Navigation path

Left navigation

Additional tools

Komisja ocenia pozostałe programy stabilności i konwergencji oraz wszczyna procedurę nadmiernego deficytu przeciwko Węgrom, Litwie, Malcie, Polsce i Rumunii

European Commission - IP/09/990   24/06/2009

Other available languages: EN FR DE NL HU LT MT SK SL RO

IP/09/990

Bruksela, dnia 24 czerwca 2009 r.

Komisja ocenia pozostałe programy stabilności i konwergencji oraz wszczyna procedurę nadmiernego deficytu przeciwko Węgrom, Litwie, Malcie, Polsce i Rumunii

W dniu dzisiejszym Komisja Europejska zbadała zaktualizowane programy stabilności i konwergencji 1 Austrii, Belgii, Rumunii, Słowenii i Słowacji, stanowiące ostatnią partię programów z 2009 r. Podobnie jak w przypadku innych państw UE szacuje się, że sytuacja budżetowa tych krajów znacznie się pogorszyła, co odzwierciedla obecną recesję i pakiety budżetowych środków stymulacyjnych przyjęte zgodnie z europejskim planem naprawy gospodarczej, nawołującym do podjęcia doraźnych i ukierunkowanych środków budżetowych w państwach członkowskich dysponujących polem manewru budżetowego. We wszystkich pięciu krajach stwierdzono również, że istnieje ryzyko niezrealizowania poszczególnych celów budżetowych. Na podstawie przekazanych w kwietniu br. danych dotyczących wyników budżetowych za 2008 r. Komisja stwierdza również, że na Litwie i Malcie oraz w Polsce i Rumunii istnieje nadmierny deficyt w rozumieniu art. 104 ust. 7 Traktatu UE i zaleca terminy korekty tych deficytów. Komisja zaleca również, by Rada przyjęła zmienione zalecenie na mocy art. 104 ust. 7 ustanawiające nowy termin korekty deficytu na Węgrzech. Oceny i zalecenia przygotowano na podstawie wiosennej prognozy Komisji oraz na podstawie innych danych i informacji. Zaproponowane terminy uwzględniają wyjściową pozycję budżetową i pole manewru zgodnie z europejskim planem naprawy gospodarczej, perspektywy gospodarcze, zaburzenia równowagi makroekonomicznej i warunki finansowania. Oczekuje się, że Rada ds. Gospodarczych i Finansowych omówi te zalecenia na nadchodzącym posiedzeniu w lipcu. W chwili obecnej zainteresowane państwa członkowskie mają sześć miesięcy na określenie i rozpoczęcie wdrażania środków służących korekcie nadmiernego deficytu.

„W ubiegłym roku sytuacje budżetowe państw w UE i poza nią znacznie się pogorszyły, a w bieżącym roku ulegną dalszemu pogorszeniu z powodu recesji oraz z powodu odpowiedniego wdrożenia, w przypadku dysponowania polem manewru, pakietów stymulacyjnych w celu ograniczenia niekorzystnego wpływu na działalność gospodarczą i poziom zatrudnienia. W celu ograniczenia kosztów zadłużenia dla obecnego pokolenia i przyszłych pokoleń, podstawowym zadaniem rządów jest opracowanie ścieżki dostosowania, zobowiązującej te rządy do korekty deficytów publicznych wraz z rozpoczęciem poprawy sytuacji gospodarczej, która – zgodnie z oczekiwaniami – ma stopniowo się polepszać od 2010 r. W pakcie na rzecz stabilności i rozwoju nakreślono ramy tej strategii wyjścia z kryzysu oraz powrotu do solidnych i stabilnych finansów publicznych w średnim lub długim okresie”, stwierdził Joaquín Almunia, komisarz ds. gospodarczych i walutowych.

