Can a ‘conventional
fiscal policy approach’ and ‘tax cuts’ solve the strategic
issues facing British Columbia in today’s open economic conditions?
Previous BC governments failed to detect strategic
issues and problems in the allocation and pricing mechanism that
regulates the liquidity and money flow in our economy. That includes
issues relating to federal tax transfer and intervention in the
regional and local economy. Subsequently, they also failed to
intervene appropriately before those issues caused adversity and
irreparable harm to the community.
In good democratic order, the voters reacted and
gave the BC Liberals an explicit mandate to reorganize the government’s
policies and institutions and to solve the issues that hamper
investment in economic production and jobs.
Canada and BC’s economy is not a planned, but a
democratic governed mixed economy and what is significant today - an
open mixed economy with unrestricted movement of investment and
liquidity. For the members of society that make up the economy, tax
base, quality of life, a good ecology and political stability,
ultimately depend on private investment in sustainable economic
production. Therefore, the question for BC is: will the new
government’s economic and social policy stimulate investment and
create the liquidity that BC businesses need in order to create jobs
and distribute wealth in the community via better paid jobs?
In our mixed economy, government’s task is to
collect tax to provide services the private sector is unable to
provide, and such services that society in good democratic order has
decided should be excluded from the private sector and the pricing
mechanism – such as healthcare etc. Our constitution states that
government is committed to: "…furthering economic development
to reduce disparity in opportunities."
Fiscal policies, budget and tax increases and cuts
are the government’s tools to smooth fluctuations in the economy and
to prevent or solve overheating or recessions. They are also strong
political campaign instruments.
Although difficult for the voters to assess, it is
appealing to believe that tax cuts and fiscal measures will be
sufficient to encourage investors at home and abroad to inject
investment in economic production in BC.
Tax reductions in other provinces and countries are
often credited or blamed for social and economic impact that in
reality have different causes.
In BC, decades of old problems were left unsolved
and allowed to become acute. It is reasonable to say that previous
governments did not provide the service the pricing mechanism and
private sector failed to provide. The government failed to analyze and
detect the problems in industry, including issues in the government’s
own policies. In sectors such as forests and healthcare, both industry
and government seems to have been unaware of the real depth of the
market, financial, organizational and ecological issues facing the
industry and the community. Tax transfer programs simply increased
disparities in opportunities.
This perpetuated a system that during the good times
failed to encourage long-term investment, adding value, and using
fewer resources; and during the bad times, it stimulated industry and
members of the community to expect government assistance and bailouts.
Better and more appropriate use of tax and tax
transfers is as important as tax cuts. There is often too much
emphasis on tax cuts and too little on the uses of tax and what
government’s role ought to be.
The government can only prevent problems by prudent
monitoring of the allocation mechanism and proper intervention before
problems occur. That requires not only recognizing the problems, but
also identifying the underlying causes.
We need to ask: a) has government properly
identified the issues? b) do they know the underlying causes? c) will
the government fiscal policy generate the investment and liquidity
needed to stimulate economic production in business and jobs.
Up to the middle of the eighties, traditional fiscal
and tax measures were sufficient. The problem is, since the eighties,
the economy has shifted from a more closed and resource driven, to
today’s knowledge driven economy, with more open economic and market
conditions.
Free and unrestricted movement of investment and
liquidity and e-communication has removed any connection between where
people live and where they invest and deposit their money. Tax
multipliers and consumer and investor propensities have changed, and
subsequently so does the effect of budget and tax cuts.
This is changing the economic behavior and
socio-psychology in the community. Intervention programs and fiscal
measures that worked and could stimulate economic production in
economic closed conditions are not as effective in today’s open
conditions. Investment and liquidity is flowing into the major equity
market and little is ending up and invested back in economic
production in British Columbia, particularly to Small and Midsize
enterprises.
It is OISD’s analysis, that in BC’s case it
would be wise to have a plan B that considers that conventional tax
cuts, fiscal measures and the private sector alone will not fix the
problems and stimulate investment.
In order to stimulate investment from investors at
home and abroad, BC will need to solve a series of problems in the
allocation and pricing mechanism. It will also be crucial to stimulate
more lateral investment and liquidity flow for BC.
That will require both BC and Federal government
intervention that meets the standard for government intervention in a
knowledge driven open economy. The more open the economy is, the more
important it becomes that government meet its monitoring and
intervening role in the economy. Never before has good government been
more important for BC.
The methods of distributing wealth by solving the
allocation problems that hamper economic production, is far more
efficient and advantageous for society, than first collecting and
redistributing tax in the form of individual and corporate welfare.
Solving the allocation problem that hampers private investment in
viable small and midsize businesses that can distribute wealth via
well-paid jobs is where our new governments efforts should be focused.
Ultimately, in our economic system, social
satisfaction, the tax base, a good ecology and political stability
depends on the issues that hamper private investment in economic
production from investors abroad and at home, being solved.
The BC government needs to review its role in the
economy and its accountability to society and to take steps to adapt
to open economic conditions. That will have to include a tax overhaul.
That will also require what level of government has
the mandate and responsibility to analyze, detect and address issues
in industrial sectors on a national, provincial or local level. Which
level of government has the mandate to identify and address issues in
the regional and local economy – such as in Prince Rupert and
Western Star in Kelowna - before the problems become acute.
Our municipal government has an administrative
function that is limited to infrastructure planning. It is significant
that local governments have no economic, social and ecological mandate
and responsibility. That is a problem because it encourage local focus
on land development and tax transfers rather than on investment in
economic production and jobs.
The powers of economic development and
responsibility to allocate resources to a sector of the economy or a
specific problem area are shared between the federal and provincial
governments, as our constitution states: government is committed to
… " furthering economic development to reduce disparity in
opportunities".
Downloading senior government responsibilities to
Municipalities will require fundamental changes to the taxation system
and the local governments structure.
As Albert Einstein said, "The significant
problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we
were at when we created them." British Columbia is facing
fundamental problems in the allocation mechanism that will require new
thinking to solve them.
OISD is concerned that our new government must be
aware of the extent of the allocation problems, and the risk that the
fiscal measures and tax cuts may not solve the underlying issues BC
face.
Okanagan Institute for Strategic Development