The Federal Budget: Issues for FY2011 and FY2012
The federal budget is an important instrument used by the Congress to distribute resources and influence federal policies. The budget cycle for a single year takes about three calendar years to be completed. The managerial agencies open the budgetary procedure by assembling complete budget requests in the fiscal year before the President’s budget obedience.
Usually, numerous agencies commence working on their budget estimates during the summer before the onset of the fiscal year. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) supervises the development of budget estimates from these agencies. The president is then expected to present a budget before the Congress on the first Monday of February (Levit, 2011, p.1).
Budget Baseline Projections
Financial plan Baseline projections review the brunt of future legislation on the budget. The CBO calculates current law baseline projections based on the postulations outlined in the budget enforcement legislation. Estimates based on these postulations usually produce superior revenue projections and slower growth of discretionary expenditure relative to scenarios autonomous forecasters perceive as likely.
There are certain assumptions incorporated by CBO baseline projections: that the 2001/2003/2010 tax reliefs expire after 2012; that discretionary expenditure stays unchanged in inflation-adjusted terms; that sharp cutbacks in Medicare’s payment rates for doctors’ services will commence at the end of 2011 as planned; and that protraction of unemployment benefit will end on 31st, 2011 as planned.
Nonetheless, CBO offers estimates of these overheads independently from its baseline (Levit, 2011, p.2).
Federal Spending and Revenue Trends
The federal spending accounted for about 21.2% of the gross domestic product (GDP) whereas federal revenues were estimated at 18.1% of GDP over the last four decades. Since FY2000, the US has experienced a budget deficit as a result of imbalances between spending and revenues (Table 1 in the appendix).
For instance, in FY2010, the regime used up over $3.49 trillion in contrast to the $2.2 trillion in proceeds during this time. In addition, between the fiscal years 2008 and 2010, expenditures grew by $472.8 billion whereas revenues shrank by $362.1 billion (Levit, 2011, p.3).
Federal Spending
Federal expenditures are usually split into: mandatory, discretionary, and net interest categories. Mandatory expenditure includes expenditure on entitlement programs such as Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid. The Congress enacts laws that stipulate eligibility requirements for entitlement programs. The Congress usually sets asides funds for entitlement programs based on the number of people who qualify.
Optional expenditure on the other hand is a matter of yearly congressional appropriations laws. Net interest encompasses interest payments made by the government on the debt held by the public. In the fiscal year 2010, discretionary expenditure was about 9.28% of GDP. Discretionary expenditure, as a percentage of GDP, has been rising by 8.2% every year since FY2000.
Increases in discretionary expenditures during this period (FY2000-FY2010) are mainly attributed to the US’ overseas military operations, especially in Afghanistan and Iraq (Levit, 2011, p.5). During the fiscal year 2010, mandatory expenditure was estimated at 55.2% of the aggregate spending, discretionary expenditure totaled 38.9% of aggregate spending, and net interest was about 5.6% of aggregate expenditure.
Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security alone make up 42.9% of aggregate federal expenditure. Given that discretionary expenditure is slightly above 33% of the aggregate federal spending, a number of budget experts propose that any major federal outlay cuts must take into account reductions in mandatory spending.
However, other experts argue that reductions in mandatory expenditures would have a negative impact on many households. Nonetheless, since CBO projects that the mandatory expenditure will increase to 14% of GDP in FY2021, action is required to reduce projected deficit levels and reinstate long-term fiscal health (Levit, 2011, p.6).
Federal Revenue
In the fiscal year 2000, total revenues were 20.5% of GDF. However, in FY2010, total revenues collected were 14.8% of GDP, the lowest level ever in the last six decades. Federal revenues have remained low for several years due to tax relief provision and economic recession. It is projected that federal revenues will remain low in FY2011.
The long-term federal revenue prospects are dependent on the legislative actions of Congress on potential tax reform and speed at which the economy recovers from the 2008 financial crisis. According to the CBO baseline projections, revenues are expected to increase to 20.7% of GDP in FY2021. These projections are based on the assumptions that some specific tax provisions end as planned under the current law.
