Econometrics

 

 

 

 

 

Economic and fiscal policy of the US and UK

 

 

 

 

 

 

Contents

Economic and fiscal policy of the US and UK including recent history                          1

Political stance and relevant literature                                                                                    1

Consumption function estimation                                                                                        3

Short-Rum Consumption Function                                                                                         3

Long-Run Consumption Function or Proportional Consumption Function                           8

Non-Linear Consumption Function                                                                                        9

Relevant hypothesis                                                                                                              10

Appropriate Model for Consumption                                                                                 11

Forecast Evaluation data for UK and US                                                                          12

Final results and policy implications for Fiscal policy in USA and UK                           14

Work market motivations                                                                                                       15

Capital using                                                                                                                           15

The Free Market Agenda                                                                                                        16

UK Fiscal Policy post-2010 and Forecast Evaluation                                                        16

 

 

Economic and fiscal policy of the US and UK including recent history

Political stance and relevant literature

Genuine house costs started to fall amid 2005 – 2006 in the US and towards the end of 2007 in the UK. Against this foundation, the results of overleveraging for the budgetary segment and, at a later stage, the "genuine economy" rapidly got to be clear. Family unit names, most outstandingly Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers, broke down. Merrill Lynch sold itself to the Bank of America. The US government took immediate control of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac through conservatorship. In Britain, there were long lines at extensions of Northern Rock prompting the procurement of government insurances to savers and the inevitable nationalization of the bank.

Confronted by these advancements, both the US and the UK abused the conceivable outcomes offered by financial approach. While investment rates had been brought up in both nations amid 2007, they were, by the starting of 2009, at an extraordinary low rate. Undoubtedly, the decrease of the Bank of England's base rate to one for every cent in February 2009 was, as the least level in its 315-year history (Seager, 2009). The expression "quantitative moving" entered political talk as the Bank of England and the Central bank acquired Treasury bonds on an extensive scale.

While just restricted numbers supported calls for a financial boost on the scale that Krugman proposed (and his later calls for a brief moment jolt), his study of fiscal strategy was broadly imparted at the end of 2008 and amid the early months of 2009. In spite of the fact that the G-20 had worries about the effect of the getting that would be needed on long haul government obligation levels, it put expanding attention upon the essentialness of proactive financial arrangement. In mid-November 2008, the Washington DC G-20 summit called for the utilization of "… monetary measures to fortify residential interest to fast impact, as suitable, while keeping up an approach skeleton helpful for monetary maintainability" (Group of Twenty, 2008).

At the outset, Insider records of Gordon Brown's administration propose that there were noteworthy pressures between Number Ten and Number Eleven Downing Street. Gordon Tan himself is said to have trusted for a bigger scale boost bundle while Alistair Darling effectively looked for more constrained measures. Dear's hesitance to confer himself to huge scale or supported builds in broad daylight use might have originated from his own particular quick circumstances. There have been proposals that he needed political trust. He had just as served as Chancellor since June 2007 (when Brown had at long last succeeded to the prevalence) and his period in office had been plagued by trouble. In October 2007, in the midst of much shame, the Treasury lost the individual records it hung on twenty five million individuals and at the end of the mid year of 2008, Darling's initial warnings about the financial issues that lay ahead were quickly revoked by the Prime Minister's media group.

It may likewise be said that strategy improvements in the US additionally owed much to political impulses and identity components. Barack Obama's triumph in the November 2008 presidential decision inescapably prompted a huge reordering of strategy necessities. The Obama move group, the approaching organization, and the Democrats' Congressional administration mutually made the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the $787 billion jolt bundle.

Regardless, it would be hard to attest in either the UK or the US that identity, chance or partisanship are sufficient in themselves to clarify the methodology of monetary arrangement determination. The degree to which organizations and institutional game plans set parameters on the reasoning of political performers and formed the connections between on-screen characters ought to likewise be considered Core institutional characters campaigned for financial restriction. Although Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke offered support for the utilization of boost strategies, the Bank's Governor, Mervyn King cautioned freely against further monetary extension.

