Sentences with phrase «of federal deficits»

The result: a need for greater private - sector financing of federal deficits.

The result: a need for greater private - sector financing of federal deficits.

While last week's budget vote cleared the way to begin the tax reform effort, 20 Republicans voted against it, citing issues with the elimination of state and local tax deductions and a massive expansion of the federal deficit.

In the Vietnam War era the government's rapid increase of the federal deficit began the inflation cycle that peaked in the late»70s.

In summary, we believe that the Institute's fiscal projections understate the magnitude of the federal deficit and that the some of the proposed restraint measures are unrealistic and will not yield their estimated savings.

The projected ballooning of the federal deficit, largely due to underfunded Medicare and Social Security benefits, should focus the minds of citizens.

Doheny does have an edge over Owens on the issues of the federal deficit and taxes, but Owens is ahead on jobs, health care, the war in Afghanistan and education.

He's also ahead by a margin of between five and 20 points on all key issues — the closest Altschuler comes is on the question of the federal deficit.

«No rational analysis says that we can begin to reduce the size of the federal deficit without a combination of cutting spending and raising revenue,» added Bloomberg.

After demonstrating a stunning lack of knowledge about the size of the federal deficit — he was off by $ 10 trillion the last time he was asked — maybe he's home studying up.

Not exact matches

Most chatter about the 2016 federal budget will be about the size of the deficit.

Ahead of the 2016 federal budget, I had a list of eight things to watch for, beyond the size of the deficit.

In his first term, Bush won passage of tax cuts that helped swing the federal budget from surpluses to deficits.

By transferring to the private sector ownership of Canada Post, the federal government can eliminate a major drain on public finances and move closer to the goals of eliminating the fiscal deficit and paying down public sector debt.

Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney argued earlier this week on CNN's «State of the Union» that increasing the federal deficit is necessary to unlocked the desired economic growth the Trump administration has targeted.

WASHINGTON, Oct 9 - A top Senate Democrat on Tuesday said new tax revenues should go to reducing the federal deficit, not cutting tax rates, dismissing as «obsolete» a Reagan - era model of tax reform.

And all of them argue that the proposed tax cuts, estimated to reduce federal revenue by more than $ 1.4 trillion, won't increase federal deficits, an assertion that's been contradicted by Congress's official tax scorekeeper.

Their issues range from the tax legislation's treatment of small businesses, to healthcare, to the federal deficit.

Thirteen months later, with Canadians staring at a $ 56 - billion crater in the government's finances, the minister got testy with reporters who were asking for his response to a report from the Parliamentary Budget Office that predicted a federal deficit of nearly $ 20 billion in 2013 - 14.

For starters, Prime Minister Stephen Harper has promised to fight the federal deficit, expected to reach $ 56 billion by fiscal year - end, with «fiscal discipline» instead of tax increases.

Many of the CEOs were worried that the federal government is projecting an $ 85 - billion deficit by the spring of 2013.

Through a combination of $ 1 billion from the sale of GM shares, a $ 2 billion reduction in the contingency fund and $ 1.8 billion taken out of Employment Insurance (a holdover from Budget 2014), the federal government was able to turn a modest deficit into a $ 1.4 billion surplus.

Morneau can risk expanding the deficit because the federal government's debt - to - GDP ratio is a relatively paltry 30 %, about half of what it was in the 1990s when Canada faced a fiscal crisis.

Most outside economic analyses say the type of tax cuts being promoted by Trump would likely fuel even larger deficits for a federal government already projected to see its debt steadily rise.

The projected elimination of the federal government deficit — currently exceeding $ 30 billion — relies on the assumption of annual GDP growth of 5.6 % while program spending is held to an average annual growth rate of 2 %.

A provision within that rule stipulates that any bill going through reconciliation can not add to the federal deficit outside of 10 years.

The White House has yet to spell out how much of a hole the tax cuts could create in the federal budget, maintaining that the resulting economic growth would reduce — if not eliminate — the risk of a soaring deficit.

«Public - sector spending — a strong, steady contributor to the economy over the past decade — is now being curtailed as federal and provincial governments try to bring deficits under control,» the Conference Board of Canada noted in a recent forecast.

Another early obstacle is the projected fiscal impact of the plan, which would slash U.S. revenues and expand the federal deficit and the national debt, which now exceeds $ 20 trillion.

Eliminating the state and local tax deduction would raise about one - quarter of the $ 4 trillion in revenues that some Republicans say they need to prevent tax cuts from creating a massive increase in the federal budget deficit.

Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives forged ahead on Tuesday with legislation to reshape the federal tax code, while a top credit - ratings agency said the bill would balloon the budget deficit and give only a temporary boost to the economy.

In a commentary in The Wall Street Journal this week, former vice president of the Federal Reserve Alan Blinder writes that Trump's tax cut plans — the largest of all the presidential candidates — would cost the nation $ 9.5 trillion over the next decade, which in turn would make the budget deficit balloon to ruinous effect.

Democrats call the Republican proposal a giveaway to corporations at the expense of the middle class, issuing dire warnings about the $ 1 trillion or more it is projected to add to federal budget deficits over a decade.

The Congress faces an array of policy choices as it confronts the challenges posed by the amount of federal debt held by the public — which has more than doubled relative to the size of the economy since 2007 — and the prospect of continued growth in that debt over the coming decades if the large annual budget deficits projected under current law come to pass.

While most of his proposals — «to abandon the gold standard, let international exchange rates float, use federal surpluses and deficits as macroeconomic policy tools that could counter cyclical trends, and establish bureaus of economic statistics (including a consumer price index) in order to facilitate this effort» — are now conventional practice, his critique of fractional - reserve banking still «remains outside the bounds of conventional wisdom» although a recent paper by the IMF reinvigorated his proposals.

Q: Will Congress» approval of trillion - dollar federal budget deficits this year and next and perhaps into the future be good for the economy?

If current laws remained generally unchanged, the United States would face steadily increasing federal budget deficits and debt over the next 30 years — reaching the highest level of debt relative to GDP ever experienced in this country.

In 1994 - 95, the federal deficit was 4.7 % of GDP.

The PBO believes that the federal government has a better than 60 per cent chance of eliminating the deficit by 2015 - 16, 70 per cent or better by 2016 - 17, and a 75 per cent chance or better by 2017 - 18.

Even when announcing in November that the federal deficit would come in at $ 26 billion, $ 5 billion higher than predicted in the 2012 budget, the minister couldn't resist gloating: «Unlike many of Canada's counterparts in the G7, we remain on track to return to balanced budgets over the medium term.»

Notwithstanding the Conservatives» repeated rejections of the PBO claim, last year's budget was an implicit admission that a significant portion of the federal government's deficit was structural.

Twin Deficits, Twenty Years Later, Federal Reserve Bank of New York Current Issues in Economics and Finance, 12, no. 7 (October).

But with provincial deficits swelling from coast to coast this year, and rising health care costs expected to ravage provincial coffers in the coming decades, federal figures are starting to paint an increasingly misleading portrait of Canada's government debt situation.

Subsequent research at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York indicates that the link between fiscal deficits and capital inflows is not as strong as commonly suggested.2

However, a budget deficit that takes the form of transfer payments to banks, as in the case of the post-September 2008 bank bailout, the Federal Reserve's $ 2 trillion in cash - for - trash financial swaps and the $ 700 billion QE2 credit creation by the Federal Reserve to lend to banks at 0.25 % interest in 2011, has a different effect from deficits that reflect social spending programs, Social Security and Medicare, public infrastructure investment or the purchase of other goods and services.

While I understand that the NDP must feel intense pressure to capture votes — including from people who have never taken a course from John Smithin — I often wish that the NDP would show a bit more policy leadership on the issue of the deficit and debt. I was particularly disappointed during the 2008 federal election campaign when Mr. Layton stated, unequivocally, that the NDP would not run a deficit in the following year if elected (even though it was clear that Canada was entering a recession).

With the onset of the 2008 - 09 recession and the subsequent G20 agreement for countries to introduce temporary stimulus spending equivalent to 2 percent of GDP, the federal deficit ballooned to $ 55.6 billion in 2009 - 10; $ 33.0 billion in 2010 - 11; $ 26.3 in 2011 - 12; $ 18.4 billion in 2012 - 13 and $ 5.2 billion in 2013.14.

Harper - economics lead to a Harper - recession and now to a Harper - deficit Louis - Philippe Rochon Associate Professor, Laurentian University Co-Editor, Review of Keynesian Economics Confirmation federal government finances have fallen back into deficit raises more questions about Harperâ $ ™ s image, now more myth than reality, as a sound economic manager.

The recently passed tax cuts could increase the Federal deficit by around $ 200 billion this year, adding to the supply of bonds.

For the first three months of fiscal year 2011 - 12, the federal government posted a deficit of $ 5.5 billion, down $ 1.7 billion from the $ 7.2 billion reported in the same period in 2010 - 11.