Abstract
This paper compares the level and composition of government spending in U.S. states that maintain separate budgets for capital and operating expenditures with that in states that employ unified budgets. It also investigates the effects of pay-as-you-go financing rules for capital projects. The empirical findings suggest that states with separate capital budgets spend more on public capital projects than comparable states with unified budgets. There is no evidence that the presence or absence of a capital budget affects the level of non-capital spending. Pay-as-you-go requirements for financing capital projects are associated with lower levels of both capital and non-capital spending.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