Consumption function estimation

Concerning utilization, experimental and additionally hypothetical work has a long custom of expecting a direct utilization capacity, accordingly inferring that the negligible penchant to expend is random to the level of family unit riches.

After the original commitments of Keynes (1936) and Friedman (1957), the normal desires adaptation of the life-cycle speculation in Hall (1978) denoted the beginning stage of a time of concentrated work. The larger part of the ideal conviction and sureness proportional models with agent operators that emulated, utilized direct utilization capacities. In any case, as noted by, e.g., Zeldes (1989) and demonstrated via Carroll and Kimball (1996), presenting uninsurable work salary vulnerability makes the utilization work strictly inward for a wide class of models. Creating the perpetual wage speculation utilizing a model within which there are patient and eager buyers, suggesting cushion stock (target sparing) conduct, Carroll (1997) can represent the aforementioned discoveries.

There are different types of consumption function.

Short-Rum Consumption Function

In short run, utilization consumption is not a basic extent of wage. It is not zero when

salary is zero. As such, a purchaser needs to acquire some consumption on utilization actually when his wage is zero.

          This consumption, known as the subsistence or self-sufficient utilization (Ca), is must

for each person to help regardless of the level of salary appreciated. Consumption acquired on utilization far beyond Ca and disposable salary (Yd) bears a corresponding association. Consumption function of this sort is alluded to as a non- corresponding consumption function and is given as:

            C = C_a + b.Y^d

            Where, C = consumption expenditure,

            C_a = autonomous consumption expenditure,

            b = a positive constant,

            Yd = consumers’ non reusable earnings, which is similar to the unwanted of earnings over Net Immediate Taxation. [Direct taxes (T) make reference to personal taxes such as earnings tax compensated and exchange expenses (R) make reference to unilateral dealings such as old-age retirement benefits obtained by the people. Net Immediate Taxation is thus similar to T-R.] = Y – (T -R)

= Income customers you can get rid of off any way they like.

            Graphically, this relationship is in Figure 4.1. Horizontal axis measures the disposable Income Yd and vertical axis measures the consumption expenditure (C). At the point when Yd is zero, C is Ca. In a two area model, disposable salary, Yd = Y, as tax as well as payment transfer are nonexistent because of the government part being absent.

Thus, APC = b, when Y =∞

APC > b, when Y has finite values. Generally, APC ≥ b

Similarly, Marginal Propensity to Consume (MPC) is described as a rise in the consumption expenditure per unit increase in income of the customers, can be indicated as

            MPC = Increase in consumption expenditure (∆C) / Increase in income (∆Y)

            = ∆C / ∆Y or dC / dY

            Thus MPC could be obtained for this consumption function through simple            differentiation of C with respect to Y.

            MPC = dC / dY

            = 0 + b

            = b

            Alternatively, let initial and final levels of consumption be C₁ and C₂ at income levels        of Y_l and Y₂ respectively.

            C₁ = C_a + bY₁ and

            C₂ = C_{a +} bY₂

            Subtracting,

            C₂ - C_{1 =} b (Y₂ – Y₁)

            ∆C = b ∆Y

            ∆C / ∆Y = b

            = MPC.

            For this consumption function, therefore,

            APC ≥ MPC.

Long-Run Consumption Function or Proportional Consumption Function

In this, consumption expenditure is directly proportional to the consumers' income and is represented as

C = by

Here, consumption expenditure becomes zero in case income is zero. In long-run consumption function, average and marginal propensities can be shown to be identical.

APC = C/Y = bY/Y = b

Similarly,

MPC = ∆C / ∆Y = b

Here, autonomous consumption (Ca) is zero. This type of consumption function is related to the long-run tendency of the consumption expenditure (Fig 4.2).