Consequently, tax rates will increase hence boost revenue collection. “The major source of federal revenues has long been individual income taxes. For example, individual income tax revenues in the fiscal year 2010 were estimated at 6.3% of GDP” (Levit, 2011, p.6).
Federal Response to Economic Crisis
The federal government adopted exceptional remedial measures to address the 2008 financial crisis. For example, in February 2008, the Congress approved a $150 billion package (Economic Stimulus Act, 2008) to boost consumption levels through reimbursements to taxpayers and allowing business organizations devalue capital investments.
Furthermore, the head of state signed into law the ARRA ACT of 2009, a second incentive package that is intended to kindle economic growth.
The ARRA enclosed provisions that are now approximated at $820.8 billion in augmented mandatory and optional expenditure and decreased tax revenue for the FY2009-FY2019 period. “CBO projects that over 86% of ARRA’s direct effect on the deficit will take place the FY2011 ends” (Levit, 2011, p.10).
These economic stimulus packages aim to bolster several state and local government programs such as: school funding, Medicaid, tax rebates, prolonged unemployment benefits as well as increased funding for transportation projects (Levit, 2011, p.10).
Appropriations in the 2011 Fiscal Year
The Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act 2010 were signed by the President into law on December 17th, 2010. This law had many provisions, such as the reinstatement of the estate tax up to 2012, the expansion of the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax rebates up to 2012 and patching the optional minimum tax up to the expiry of FY2011.
In addition, the emergency unemployment benefits were prolonged under this law (Office of Management and Budget, 2011, p.16). The employee share of the payroll tax was also reduced by 2% until the expiry of FY2011. According to the present law, CBO projected that the expenditure and revenue actions in the bill would amplify the deficit by over $389 billion in FY2011 and by $467.9 billion during the FY2012-FY2020 (Levit, 2011, p.12).
California’s State Budget
In recent years, the state of California has been compelled to make hard choices to plug the budget gaps, for example, taxes were increased provisionally. In addition, the Proposition 98 Guarantee was decreased from $56.5 billion to about $49 billion. Overall, $103.5 billion in budgetary cuts were implemented between FY2008 and FY2010 (Brown, 2011, p.1).
Even though the financial crisis has been the main cause of California’s budget deficit, the state had structural budget deficit prior to the economic recession. The budget gap for California State is projected to increase to $25.3 billion in the FY2011-12. This gap is composed of a budget-year deficit of $17.3 billion and a current-year deficit of $8.1 billion.
There are several factors that contributed to the anticipated shortfall in FY2011-12. For example, the budget plan implemented in FY2010-2011 was based on impractical assumptions, such as financial assistance from the federal government and on expenditure cuts that were not implemented. In total, these factors ($3.5 billion in federal assistance and $1.8 billion cuts) increase the budget gap by $5.3 billion (Brown, 2011, p.4).
Bridging the Budget Gap
In order to reinstate the power of local government to make sound decisions, increase efficiency in government operations and ensure the sustenance of core services, the governor proposed several remedial measures to bridge the budget deficit. As illustrated in Table 2, the budget consists of $ 26.4 billion in revenues, expenditure cuts and other measures to reduce plug the deficit in FY2010-11 and beyond.
The budget decreases expenditure by about 12.4 billion. It comprises considerable cuts to several key programs, for example, $1.4 billion to California’s welfare-to-work program, $1.6 billion to Medi-Cal, $1billion to the California State University and University of California, over $579 million to employee reimbursement and state operations, and $750 million to the Department of Development Services (Brown, 2011, p.5).
The California’s budget also contains some elements of borrowing and savings. “These consist of $1.6 billion in property tax shifts, $1.7 billion in borrowing from special funds, $0.9 billion from Proposition 63 moneys to finance community mental health services and $1 billion from Proposition 10 reserve to finance children’s programs”(Brown, 2011, p.6).
Implementing the budget’s long-term solutions is the best way to purge the structural gaps in the future. As a result, the proposed budget demands for a hastened timeline to reinstate balance to the State’s budget. The proposed budget assumes that all relevant legislative amendments will be passed by the legislature and signed into law to implement budget solutions (Brown, 2011, p.6).
