<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">TEL</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Theoretical Economics Letters</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2162-2078</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/tel.2012.22037</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">TEL-19326</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Business&amp;Economics</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  Playing the Deficit Gamble Easily
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>enichi</surname><given-names>Tamegawa</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sub>1</sub></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><addr-line>School of Commerce, Meiji University, Tokyo, Japan</addr-line></aff><author-notes><corresp id="cor1">* E-mail:<email>tamegawa@kisc.meiji.ac.jp</email></corresp></author-notes><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>23</day><month>05</month><year>2012</year></pub-date><volume>02</volume><issue>02</issue><fpage>209</fpage><lpage>211</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>February</day>	<month>2,</month>	<year>2012</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>March</day>	<month>14,</month>	<year>2012</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>March</day>	<month>23,</month>	<year>2012</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
  In this paper, we attempt to obtain the exact probability distribution of the debt-to-GDP ratio in T years, assuming that 1) the primary balance is zero and 2) the interest rate and the GDP growth rate are given as exogenous random variables. With this approach, researchers can play the “Deficit Gamble” without conducting a Monte Carlo simulation. Calculating the distribution of the debt-to-GDP ratio would be useful for policy planning.
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Deficit Gamble; Government Debt</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>Recently, many countries provided fiscal stimulus packages to cope with the economic recession arising from the financial crisis. As a result, these governments’ debt increased, and the fiscal crisis became a very important issue, especially in the EU countries. Therefore, it is important to predict the future path of government debt. This paper provides a useful formula to obtain the probability distribution of the debt-to-GDP ratio in T years, assuming that (1) the primary balance is zero and (2) the interest rate and the GDP growth rate are given as exogenous random variables.</p><p>Given assumptions (1) and (2), the debt-to-GDP ratio in T years is a random variable. Thus, the time path of the debt-to-GDP ratio exceeding a target level given an initial condition is purely random. Therefore, this “game” is referred to as the “Deficit Gamble”. Ball et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.19326-ref1">1</xref>] have shown the probability of the debt deficit gamble failing in T years in the US, where the deficit gamble is considered to have failed if the debt-to-GDP ratio exceeds some target level. In Ball et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.19326-ref1">1</xref>], this probability has been calculated using a Monte Carlo simulation. However, as shown below, the exact distribution of the debt-to-GDP ratio can be easily obtained and thus we can calculate this probability without a simulation analysis. We only need the standard normal distribution table and a simple OLS estimation. Using this simplification, one can easily play the deficit gamble.</p><p>The rest of the paper is organized as follows: Section 2 derives a distribution of the debt-to-GDP ratio, Section 3 states a useful statistic for the debt-to-GDP ratio, and finally, Section 4 concludes our paper.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. Literature Review</title><p>The deficit gamble has been suggested in Ball et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.19326-ref1">1</xref>] and recently has been applied to the Japanese economy in Oguro [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.19326-ref2">2</xref>]. As stated above, these studies use the Monte Carlo simulation to obtain the distribution of debt-to-GDP ratio. On the other hand, with the approach developed in this paper, researchers need not use the Monte Carlo simulation, and deficit gamble analysis becomes very simple.</p><p>The deficit gamble approach does not require any economic theory and, therefore, one can mechanically obtain information for debt accumulation path. However, an analysis using a micro-founded economic model is also important for considering how debt accumulates through an economic structure. In line with this, Sakuragawa and Hosono [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.19326-ref3">3</xref>] have used a dynamic stochastic general equilibrium model in order to calculate the debt accumulation path.