1. Assessment of Stability and Convergence Programmes

AUSTRIA

After a budget deficit of only 0.4% of GDP in 2008, Austria faces a severe deterioration in its public finances due to the global economic and financial crisis and the budgetary measures adequately taken in line with the EERP. The updated Stability Programme foresees a budget deficit of 3.5% of GDP in 2009 and of 4.7% over 2010-2012 before edging down to 3.9% in 2013. This is subject to downside risks.

Benefiting from the fiscal space created during the boom years and from the absence of external imbalances, the Austrian government introduced sizeable fiscal stimulus of around 1¼% and 1¾% of GDP for 2009 and 2010 that include a mix of revenue and expenditure instruments. The aim is to bolster private incomes, avoid lay-offs, strengthen human skills by providing further vocational training, and provide incentives for investment and support to the automotive sector.

In view of the assessment, Austria is invited to (i) implement the stimulus measures, but reverse the expansionary fiscal stance once the economic crisis subsides so as to return to a consolidation path compatible with the long-term sustainability of public finances, (ii) substantiate the government's intention mentioned in the programme to implement measures deemed necessary to achieve a general government deficit below the 3% of GDP reference value by 2012 at the latest and (iii) further improve the budgetary framework to strengthen fiscal discipline at all levels of government through enhanced transparency and accountability notably by aligning legislative, administrative and financing responsibilities between the different levels of government.

BELGIUM

Following the sharp contraction of the Belgian economy in the last quarter of 2008 and the first of 2009, the updated stability programme foresees a deterioration of the budget deficit from 1.2% of GDP in 2008 to 3.4% of GDP in 2009 and 4% of GDP in 2010. Afterwards, the programme foresees a reduction to below the 3% of GDP reference value by 2012 and to 1.5% of GDP in 2013. The government debt-to-GDP ratio, which rose to 89.6% in 2008 as a result of the measures to stabilise the financial system, is expected to continue its upward movement, reaching 95% in 2010, before gradually declining thereafter, to 92% in 2013. The absence of crucial information in the programme, such as the expenditure and revenue ratios, has hampered the possibility to assess the credibility of the deficit and debt targets in the programme.

The deficit and debt targets are subject to considerable downside risk over the entire programme period, stemming from favourable macroeconomic assumptions and the lack of underlying measures. Moreover, also in the light of the debt dynamics and the long-term sustainability of public finances, the programme lacks ambition regarding the decisive correction of the deficit as the economic situation improves.

On the basis of the Commission's assessment, Belgium is invited to: (i) submit, by 20 September at the latest, an update of the programme including a well founded medium-term budgetary strategy and improve compliance with the data requirements of the code of conduct especially regarding compulsory data; (ii) implement the stimulus measures in line with the EERP as planned while avoiding a further deterioration of the structural balance in 2009 and reverse the expansionary fiscal stance as from 2010 when the economy is expected to improve so as to return to a consolidation path compatible with the long-term sustainability of public finances; (iii) improve the quality of public finances by adopting a more stringent budgetary framework, encompassing binding, multi-annual expenditure ceilings and budgetary agreements among the different government tiers, including the establishment of enforcement mechanisms to ensure the respect of the fiscal targets; and (iv) undertake structural reforms of the social security system, the labour market and product markets to enhance potential growth, increase the employment rate and reduce the budgetary impact of ageing, in order to improve the long-term sustainability of public finances.

ROMANIA

The global economic downturn has resulted in a sharp drop of private capital flows to Romania, leading to a significant deceleration of activity since the fourth quarter of 2008. The Romanian programme assumes GDP to contract by 4% for the whole of 2009, followed by zero growth in 2010 and 2.6% in 2011. Considering the absence of room for fiscal manoeuvre and the need to correct large fiscal and external imbalances, Romania envisages a restrictive fiscal stance between 2009 and 2011.