Non-Linear Consumption Function

This kind of consumption function is semi direct (halfway straight and partly non-linear). It refers to example of consumption in advanced nations or of prosperous areas. The logarithmic statement may take the accompanying structure:

C = C_a+ bY + cY²

Neither APC nor MPC is constant. Each one is a function of income. For instance,

APC = Ca/Y + b + cY

MPC = b + 2cY

The linear function of Y is MPC and its parabolic function is APC. Fig. 4.3 portrays the nature of the curve represented by the above equation.

Relevant hypothesis

Believe that there is a customer who desires that he will live for another T years and has wealth of W. The customer also desires to yearly earn passive income Y until he retires R decades from now. In this situation, the customer's sources over his life-time include both of his initial wealth endowment, W, and of his life-time income, RY. Note that attention rates are believed to be zero. If the attention amount were positive, we would have to account for the attention earned on savings.

The customer can spread his life-time sources over the staying T decades of his life. He separates W + RY similarly among T decades and in each year he consumes

This person's consumption function can be written as

If every personal in the economic system programs his intake in this way, then the total intake operate will be quite similar to the person one. Thus, the total intake operate of the economic system is

where 'a' is the minor tendency to consume for prosperity and b is the minor tendency to consume for earnings.

Appropriate Model for Consumption

Around the end of 1980's, no UK macro models embodied an intake operate depending on intertemporal marketing. This was despite the truth, mentioned above, that by the mid-80s the intertemporal intake design had become conventional within educational macroeconomics. Logical objectives was no more a key problem: by now - following return amount overshooting and the example of Minford's Gatwick design - most of the significant UK designs had integrated rational objectives at some level. Yet none had yet integrated the then conventional theoretical design of intake.

If the primary objective of these designs had been plan research, then the point that no UK design had implemented intertemporal intake would be amazing. This design is essential for financial plan research because of Ricardian Equivalence. It might have been regrettable if all the designs had implemented intertemporal intake, given the serious scientific controversy about its credibility, but the point that none did display how dislocated UK macroeconomics designs had become from popular educational research. The scenario was much the same in the US. However, the omission is much easier to understand if UK macro econometric designs had been mainly designed to predicting. In regular times, objectives about upcoming income would be a constant operate of previous earnings, and so a conventional Keynesian type intake operate would be sufficient from a predicting perspective and a lot much easier to use.

The Keynesian Concept of intake is that present actual non reusable earnings are the most important determinant of intake in the short run. Real Earnings are money earnings modified for rising prices. It is an evaluation of the quality of products or services that customers have buy with their earnings (or budget).

For example, a 10% development of money earnings may be printed by a 10% development of rising prices. This means that real earnings (the quantity or volume of products or services that can be bought) have stayed continuous.

Forecast Evaluation data for UK and US

Most recent information propose that the UK economy shrank by 6.3 for every penny from its top in to the start with quarter of 2008 to its trough in the second quarter of 2009, since when it has recouped simply a third of this decrease. The subsidence was deeper than its three forerunners; however the moderate pace of the recuperation has been much all the more striking. Emulating the Coalition's first Budget in June 2010 we estimate that the recuperation would be slower than its antecedents, however no place close as moderate as it has been. We conjecture that GDP would climb by 5.7 for every penny from the first quarter of 2010 to the second quarter of 2012, yet the most recent information propose it has developed by just 0.9 for every penny.

In any case we rose our fleeting development gauges in the harvest time of 2010, in reaction to the startling quality of GDP that late spring, just to amend them down again as the economy lost energy going into 2011. We then figure a comprehensively level profile for GDP into and through 2012 in our November 2011 and March 2012 EFOs, just to see GDP fall consistently in the latest seventy five percent.

