html5-img
1 / 51

Part 4: Public Expenditures in Canada

Part 4: Public Expenditures in Canada. Part 2 (Chapters 4-7) provided the justification for government involvement: 1) Public Goods (chapter 4) 2) Externalities (chapter 5) 3) Income Redistribution (chapter 6) As well as a general framework to evaluate any government project:

conner
Download Presentation

Part 4: Public Expenditures in Canada

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Part 4: Public Expenditures in Canada Part 2 (Chapters 4-7) provided the justification for government involvement: 1) Public Goods (chapter 4) 2) Externalities (chapter 5) 3) Income Redistribution (chapter 6) As well as a general framework to evaluate any government project: 4) Cost – Benefit Analysis (chapter 7) Part 4 examines major expenditures of different levels of Canadian government

  2. Part 4: • Chapter 10: Social Welfare Programs • Chapter 11: Employment Insurance • Chapter 12: Public Pensions • Chapter 13: Health Care • Chapter 14: Education

  3. Canadian Public Expenditure • A large portion of government expenditure goes to Welfare, Health Care, and Education: • Welfare and Income Security (23% of government expenditure - 2002) • Health Care (10.4% of GDP - 2008) • Education (16.1% of GDP - 2009)

  4. Canadian Public Expenditure, % of GDP

  5. Canadian Public Expenditure • These programs aim to both: 1) Redistribute Income 2) Achieve Goals mandated in Part II • Often these two issues are intermeshed or opposing • There is a great deal of interaction between the various programs

  6. Chapter 10: Social Welfare Programs • 84% of Canadians agree that the government should provide a social safety net (Gallup poll, 1989) • Issues arise in this “safety net” because: • People disagree about basic standard of living • Welfare recipients have increased since 1970’s • Some welfare recipients are employable • Some think welfare is too high, reducing work incentives

  7. Chapter 10: Social Welfare Programs • History - Descriptions and Trends • Theory - Welfare Programs and Work Incentives • Theory - Alternatives to Welfare

  8. Theory – Definitions • Social Insurance -insurance against adverse effects (unemployment, illness, etc) -mandatory programs not FOCUSED on income redistribution (benefits are paid out regardless of income) • Social Assistance (Welfare) -provides benefits to low income

  9. History - Welfare Programs: Descriptions and Trends • The Canadian Constitution gives the provinces responsibility for a VARIETY of social welfare programs • BUT the Federal government plays a DIRECT and INDIRECT role: Direct: • Working Income Tax Benefit (WITB) • Canada Child Tax Benefit (CCTB) • National Child Benefit Supplement (NCBS)

  10. History - Welfare Programs: Descriptions and Trends Indirect: • 1966 – the Canada Assistance Plan (CAP) provided 50% of a province’s eligible welfare expenditures (had to meet federal guidelines) • Matching grants were replaced by block grants in 1996

  11. History - Welfare Programs: Descriptions and Trends Indirect: • CAP replaced by the Canada Social Transfer (CST) for social programs and post-secondary education -per capita cash grant) -only condition is prohibiting residency requirements -CAP was $11.2 billion in 2010/11

  12. History – Who Needs Welfare • 13% of Canadians were low income in 2009 • This varies greatly by group (ie: female single-parent families) • Generally higher unemployment creates higher welfare need because: • Some people exhaust EI • Some people don’t quality for EI • But this is not the only factor…… • Some argue that wide changes in EI programs have a large effect

  13. Welfare and Unemployment Although in some time periods (yellow), welfare seems to move with unemployment, in other times (red), it obviously does not

  14. Who Receives Welfare? • -Note that OAS/GIS, CPP/QPP and other programs almost eliminated elderly need for welfare.

  15. Welfare Programs & Provinces • All welfare programs are based on needs: • The need for food, shelter, clothing, house supplies, personal care, and special needs (medical and dental) are assessed • Financial Resources (employment, EI, etc) are assessed • Assets (with exemptions such as furniture, vehicles, home, employment tools and small savings accounts) are assessed • Social assistance is calculated as (Needs-Available Resources) • The following table summarizes maximum provincial welfare (including child benefits, GST credits and provincial tax credits):

  16. Welfare Programs & Provinces • Note that special needs and EI are not included

  17. Welfare Programs & Provinces • Welfare varies widely (by thousands), among provinces and territories: • 2009 Single Employable welfare person was lowest at $3,773 a year in New Brunswick and highest at $9,593 in Newfoundland ($15,369 in Yukon to $43,826 in Nunavut) • Variations party due to • Cost of living • Provincial finance • Different welfare programs • Different welfare preferences (politics)