</p><p>Our approach would be quite useful for supporting an argument for the sustainability of government debt. Related to this issue, Bohn [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.19326-ref4">4</xref>], Trehan and Walsh [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.19326-ref5">5</xref>], and Hakkio and Rush [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.19326-ref6">6</xref>] have analyzed the sustainability of government debt given the economic data. Using our approach, one can calculate a counter factual debt accumulation distribution if the primary balance would have been zero at certain past periods. An analysis such as this would become another approach for dealing with the sustainability issue.</p></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Distribution of the Debt-to-GDP Ratio</title><p>Suppose that government debt is accumulated as follows:</p><disp-formula id="scirp.19326-formula42490"><label>, (1)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="17-1500110\7838f581-350d-4d28-a36e-96f8326b1a05.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>where <img src="17-1500110\24d70687-abe0-43ae-92ca-63e145c51295.jpg" /> denotes the nominal government debt at the end of term, <img src="17-1500110\5463fd3b-48ea-454e-bd37-e462c2705dbe.jpg" />denotes the nominal interest rate, and <img src="17-1500110\54d907ac-68be-42bd-bf88-0411077f0ddc.jpg" /> denotes the primary balance, which is the government spending minus tax. From Equation (1), we get</p><p><img src="17-1500110\0f2666ed-1a17-44ef-b050-5804f47741a4.jpg" />where, defining <img src="17-1500110\f90e960e-f0bd-49e6-9ea4-4474fc0a22e3.jpg" /> as GDP, <img src="17-1500110\f9b23baa-885c-428e-9d40-0c4368b7bf29.jpg" />, <img src="17-1500110\591b19cf-aadc-41f7-992b-e9ba8fbb0deb.jpg" />, and<img src="17-1500110\c1abdb8d-0103-4b21-b3b0-f7b53b264324.jpg" />. Our goal is to obtain the probability distribution of the debt-to-GDP ratio in T years with zero primary balance. Assuming that the current period is zero and that <img src="17-1500110\99260793-b1f7-4fbf-983d-04fc8370ce1e.jpg" />for all<img src="17-1500110\e8a41341-3404-4427-877f-ea0ee0e39a39.jpg" />, the debt-to-GDP ratio in T years is as follows:</p><disp-formula id="scirp.19326-formula42491"><label>. (2)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="17-1500110\96a06291-bb8f-4e5e-bc24-5368d9566653.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>Following Ball et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.19326-ref1">1</xref>], we assume</p><p><img src="17-1500110\de70771f-e878-4544-9b69-d9f7b3c25d8a.jpg" />where <img src="17-1500110\e7818161-d1c7-4b46-9ae6-bdb8e93928d5.jpg" /> is a normally distributed random variable with mean zero and variance<img src="17-1500110\8a85eb9f-a664-417b-9a07-e254f2b42520.jpg" />. Taking the logarithm of Equation (2), we get</p><disp-formula id="scirp.19326-formula42492"><label>. (3)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="17-1500110\3f8e892c-8d15-479c-81df-11efe3d16b8e.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>Since <img src="17-1500110\dde46312-47cf-42ae-9076-6ab648e68e49.jpg" /> can be expressed as the following MA representation</p><p><img src="17-1500110\6cc712e2-1f7b-4d1a-bc6a-5b2f914b7d3d.jpg" /></p><p>Equation (3) can be written as follows:1</p><p><img src="17-1500110\3213f934-477d-43bf-ab6a-6c76e75daec8.jpg" />.</p><p>The above equation can be simplified as follows:</p><disp-formula id="scirp.19326-formula42493"><label>. (4)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="17-1500110\0b4a2f4a-9ba4-4042-9df1-98b5d347baa3.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>Note that the distribution we want to obtain is conditional on the current period’s information<img src="17-1500110\73132ea7-f6c2-4f88-84ab-d4752fb9afe8.jpg" />. Equation (4) implies that the distribution of <img src="17-1500110\5eae39fe-a80e-4342-b3f4-443e2287de4b.jpg" /> conditional on <img src="17-1500110\bbf49239-8f77-4b94-9ec1-097de678147d.jpg" /> is normal with mean</p><p><img src="17-1500110\2a9255cc-6b13-4879-a103-9d7b10920d35.jpg" />and variance</p><p><img src="17-1500110\4f4029e8-7a91-4391-9559-ade6eaa1d385.jpg" />.</p><p>Noting that</p><p><img src="17-1500110\a696338c-5065-4063-90e2-f69d4f323652.jpg" /></p><p>and defining z as</p><p><img src="17-1500110\1d74696d-53d8-4e28-8869-f005a8fb8a68.jpg" /></p><p>We have the following proposition Proposition. If <img src="17-1500110\ae85098a-fba3-4fa1-8c1e-ea533d6dd336.jpg" /> and <img src="17-1500110\569a741d-df38-4e97-b19e-e50343c8bbfd.jpg" /> is a sequence of independently normal distributed random variables with mean zero and variance<img src="17-1500110\ee6ad59b-4c71-4449-8193-26b54c03a15b.jpg" />, then <img src="17-1500110\d602da50-131a-4810-86d7-b46f399b0920.jpg" /> as conditional on <img src="17-1500110\2e2f2812-7f12-4872-95b6-188155956347.jpg" /> follows the standard normal distribution.