The constant information set that we use to assess the estimates is focused around the work of Croushore and Stark at the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, US. Their constant information set for macroeconomists gathers depictions of various macroeconomic time arrangement information when each one quarter since November 1965. Information inside any vintage of the information set could be used to show definitely what information was accessible to a forecaster at on a particular date. One of the variables included inside the information set is the GDP deflator. The timing of the vintages is as of the centre day of the centre month of each one quarter. The main two overviews that compass the period from the 1970s to today with figures for the GDP deflator are the Livingston Survey and the Survey of Professional Forecasters. The Livingston Survey, which started in the 1940s, gathers its conjectures from a wide show of economists, not every one of whom has determining as their primary job. The Overview of Professional Forecasters (SPF), which was known as the ASA-NBER Survey from 1968 to 1990 preceding it was assumed control by the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, gathers its conjectures from economists for whom determining is a significant piece of their employments.

Therefore, the review gauges match up precisely with the continuous information set for macroeconomists. The study calls for estimates for each one quarter for the current and emulating four quarters, so we can develop a precise four-quarter-ahead gauge. The timing could be seen in the accompanying sample: in late January 2005, the national salary account information is discharged and the forecasters know the estimations of the GDP value file from 1947:q1 to 2004:q4. They estimate levels of the GDP value file for 2005:q1, 2005:q2, 2005:q3, 2005:q4, and 2006:q1. We analyze their one-year-ahead estimates taking into account their estimate for 2006:q1 in respect to their gauge for 2005:q1. In this manner, the estimates compass an one-year (four-quarter) period, however it may be significant to note that the end of their conjecture skyline (2006:q1) is five quarters after the last date for which they watch an acknowledgment (2004:q4). In spite of the fact that the review itself started in 1968, the GNP deflator's early conjectures were adjusted to the closest entire number, which causes the conjectures to be truly flighty in the early years of the overview. As a result of this, and to break down the Livingston Survey and SPF gauges on the same specimen period, we take a gander at the SPF conjectures made somewhere around 1971:q1 and 2004:q2. Our example closes with the overviews made in 2004:q2, in light of the fact that that is the last review whose one-year-ahead conjectures we can assess, given acknowledged information through 2005:q2 (the most recent accessible information when the to begin with draft of this paper was composed). Similarly as with the Livingston Survey, to dodge quirky developments in the figures, we inspect the average figure over the forecasters.

Final results and policy implications for Fiscal policy in USA and UK

It is vital to comprehend that monetary approach can have paramount impacts on the supply-side of the economy. Surely numerous governments monetary choices are made in view of enhancing the supply-side.

The current Coalition government has dispatched a Growth Review – a set of strategies that intends to drive stronger GDP development in the UK as the economy battles to rise up out of the subsidence. A considerable lot of their points require the dynamic utilization of monetary strategy to help supply-side motivating forces, speculation and productivity.

Work market motivations:

Changes in salary assessment can enhance impetuses for individuals to earnestly search for work Lower assessments may additionally have a positive impact on work exertion and work gainfulness. Slices to national protection commitments may help to extend the dynamic work supply A few economists contend that welfare profit changes are more critical than tax reductions in enhancing impetuses – to make a hole between the livelihoods of individuals in an occupation and the unemployed. Some individuals support lessening the relative estimation of profits as a method for enhancing motivations. Others support a move towards focused on profits where the exchange instalment is connected to investment in occupation plans or group work (Acs, Z. and Audretsch, 2001).

Capital using:

Using on framework (e.g. enhancements to our motorway system or expansion in the building project for new schools and doctor's facilities) aides give the limit required to different organizations to thrive. Lower rates of organization expense and different business expenses may draw in internal financing from abroad (Blau, 2007). A point of the UK government is to have the least corporate assessment rate in the G7 and among the most reduced in the G20 countries

Business and speculation: Government using could be utilized to reserve a development in new little business new businesses

Innovative work and development: Government using, duty credits and other assessment stipends could be utilized to sway innovative work to enhance aggressiveness and help a quicker pace of advancement and creation (Ferrucci and Miralles, 2007). A key point going ahead is to utilize charge motivating forces to empower an expand in speculation in low carbon advances to push green development