  18. Canada Child Tax Benefit • The Canada Child Tax Benefit (CCTB) in 2011 was $1,348 per year for the first and second child and $1,442 for further children • This is clawed back as income increases • The National Child Benefit Supplement (NCBS) targets low-income families with $2,088 per year for the first child, $1,848 for the second, and $1,758 for each additional child • This is clawed back faster as income increases

  19. Is Welfare Enough? • Note that these provincial values are below Stat’s Canada’s Low Income Cut-Off Lines (LICO) • 2009 Nova Scotia welfare of a single employable person was 41% of the LICO • Are these amounts enough? • Recall: • The LICO may be above the poverty line; basic needs likely lie below this income level • There may be other sources of aid

  20. Is Welfare Enough? Question: Should welfare provide a reasonable standard of living? OR Should welfare simply prevent extreme deprivation?

  21. Theory – Welfare Programs and Work Incentives Two Questions dominate the welfare debate: • Does welfare reduce work effort and labor force participation? • Do generous welfare benefits lead to social assistance dependence? The following model examines these two questions:

  22. Theory - Labor/Leisure Trade-Off In economics, time spent working is LABOR, and ALL other time (even chores) is considered LEISURE. • A person’s time is divided between labor and leisure in a time budget constraint, where time spent in labor produces income People gain utility from leisure activities, and utility from income (therefore indirectly get utility from labor) • This allows for typical indifference curves on the labor-leisure graph:

  23. Labor/Leisure Trade-Off -Utility is maximized at the point of tangency E -Here, OF hours are spent on leisure -Here, FT hours a spent on Work, for an income of wFT (w=hourly wage) -Available hours are OT

  24. Welfare w/no Earning Exemption Assume a simple welfare situation where someone is given $500, which is reduced by $1 for every $1 one earns • This occurs if a province does not have a earnings exemption on welfare (BC) • This creates a vertical kink in the time budget constraint • All points below the vertical portion of this kink are effectively ruled out • On the horizontal section, would receive the same income from working as from not working:

  25. Welfare w/no Earning Exemption -Without the assistance, this person would work OF hours, but due to the assistance, work falls to ZERO

  26. Welfare w/no Earning Exemption -Some people would still chose to work and accept no social assistance

  27. Welfare and Partial Earning Reductions Alternately, welfare could be reduced by a PORTION of job earnings. Assume again $500 welfare, which is reduced by $0.50 for every dollar earned: • This provides a less serious kink in the curve: • Effectively, along the lower portion of the curve, the person receives an EXTRA $0.50 for each hour worked instead of $0.

  28. Welfare and Partial Earning Reductions -Without welfare this person would work FT hours -With welfare this person still works KT hours

  29. Theory - Disincentive Effects Having a severe “clawback” (reduction in benefits due to earnings) creates a large disincentive to work. • Therefore, many governments have an amount of earnings exempt from clawbacks, and then reduces by than 100% after that point • Ie: In Alberta $230/month of earnings are exempt, afterwards the benefit reduction is 75% The following table shows the Marginal Tax Rate (MTR) in Quebec with federal and provincial income tax and tax credits/benefits (does not include Quebec social assistance)

  30. Quebec MTR for 2 Earner Family of Four

  31. Disincentive Effects Studies have shown that more generous welfare rates do create more and longer welfare cases: • probability of welfare participation by women in 1980 increased (Charette and Meng, 1994) • Welfare collection for 22 to 29 Quebec men increased by 3.8 months (Drolet, 2004) Welfare Wall – situations that prevent people from leaving social assistance

  32. Welfare & Work Welfare Labor Disincentives are important BUT cannot be over-emphasized • Income Redistribution is distortionary • This distortion cannot be removed • If the goal of welfare is to maximize work hours, taken to the extreme this leads to the workhouses (English Poor Law of 1843) • The poor in England were segregated from their families and treated similar to criminals • Similar to conscription

  33. Other Welfare Distortions Critics claim that some able-bodied people chose to stay on welfare. Economically, we worry if welfare: a) causes laziness/disincentive to work b) decreases human capital (market skills) Some studies have weakly suggested this may occur somewhat for those over 24. Another concern of welfare deals with family make-up. Do the different welfare amounts for different family types encourage marriage, divorce, or even more children?