Revenue Estimates
California is currently recovering from the 2008 economic crisis. This recovery is apparent in the underlying revenue estimates for the majority of California’s key revenue sources. The recently passed legislation has altered the pattern of California’s General Fund revenues.
For instance, the Business Act [2008] limited the use of business tax credits (by 50%) to compensate taxpayer’s pre-credit responsibility for big businesses in FY2008-09. the impact of this restriction was to augment revenue by about $352 million in the FY2008-09, by $274 million in FY2009-10, and by about $7.9 million in FY2010-11. in addition, the Budget Act [2008] allowed corporations to share their credits with members in their association, commencing in FY2010.
The impact of this provision was not evident until the FY2009-10 when the anticipated revenue is $54.9 million (Brown, 2011, p.36). This provision is projected to cause a revenue loss of about $235 million and $340 million in FY2010-11 and FY2011-12 respectively (Brown, 2011, p.37).
Employee Compensation and Retirement
In FY2011-12, salaries for state employees are estimated to cost about $6.9 billion while other benefits such as retirement contributions and health care are estimated to cost $3.3 billion General Fund. Consequently, reducing salaries and benefits outlays continues to be critical to closing the budget gap. There are several proposals outlined in the General Fund budget to bridge the deficit.
The first proposal relates to Personal Leave Program. The proposed budget mirrors savings of $71.5 million accruing from the personal leave program and extending into FY2011-12. The second proposal relates to the Reduced Employee Compensation Costs. A decrease of $308.3 million attained via a 10% reduction in take-home reimbursement for the 6 bargaining units without agreements.
These savings will be realized via joint bargaining. Core Health Care Option is the third proposal outlined in the budget. In FY2010-11, healthcare benefit outlays for retirees and active employees are projected at 2.3 billion (Brown, 2011, p.177).
In order to reduce healthcare expenditures for retirees and state employees, the budget incorporates an additional core health plan to the present plan options in order to save over $71 million from the anticipated rise in the FY2012 health rates. The core health plan would grant essential healthcare insurance at a lower premium.
The California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) will be empowered by the legislation to: bargain and append a core healthcare plan option to the current range of healthcare plans; and include a state agent in the healthcare contract consultations for the purpose of making adjustments to the core healthcare plan option and promoting the inclusion of cost-effective options within the current plans (Brown, 2011, p.178).
Lancaster County: Budget Estimates FY2010
The management staff of the Lancaster County prepared a comprehensive budget estimates on the financial activities of the county for the FY2010. Since FY2004, the County of Lancaster has never experienced a budget deficit (Table 3). For example, in FY 2004-05 total revenues were estimated at $16.6 million while total expenditures were $16.3 million during this period.
In spite of the 2008 financial crisis, the total revenues collected in the County of Lancaster in FY2009-10 was the highest ($23.5 million) since FY2004-05 (Russell, 2010, p.61). In FY2010, unemployment rate for the County of Lancaster was 8.5%. In addition, revenues from taxable sale reduced by 3.5% during the 2010 fiscal period. As a result, the County’s budget for FY2011 decreased by about 2.3% (Russell, 2010, p.9).
Priority of Funding
The Lancaster County offers government services in eight key operational areas. These areas and percentage of total funding are: Judicial Administration- 3.2%; General Government Administration- 6.1%; Public Works-5.7%; Public Safety- 19.5%; Education- 50.7%; Health and Welfare- 11.8%; Community Development- 2.1%; and Parks, Recreation and Cultural-0.9% (Russell, 2010, p.3).
Overview of the Lancaster’s Budget
The budget statement for the County of Lancaster has three key aspects: Government financial reports; Fund financial reports; and Notes to the financial reports.
The government financial reports provide general overview of the financial status of the County. Moreover, the government financial reports differentiate roles of the Lancaster County that are mainly financed through taxes and intergovernmental revenues obtained from user fees and other charges.
The governmental activities of the Lancaster County include: courts; general government; sanitation; police services; social services; and education. The Fund financial reports are a cluster of accounts that are used to manage the manner in which the Counties resources are distributed for certain activities.