Human capital of the workforce: Using on instruction and expanded financing in wellbeing and transport can likewise have imperative supply-symptoms in the long run .Government using on youth apprenticeships can help to enhance human capital, employability and benefit – giving more youthful individuals the opportunity to make a solid begin when they enter the work market

The Free Market Agenda

Free market economists are doubtful of the impacts of government using in enhancing the supply-side of the economy. They contend that lower assessment and tight control of government using and obtaining is obliged to permit the private division of the economy to thrive. They have confidence in a littler estimated state division so that in the long run, the general load of tariff can descend and subsequently permit the private segment of the economy to develop and prosper.

 UK Fiscal Policy post-2010 and Forecast Evaluation

At the point when the administration is running a financial plan setback, it implies that in a given year, all out government consumption surpasses aggregate duty income .In the event that the legislature is running a funding deficiency, it need to obtain this cash through the issue of obligation, for example, Treasury bills and securities .The majority of the legislature obligation is purchased up by monetary establishments yet people can purchase securities, premium securities and purchase national reserve funds endorsements .The financial backing equalization is the yearly contrast between expense incomes and government using . government obligation is the aggregate amassed obligation owed by the administration – this is otherwise called the national obligation The UK government last had a funding surplus in the year 2000 however it has run plan setbacks in consistently from that point forward. There was an extensive climb in the financial backing shortfall from 2008 onwards in light of the retreat furthermore endeavours by the administration to invigorate the economy. The shortage crested at in excess of 10% of GDP and been declining steadily Close by these real contrasts in administration and governmental issues, disparate financial structures and patterns which influence both the limit and political will of a nation to act—help to clarify the UK's fast move to monetary combining, and the United States' powerlessness to do likewise (Baker, G. and Kennedy, R.E., 2002).

First and foremost, at 8.9 percent, the current unemployment rate is not just much higher in the United States than in the UK (7.8 percent); however it is additionally impressively higher than the recorded normal. From 1990 to 2007, U.S. unemployment arrived at the midpoint of 5.4 percent contrasted with 6.9 percent in the UK. Also, U.S. long haul unemployment (measured as the percent of the aggregate unemployed specialists who have been unemployed for 27 or more weeks) arrived at 45.8 percent in June 2010—a figure 20 rate focuses higher than its record high arrived at in June 1983—and has descended just somewhat to 43.8 percent through February(HM Treasury, 2000b). Moreover, high unemployment is harder to endure in the United States, where unemployment profits are a great deal less liberal than in the UK. What's more, unemployed American labourers normally lose their wellbeing protection, although in Britain social insurance is given by the openly financed National Health Service. In this manner, while the UK can depend in part on "programmed stabilizers" in extreme times, the United States need to depend fundamentally on optional jolt using, which rises general monetary using. Second, the normal UK labourer however maybe less princely than the normal U.S. specialist has revelled in a long time of climbing earnings. Genuine wages for centre quintile family units in the UK have climbed by 37 percent since 1977, the most punctual accessible equivalent information. Paring over on a little piece of these additions to restore certainty in the administration may appear a value worth paying. In the United States, then again, true wages for centre quintile families have climbed by just 13 percent over the same period. In the meantime, Republican triumphs in a year ago midterm decisions appear to block the likelihood of expanding assessments on high-wage earners, where about all pay development in the United States has been concentrated. Third, Britain can depend all the more on remote interest to balance the impacts of plan cuts. Fares of merchandise and administrations are a much bigger piece of the British economy than the U.S. one—27 percent versus 11 percent, individually, from 2000 to 2009. What's more, the British pound has devalued pointedly since the emergency emitted in 2008, declining by 22 percent with respect to a crate of significant monetary forms, which proposes that worldwide exchange recuperation could profit the UK substantially more than the United States. The OECD ventures that net fares will add about 1 rate point to GDP development throughout the following two years in the UK along with subtracting 0.6 percent from U.S. development.