  34. Theory – Welfare Alternatives and Ongoing Challenges Two key alternatives to Welfare are: • Negative Income Tax (NIT) • Workfare In addition, the welfare system faces ongoing challenges in Canada.

  35. 1) Negative Income Tax One alternative to typical welfare is the NEGATIVE INCOME TAX (NIT) Under NIT: • People are guaranteed a basic annual income (W) • If people work and earn income (E), their grants are reduced by an implicit marginal tax less than 100% (t) • Benefit (B) received is therefore B=W-tE, until B equals zero at a high income level

  36. 1) Negative Income Tax -The NIT has a smaller kink than zero exemption welfare -point S, where E=W/t, is break-even earnings where assistance ends -NIT’s are also called Guaranteed Annual Income (GAI)

  37. 1) Negative Income Tax -The NIT allows for a higher utility than no assistance, while still allowing for work

  38. 1) Negative Income Tax Canadian NIT’s include: • the Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS – Public Pensions Chapter) for those over 65 years • Child Tax Benefits (and NCB Supplement) • the GST tax credit • Alberta Blue Cross healthcare coverage NIT’s have advantages and disadvantages...

  39. Negative Income Tax Advantages • Welfare recipients have more incentive to work (compared to a 0% earning exemption) • The working poor receive some income support if (earnings<break-even earnings) • Welfare administration could be simplified • Payments according to income requires no assessment of needs • Similar overlapping programs programs (GST credit, GIS, Child Tax Benefit, housing subsidies, employment insurance) could be replaced

  40. NIT Disadvantages • NIT would be costly if it gave good incentives (low t), and a reasonable guaranteed income • (W/t – break-even point – is very large) • NIT would reduce incentives to work for the current working poor (who currently face a lower marginal tax than under NIT

  41. NIT Disadvantages 3) NIT is a PASSIVE income support scheme • it lacks training to allow recipients to become self-sufficient • There is no reciprocal responsibility for the recipient to become a more productive member of society Due to many of these disadvantages (especially #3), Workfare programs are often proposed:

  42. 2) Workfare In traditional welfare and NIT, individuals CHOOSE how much to work. In Workfare programs, participants receive benefits only if they: • Participate in a work-related activity (including education) • Accept employment if offered Workfare has a variety of advantages and disadvantages:

  43. Workfare Advantages • The program is more politically popular (therefore may receive higher benefits) • Collecting welfare becomes harder, reducing recipients and lowering welfare costs • People are equipped with work skills, allowing them to escape from poverty Fortin, Truchon, and Beausejour (1993) indicated workfare programs could be potentially superior to current welfare in Quebec

  44. Workfare Disadvantages • The program may demean the poor (morality) • Work-related activities may be difficult to produce (effectiveness) • Difficulty distinguishing between those able and unable to participate in work-related activities • High administration costs

  45. Workfare Conclusions Gueron (1993) studied US Workfare and concluded: • “implementing participation mandates is feasible but difficult” • “such programs result in positive and cost-effective – although modest – gains but do not lift large numbers of people out of poverty”

  46. Workfare Conclusions Welfare-to-work and workfare have become more common since the mid 1990’s: • Ontario started the Ontario Works program in 1998. • In the early 1990’s, Alberta started directing new social assistance applicants to training and work projects. -These programs empirically reduce new applicants, but don’t cause current cases to leave welfare

  47. Ongoing Challenges Social welfare programs have changed over time, and have many issues. 3 example of issues are: • Program interactions and overlap • Child Care • Asset Stripping

  48. 1) Program Overlap 1) A single parent living in Toronto with one child working 37.5 hours a week at $10.25 an hour has net income of $26,979 after $8,154 in social assistance -But this social assistance comes from 8 different sources, each with different exemptions, clawbacks, and administration costs -this creates jumps in the welfare wall -would a single program be more beneficial?

  49. 2) Child Care 2) Childcare costs can prevent parents from entering the labor market: -Some provinces have subsidized child care, some don’t -Even with fully subsidized child care, child care costs exceed the Universal Child Care Benefit (Federal grant of $100 per month per child under 6) -There is evidence that stay-at-home parents have a large LONG-RUN benefit to society as the child benefits when they grow up

  50. 3) Asset Stripping 3) Assets can make a person ineligible for social assistance, and therefore need to be “stripped away” to fully qualify -Allowing welfare recipients to retain more assets increases caseloads and program costs -Some assets can help people become self-sufficient Ie: Registered Education Savings Plans are exempt, but the debate on what should and shouldn’t be exempt goes on

More Related