes, higher employment or other factors, these three provinces have a greater ability to collect government revenue so they will not receive equalization.

However, contrary to the intent of the program, as recently as 2021, equalization program costs increased despite a decline in the fiscal capacity of oil-producing provinces such as Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Newfoundland and Labrador. In other words, the fiscal capacity gap among provinces was shrinking, yet recipient provinces still received a larger equalization payment.

Why? Because a “fixed-growth rule,” introduced by the Harper government in 2009, ensures that payments grow roughly in line with the economy—even if the gap between richer and poorer provinces shrinks. The result? Total equalization payments (before adjusting for inflation) increased by 19 per cent between 2015/16 and 2020/21 despite the gap in fiscal capacities between provinces shrinking during this time.

Moreover, the structure of the equalization program is also causing problems, even for recipient provinces, because it generates strong disincentives to natural resource development and the resulting economic growth because the program “claws back” equalization dollars when provinces raise revenue from natural resource development. Despite some changes to reduce this problem, one study estimated that a recipient province wishing to increase its natural resource revenues by a modest 10 per cent could face up to a 97 per cent claw back in equalization payments.

Put simply, provinces that generally do not receive equalization such as Alberta, B.C. and Saskatchewan have been punished for developing their resources, whereas recipient provinces such as Quebec and in the Maritimes have been rewarded for not developing theirs.

Finally, the current program design also encourages recipient provinces to maintain high personal and business income tax rates. While higher tax rates can reduce the incentive to work, invest and be productive, they also raise the national standard average tax rate, which is used in the equalization allocation formula. Therefore, provinces are incentivized to maintain high and economically damaging tax rates to maximize equalization payments.

Unless premiers push for reforms that will improve economic incentives and contain program costs, all provinces—recipient and non-recipient—will suffer the consequences.

Continue Reading

Business

Trudeau’s new tax package gets almost everything wrong

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Ben Eisen and Jake Fuss

Recently, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced several short-term initiatives related to tax policy. Most notably, the package includes a two-month GST holiday on certain items and a one-time $250 cheque that will be sent to all Canadians with incomes under $150,000.

Unfortunately, the Trudeau government’s package is a grab bag of bad ideas that will not do anything to get Canada out of the long-term growth rut in which our economy is mired. There are too many to list all in one place, but here are four of the biggest problems with Prime Minister Trudeau’s tax plan.

  1. It reduces the wrong taxes. When it comes to economic growth, not all taxes are created equal. Some cause far more economic harm per dollar of government revenue raised than others. The government’s package creates a holiday on the GST for some items (only for two months) which is a mistake given that the GST is one of the least economically harmful components of the tax mix. Canada’s recent growth record is abysmal, and boosting growth should be a primary goal of any changes to tax policy. A GST cut of any duration fails this test relative to other tax cuts.
  2. Temporary tax holidays shift consumption in time, they don’t boost growth. The government’s GST reduction is actually a short-term tax holiday on certain items that will last two months. There are decades worth of economic research showing that when governments create short-term tax breaks, they may change the timing of consumption, but they won’t contribute to actual economic growth. Shifting consumption from the future to the present won’t help get Canada out of the economic doldrums. This is particularly true of the Trudeau tax holiday since purchases that Canadians may have made after the two-month holiday period will simply be shifted forward to take advantage of the absence of the GST. As noted above, there are better taxes to cut than the GST, but no matter what taxes we are talking about permanent reductions are vastly superior to temporary tax cuts like short-term holidays.
  3. One-time tax rebates don’t improve economic incentives. Perhaps the worst element of the Trudeau government’s announcement was a plan to send $250 cheques to all Canadians earning under $150,000. One-time tax rebates are a terrible way to provide tax relief. When you cut income tax rates, you improve incentives for people to work and invest because they get to keep a larger share of their earnings. This helps the economy grow. One-time rebates that you get regardless of the economic choices you make has no similar effect. This means that the rebate with its $4.7 billion price tag won’t help Canada’s poor growth performance.
  4. It borrows from the future to give to the present. The federal government is currently running a large deficit. This raises the question of who will have to pay the $4.7 billion bill for the one-time payments announced today. The answer is that the government will have to borrow the money and therefore future taxpayers will have to either pay it off or service the extra debt indefinitely. The money the Trudeau government will send out won’t come out of thin air, it’ll have to be borrowed with the burden falling on future taxpayers.

The Trudeau government got one thing conceptually right, which is that there are advantages to reducing the tax burden on Canadians. Unfortunately, the policy package it has put forward to provide tax relief gets everything wrong. It reduces the wrong taxes, shifts taxes temporally rather than cutting them, does nothing to improve economic incentives, and burdens future taxpayers. With the holiday season around the corner, this attempt at a gift to Canadian taxpayers is the economic equivalent of a lump of coal in the stocking.

Continue Reading

Trending

X