The Budget's underlying subject is of monetary shortcoming, expanded financial severity and fiscal adaptability. The Chancellor has not looked to balance the slippage on the financial side (in both money terms and structural terms) with much more prominent forthright monetary tightening. Anyway, despite the fact that the economy is at the end of the day far weaker than anticipated, the Chancellor likewise has chosen not to fundamentally concede the heavier monetary tightening made arrangements for the following three years. Behind all the tweaks, monetary approach will tighten especially in the advancing year and stay tight for an augmented period. That judgment to endure monetary slippage during a period of financial shortcoming is justifiable. Anyway, it does leave the UK obligation degree climbing for an amplified further period (and we expect it will even overshoot the OBR's conjectures).

Additionally, in our perspective, the administration needs solid arrangements to settle or lessen general society obligation/GDP degree in nearing years. The OBR's estimates for the obligation/GDP proportion to fall in 2017/18 rest on the presumption of substantial using cuts in 16/17 and 17/18, more prominent cuts than in the one year from now or two. Then again, there are no legitimate open using arrangements for those later years (Devereux, M., and Griffith, R., 1998a). The point by point open using arrangements stretch out just to 2014/15, with the arrangements for 15/16 because of be concurred this mid-year (yet confronting extensive contradiction at present) (Gerschenkron, 1962).. Past that, the administration basically has sums for open using in 16/17 and 17/18, however no arrangements of where the hatchet will fall and no proposition of creating such plans at whatever time soon. With the high and climbing obligation proportion in addition to the absence of believable medium term arrangements to come back to monetary manageable quality, we expect the UK likely will be downsized from AAA (or identical) by different organizations in the not so distant future, and through the one year from now or two the UK may well be put on negative standpoint for a further conceivable downsize.

With monetary arrangement set to tenacious limitation and the more adaptable dispatch, money related approach is liable to relax further and stay detached for an amplified period. Jolt is prone to pass through a scope of instruments, including QE, rate direction and credit manoeuvring in nearing months – with different measures (e.g. lower rates on overabundance saves, capacity to bear restored sterling deterioration) conceivable if the economy baffles especially, the EMU emergency erupts or sterling climbs strongly. Retreat systems are removed. The UK needs to get recuperation first and foremost, and that likely will oblige a long time of detached fiscal arrangement in our perspective.

References:

1.      Mary Morgan (2004). Empirical Models and Policy Making: Interaction and Institutions. 3rd ed. UK: Routledge. p176.

2.      John Hunter and Feng Wu (2009). A Multifactor Consumption based Asset Pricing Model of the UK Stock Market: The US Stock Market as a Wealth. 2nd ed. UK: brunel. p34-56.

3.      Michael D. Godfrey, E. Phillip Howrey (1967). An Analysis of International Consumption Function. UK: Princeton University. 2-13.

4.      Acs, Z. and Audretsch (2001).New-Firm Startups, Technology, and Macroeconomic Fluctuations., Small Business Economics, 6(6), p. 439-49.

5.      Blau, D.M. (2007) ‘A Time-Series Analysis of Self-Employment in the United States’, Journal of Political Economy, 95(3), p. 445-467.

6.      HM Treasury (2000b), Spending Review 2000: New Public Spending Plans 2001-2004

7.      Ferrucci and Miralles (2007), Saving Behaviour and Global Imbalances: The Role of Emerging Market Economies, ECB Working Paper, No. 842.

8.      Feyrer and Shambaugh (2009), Global Savings and Global Investment: The  ransmission of Identified Fiscal Shocks, NBER Working Papers, No. 15113.

9.      Haque, Pesaran and Sharma (1999), Neglected Heterogeneity and Dynamics in Cross Country Savings Regressions, IMF Working Paper, No. 99/128

10.  Foster, L., Haltiwanger, J. and Krizan, C. (2001) ‘Aggregate Productivity Growth Lessons from Microeconomic Evidence’, NBER Chapters in: New Developments in Productivity Analysis, p. 303- 372.

