Investigating the Dominance of Fiscal Policy over Monetary Policy in Iran's Economy with Fiscal Theory of the Price Level (FTPL)

Document Type : Scientific paper

Authors

1 Shahid Beheshti University of Tehran

2 phd student of economics, allameh tabatabaei university, tehran, iran

Abstract

This research examines the role of financial policies in Iran using quantitative approaches and investigates the relative importance of financial policies in strengthening economic growth. In this regard, with the help of the Financial Theory of the Price Level (FTPL), this study addresses the issue of which political regime in Iran is placed in the group of "fiscal dominance" or "monetary dominance" and whether the primary government deficit is adjusted independently of real debts or not. In the next step, the current research investigates to what extent inflation is affected by financial deficits. Such an analysis can be indirect proof of the type of political regime in Iran, as well as an examination of how inflation will react to financial shocks. Financial dominance can have wide dimensions that the policymaker should pay attention to. Based on the results obtained in the econometric model of the research, it can be suggested that the two variables of money volume and budget surplus will have a major contribution to inflation changes. According to the above findings, it can be stated that Iran's economy is placed in the regime group with financial policy dominance because the monetary policymaker considers himself committed to the needs of the financial policymaker. Also, the results of this research show the important role of the budget deficit in determining the exogenousness of money volume in Iran, whose effect will be stable in Iran's economy for the next eight periods.

Keywords

Main Subjects


Afonso, A. (2008). Ricardian fiscal regimes in the european union. Empirica, 35(3), 313-334.
Barro, R. J. (1974). Are government bonds net wealth?. Journal of political economy82(6), 1095-1117.
Blanchard, O. J., & Kiyotaki, N. (1987). Monopolistic competition and the effects of aggregate demand. The American Economic Review, 647-666.
Canzoneri, M. B., & Diba, B. (1996). Fiscal constraints on central bank independence and price stability (No. 1463). CEPR Discussion Papers.
Canzoneri, M & B Diba (1998). Fiscal constraints on central bank independence and price stability, in J Malo de Molina, J Vinals and F Gutierrez (eds) Monetary policy and inflation in Spain, MacMillan. 
Canzoneri, M. B., Cumby, R. E., & Diba, B. T. (2001). Is the price level determined by the needs of fiscal solvency?. American Economic Review91(5), 1221-1238.
Clarida, R., Gali, J., & Gertler, M. (1999). The science of monetary policy: a new Keynesian perspective. Journal of economic literature37(4), 1661-1707.
Cochrane, J. H. (1996). Maturity matters: long-term debt in the fiscal theory of the price level. Unpublished, University of Chicago, December.
Cochrane, J. H. (1998). A frictionless view of US inflation. NBER macroeconomics annual13, 323-384.
Galí, J. (2007). Monetary policy, inflation, and the business cycle. Manuscript, CREI and UPF, 28.
Goodfriend, M., & King, R. G. (1997). The new neoclassical synthesis and the role of monetary policy. NBER macroeconomics annual12, 231-283.
Greiner.A,J. 2013. Consequences of real earnings management and weak corporate governance: evidence from cash holdings. Available at http:www.utexas.summon.com,retrieverd on 10.02.2013
Jordi Galí. (2007). Understanding the effects of government spending on consumption, Journal of the European Economic Association 5(1), 227-270.
Jørgensen, P. L., & Ravn, S. H. (2018). The inflation response to government spending shocks: a fiscal price puzzle?. Københavns Universitet.
Liu, C., & Xie, Y. (2022). Understanding inflation dynamics: the role of government expenditures. Available at SSRN.
Mankiw, N. Gregory. (1985). Small menu cost and large business cycles: A macroeconomic model. Quarteru Journal of Economics, 100(2), 529-538.
Mélitz, J. (2000). Some cross-country evidence about fiscal policy behavior and consequences for EMU. Euro Econ Rep Stud 2, 3–21.
Mishkin, F. S. (2011). Over the cliff: From the subprime to the global financial crisis. Journal of Economic Perspectives25(1), 49-70.
Momigliano, R. (2003). Aquarianism as genealogy: Arnaldo Momogliano’s method. History and Theory, 53(2), 212–233.
Rotemberg, J. J., & Woodford, M. (1997). An optimization-based econometric framework for the evaluation of monetary policy. NBER macroeconomics annual12, 297-346.
Sargent, T. J., & Wallace, N. (1981). Some unpleasant monetarist arithmetic. Federal Reserve Bank of minneapolis quarterly review5(3), 1-17.
Sims, C. A. (1992). Interpreting the macroeconomic time series facts: The effects of monetary policy. European economic review, 36(5), 975-1000.
Sims, C. A.)1997(. “Fiscal foundations of price stability in open economies”, mimeo, Yale University, 53(6), 112-134.
Sims, C. A., & Zha, T. (1995). Error bands for impulse responses. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta. Working Paper 95-6.
Uziel, E., & Santos, N. B. D. (2019). Source criticism and the history of Brazilian foreign policy. Contexto internacional41, 187-208.
Walsh, C. E. (2017). Monetary theory and policy. MIT press.
Woodford, M. (1994). Monetary policy and price level determinacy in a cash-in-advance economy. Economic theory4, 345-380.
Woodford, M. (1998). Control of the public debt: a requirement for price stability?. In The debt burden and its consequences for monetary policy: proceedings of a conference held by the International Economic Association at the Deutsche Bundesbank, Frankfurt, Germany Palgrave Macmillan UK. (pp. 117-158).
Woodford, M. (2007). The case for forecast targeting as a monetary policy strategy. Journal of economic perspectives21(4), 3-24.
Zoli, E. (2005). How does fiscal policy affect monetary policy in emerging market countries?.BIS Working Papers No. 174(1) 15-37 .