</p><p>In practice, <img src="17-1500110\d70a6b20-84ed-4da7-b0fc-b451f245b09d.jpg" />and <img src="17-1500110\d2724328-bc11-40cb-a3cc-bd8a6bbaa9a0.jpg" /> are not known a priori and they have to be estimated on the basis of the available information. Regardless, since the estimates of <img src="17-1500110\7a96bf33-e9a0-4768-94f7-3aaa52c9990c.jpg" /> and <img src="17-1500110\edac308f-a432-4147-9d10-77f1704517cb.jpg" /> are fixed for <img src="17-1500110\38a96818-450e-4bdd-8087-e15e707500dd.jpg" /> years as non-random variables, the proposition still holds.</p></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Deficit Gamble Statistic</title><p>In this section, we define a useful statistic for the deficit gamble. Suppose that the deficit gamble fails if<img src="17-1500110\a8cee3a0-ecf1-48d6-b90e-5d85a7515c82.jpg" />, where <img src="17-1500110\e6848ca2-cb89-4f9d-ae02-8543f623ef69.jpg" /> is some target level of the debt-to-GDP ratio that is set manually by researchers. Now define<img src="17-1500110\1a7b0107-1195-41ee-85f9-40a079755bfb.jpg" />, which we call the “Deficit Gamble Statistic”, as follows:</p><p><img src="17-1500110\48e15194-2322-40f5-bf24-1b09cbca2214.jpg" /></p><p>In this setting, the probability of the debt deficit gamble failing in T years is calculated as<img src="17-1500110\f1f0ad60-da06-4615-beeb-aa28e156db7b.jpg" />, where <img src="17-1500110\111641fd-5ed4-4162-ba15-d4e55ab99e08.jpg" /> denotes the standard normal distribution function. Here is an example.</p><p>Example. Assume <img src="17-1500110\18630b3d-c896-4e9a-bcb5-f895a81b1078.jpg" /> with<img src="17-1500110\06f0d8e4-5279-4dc9-9376-e880a644ef09.jpg" />, <img src="17-1500110\bdfc67cd-c614-4bd3-be4d-22ebd7aa9e77.jpg" />, <img src="17-1500110\0be8bd36-1500-4e8c-84f0-03808ad324a8.jpg" />, and T = 25. Setting the target level f = 1.5, we obtain g = 2.6173. In this case, the probability of the debt deficit gamble failing in 25 years is 0.005.</p></sec><sec id="s5"><title>5. Concluding Remarks</title><p>In this paper, we obtain the exact distribution of the debt-to-GDP ratio in T years and further develop the formula for calculating the probability of the deficit gamble, wherein the debt-to-GDP ratio exceeds some target level, without conducting a Monte Carlo simulation. Calculating the distribution of the debt-to-GDP ratio would prove useful for policy planning.</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>REFERENCES</title></sec><sec id="s7"><title>NOTES</title></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.19326-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">L. D. Ball, D. W. Elmendorf, and N. Mankiw, “The Deficit Gamble,” Journal of Credit, Money, and Banking, Vol. 30, No. 4, 1998, pp. 699-720. doi:10.2307/2601125</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.19326-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">K. Oguro, “A Study of Government Deficit in Terms of a Gamble: Under Uncertainty for GDP Growth Rate and Interest Rate,” JCER Journal, No. 60, 2009, pp. 19-35. </mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.19326-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">M. Sakuragawa and K. Hosono, “Fiscal Sustainability of Japan: A Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium Approach,” Japanese Economic Review, Vol. 61, No. 4, 2010, pp. 517-537.  
doi:10.1111/j.1468-5876.2009.00503.x</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.19326-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">H. Bohn, “The Behaviour of US Public Debt and Deficits,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 113, No. 3, 1998, pp. 949-963. doi:10.1162/003355398555793</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.19326-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">B. Trehan and C. E. Walsh, “Common Trends, the Government Budget Constraint, and Revenue Smoothing,” Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Vol. 12, No. 2-3, 1988, pp. 425-444.  
doi:10.1016/0165-1889(88)90048-6</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.19326-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">C. S. Hakkio and M. Rush, “Is the Budget Deficits ‘Too Large’,” Economic Inquiry, Vol. 29, 1991, pp. 429-445. 
doi:10.1111/j.1465-7295.1991.tb00837.x</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.19326-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">F. Hayashi, “Econometrics,” Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>