11.  Gentry, W. and Hubbard, R.G. (2000) ‘Tax Policy and Entrepreneurial Entry’, American Economic Review, 90(2), p. 283-287.

12.  Gentry, W. and Hubbard, R.G. (2004) ‘The Effects of Progressive Income Taxation on Job Turnover’, Journal of Public Economics, 88(11), p. 2301-2322.

13.  Geroski, P.A. (1995) ‘What do we Know about Entry’, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 13(4), p. 421-440

14.  Harris, C.D. (1954) ‘The Market as a Factor in the Localization of Production’, Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 44, p. 315-348

15.  Hanson, G. (2005) ‘Market Potential, Increasing Return and Geographic Concentration’, Journal of International Economics, 67(1), p. 1-2

16.  Acs, Z. and Audretsch, D.B. (1994) ‘New-Firm Startups, Technology, and Macroeconomic Fluctuations’, Small Business Economics, 6(6), p. 439-49.

17.  Aw, B.Y., Chen, S. and Roberts, M. (1997) ‘Firm-level Evidence on Productivity Differentials, Turnover and Exports in Taiwanese Manufacturing, NBER Working Paper 6235

18.  Baier, S.L. and Bergstrand, J.H. (2007) ‘Do Free Trade Agreements Actually Increase Members’ International Trade?’, Journal of International Economics, 71(1), p. 72-95

19.  Baker, G. and Kennedy, R.E. (2002) ‘Survivorship and the Economic Grim Reaper’, Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, 18(2), p. 324-361.

20.  Baldwin, J.R. and Gorecki, P. (1991) ‘Firm Entry and Exit in the Canadian Manufacturing Sector, 1970-1982’, Canadian Journal of Economics, 24(2), p. 300 – 323.

21.  Baldwin, J. and Gu, W. (2002) ‘Plant Turnover and Productivity Growth in Canadian Manufacturing’, PECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers, 2002/2 OECD Publishing.

22.  Bartelsman, E. and Doms, M. (2000) ‘Understanding Productivity: Lessons from Longitudinal Microdata’, Journal of Economic Literature, 38(3), p. 569-594.

23.  Bartelsman, E., Haltiwanger, J. and Scarpetta, S. (2005) ‘Microeconomic Evidence of Creative Destruction in Industrial and Developing Countries’, Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 04- 114/3. Tinbergen Institute.

24.  Bernard, A., Jensen, J.B. and Schott, P. (2006) ‘Survival of the best fit: Exposure to low-wage Countries and the (uneven) Growth of U.S. Manufacturing Plants’, Journal of International Economics, 68(1), p. 219-237.

25.  Blau, D.M. (1987) ‘A Time-Series Analysis of Self-Employment in the United States’, Journal of Political Economy, 95(3), p. 445-467.

26.  Bruce, D. (2000) ‘Effects of the United States tax system on transitions into self-employment’, Labour Economics, 7, p. 545-574.

27.  Burke, A., Fok, D., van Stel, A. and Thurik, R. (2009) ‘The Dynamics of Entry and Exit’, SCALES research paper H200907

28.  Carrol, R., Holtz-Eakim, D., Rider, M. and Hervey, S. (1997) ‘Entrepreneurs, Income Taxes, and Investment’, Office of Tax Policy Research Woraking paper

29.  Da Rin, M., Di Giacomo, M. and Sembenelli, A. (2011) ‘Entrepreneurship, Firm Entry, and the Taxation of Corporate Income: Evidence from Europe’, forthcoming in the Journal of Public Economics.

30.  Devereux, M., and Griffith, R., (1998a) ‘Taxes and the location of production: evidence from a panel of US multinationals,’ Journal of Public Economics, 68 (1), p. 335—67.