Budget Surpluses:

Experiences of Other Nations and Implications for the United States

AIMD-00-23: Published: Nov 2, 1999. Publicly Released: Nov 2, 1999.

Contact:

Paul L. Posner
(202) 512-3000
contact@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO provided information on the experience of six nations--Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, and the United Kingdom--with budget surpluses, focusing on: (1) how they achieved budget surpluses and what their fiscal policies were during periods of surplus; (2) how they addressed long-term budgetary pressures; (3) how they adapted their budget process during a period of surplus; and (4) the lessons these nations learned from their experiences with budget surpluses that might be applicable to the United States.

GAO noted that: (1) the case study countries generally chose to continue with a fiscally cautious approach, with three countries--New Zealand, Norway, and Sweden--aiming for sustained surpluses; (2) New Zealand and Sweden have focused on the need to reduce debt as a justification for sustained surpluses, while Norway has focused on the need to save for long-term budget and economic pressures; (3) to maintain support for their policies, these three countries have also devoted some portion of their surpluses to tax cuts or spending increases, addressing critical needs while still aiming for a surplus; (4) each of the case study countries has taken actions to address long-term budgetary and economic concerns; (5) for Norway in particular, long-term budget and economic pressures were a major factor leading the government to decide that surpluses were needed to ensure the long-term sustainability of its fiscal policies; (6) for other countries, programmatic reforms aimed at addressing long-term pressures enacted prior to the arrival of surpluses resulted in increased fiscal flexibility during a period of surplus; (7) over the last two decades, four of the case study countries have reformed their pension systems, improving their long-term sustainability; (8) as a result, as these countries entered a period of surplus, their debate focused on other needs; (9) each case study country changed its budget process during the 1990s in an attempt to better control spending or to guide fiscal policy decisionmaking; (10) GAO's study suggests that it is possible to sustain support for continued fiscal discipline during a period of surpluses while also addressing pent-up demands; (11) however, a fiscal goal anchored by a rationale that is compelling enough to make continued restraint acceptable is critical; (12) for each country in GAO's study, the goal and the supporting rationale grew out of its unique economic experience and situation; (13) GAO's long-term model simulations illustrate the need for continued restraint by saving some of the surplus along with structural reform of public retirement and health programs; and (14) while eliminating a deficit is arguably self-defining and straightforward, other nations' experiences suggest that sustaining even a portion of the nation's surpluses calls for a different framework featuring explicit fiscal policy goals and targets to both inform the allocation of surpluses and to promote public acceptance of the choices.

Jul 29, 2014

Jul 18, 2014

Jun 23, 2014

Jun 17, 2014

Jun 12, 2014

Jun 10, 2014

May 28, 2014

Mar 27, 2014

Mar 6, 2014

Looking for more? Browse all our products here