The notes to the financial reports provide supplementary information that is critical to a full comprehension of the data contained in the government and fund financial reports (Russell, 2010, p.5).
The government statement reflects activities such as public works, public safety and welfare services, which are financed through general government revenues (sales tax, property tax, fines, permits, etc). The statement of activities decreases gross expenditure via contributions, related program revenues and capital grants.
The legislative fund fiscal reports are prepared using the attuned accrual basis of secretarial and the present fiscal resources extent benchmark. Revenues are acknowledged on the basis of their availability.
They are treated as available only if they are collectible in the present financial period in order to be used to offset current expenditures. Accordingly, the County of Lancaster deems revenues to be available if they are collectible within 60 days after the expiry of the current financial period.
“Expenditures are usually recorded when an expense is incurred. Nevertheless, debt service spending and spending related to compensated claims, absence and judgments are documented only when imbursement is due” (Russell, 2010, p.20).
The fiduciary funds of the Lancaster County are documented in the financial reports by type. Given that these resources cannot be used finance activities of the local government, they are not included into the government financial reports (Russell, 2010, p.20).
Franchise taxes, property taxes and licenses related to the current fiscal year are perceived to be subject to accrual and are thus documented as revenues in FY2010. Consequently, personal and real taxes are documented as receivables and revenues when payable.
Utility and sales taxes, which are amassed state agencies and forwarded to the County of Lancaster are treated as receivables and revenues if they are collectible within 60 days after the expiry of the FY2010. In addition, permits, licenses, rents and fines are documented as revenues when collected.
Intergovernmental revenues- from state, federal and other grants to be used to fund specific outlays- are documented in the fiscal period to which the funding applies. All other sources of revenues are perceived to be available and measurable the moment they are received by the government (Russell, 2010, p.20).
Governmental Fund
The County of Lancaster uses the General Fund to finance its operations. The fund is mainly used to document all financial resources and transactions of the County. The main sources of revenues are: local taxes; property taxes; licenses; federal grants; service charges; permits; and income interests. A major segment of the General Fund is mainly used to fund the activities of the Component Unit School Board.
Capital Projects Funds is used to finance the construction or procurement of major capital assets. Special Revenue Funds are used by the County to document incomes from specific sources of revenues (except major capital projects) and requires different documentation as stipulated by the current legislative provisions (Russell, 2010, p.21).
Long-term Obligations
In the government financial reports, long-term obligations are documented as expenditures in the relevant business-type activities and governmental activities. With esteem to the fund fiscal reports, legislative fund sorts deed bond premiums as well as issuance costs of the bonds during the current fiscal period.
The nominal value of debt issued and payments on debt issuances are documented as other sources of financing whereas concessions on debt issuances are documented as other expenditures incurred. The costs of bond issuances are documented as debt service outlays (Russell, 2010, p.24).
Appendix
Table 1: Federal Budget: Total Expenditure and Revenues, FY2000-FY2010
(As percentage of GDP)
Source: Levit, M.R. (2011). The Federal Budget: Issues for FY2011, FY2012, and Beyond. Washington, D.C., Congressional Research Service
Table 2: California’s State Budget: Budget Estimates (Dollars in millions)
Source: Brown, E.G. (2011). 2011-12 Governors’ Budget Summary. Sacramento, California, State Capital.
Table 3: Lancaster County: Total Revenues and Expenditures, Fy2004-FY2010
(Dollars in millions)
Source: Russell, J. (2010). County of Lancaster, Virginia: Annual Financial Report. Virginia, County of Lancaster.
References
Brown, E.G. (2011). 2011-12 Governor’s Budget Summary. Sacramento, California, State Capital.
Levit, M.R. (2011). The Federal Budget: Issues for FY2011, FY2012, and Beyond. Washington, D.C., Congressional Research Service.
Office of Management and Budget. (2010). Fiscal Year 2012: Budget of the U.S. Government. Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office.
Russell, J. (2010). County of Lancaster, Virginia: Annual Financial Report. Virginia, County of Lancaster.