In line with the commitments made by Romania in the framework of the EU balance of payment assistance, the authorities envisage to undertake a significant fiscal consolidation effort, targeting a deficit of 5.1% of GDP in 2009, with the aim of reducing it to below 3% of GDP by 2011. Furthermore, the programme foresees measures to improve fiscal governance, enhance financial sector regulation and supervision and step up structural reform. However, the budgetary outcomes are subject to downside risks, taking into account the uncertainty related to the macroeconomic scenario in 2009, the effective implementation of the planned expenditure measures and the lack of information on concrete measures needed to underpin fiscal consolidation after 2009.

In view of this assessment and taking into account the policy invitations addressed to Romania to correct the excessive deficit under Article 104(7) of the Treaty (see below), as well as to ensure sustainable convergence, and in line with the economic policy measures envisaged under the economic programme supported by Community balance-of-payments assistance, Romania is invited to: (i) ensure the correction of the excessive deficit by 2011; to this effect, implement the fiscal measures as planned in the February 2009 budget and the April 2009 amended budget, especially in the area of public sector wages and pension reform; take further corrective action if needed to achieve the 2009 deficit target in order to ensure compliance with the commitments undertaken under the programme supported by EC balance of payments assistance; and specify measures to buttress the envisaged reduction of the deficit in 2010 and 2011, in particular those underpinning the planned reduction of the public wage bill; (ii) undertake concrete steps towards the envisaged strengthening of fiscal governance and transparency, in particular by setting up a binding medium-term budgetary framework, establishing an independent fiscal council, introducing limits on budgetary revisions during the year and laying-out fiscal rules as well as restructuring the public compensation system, including pay and bonuses; in the area of tax administration, improve the efficiency of revenue collection through the reform of tax administration and a broadening of the tax base; (iii) accelerate the reform of the pension system (in particular with respect to the indexation of pensions and the retirement age) to curb the substantial increase in age-related expenditures and reduce the risks to the sustainability of public finances and improve the effectiveness and efficiency of healthcare spending; and (iv) strengthen the supply side of the economy by making tangible progress with the implementation of the structural reforms, notably by enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of public administration, improving the business environment, tackling undeclared work and by increasing the absorption and improving the use of EU funds.

SLOVENIA

According to the programme update, the deficit is targeted to widen significantly in 2009, to 5.1% of GDP, reflecting the working of the automatic stabilizers and various discretionary measures as well as the strong dynamics of social transfers and compensation of employees. Thereafter, the deficit is projected to narrow gradually, especially in 2010, but to remain above the 3% of GDP reference value. Assessed against currently available information, the macroeconomic scenario for 2009 and 2010 appears favourable and the budgetary outlook throughout the programme period seems subject to downside risks. In response to the EERP, Slovenia adopted stimulus measures that , together with tax relief decided before the onset of the crisis, should support the economy. They focus on stemming the deterioration in the labour market and enhancing growth potential and competitiveness.

Going forward, key challenges for Slovenia are the reversal of the fiscal stimulus, the need to improve the long-term sustainability of public finances, for which Slovenia is at high risk, and to enhance competitiveness. In view of the assessment, Slovenia is invited to: (i) implement the stimulus measures in 2009 in line with the EERP; (ii) start reversing the fiscal stimulus as planned in the programme in 2010 and strengthen the adjustment foreseen for 2011 in the light of the assumed pick-up in economic growth; in so doing, keep tight control over government expenditure; (iii) in view of the projected increase in age-related expenditure, improve the long-term sustainability of public finances by further reforming the pension system, in particular with a view to encouraging longer working lives

SLOVAKIA

The stability programme of Slovakia targets a budget deficit of 3.0%, 2.9% and 2.2% GDP in 2009, 2010 and 2011 respectively. These budgetary projections are based on markedly favourable macroeconomic assumptions. Achieving medium-term budgetary targets will require more significant structural consolidation after 2009 than envisaged in the programme. The consolidation effort needs to be backed up by concrete expenditure measures. In addition, the deterioration of public finances presents a risk also for long-term sustainability. In this context, it is crucial to keep stable rules for the fully-funded pension pillar and therefore to avoid measures that create uncertainty for the business strategy of pension funds. Slovakia adopted stimulus measures in line with the EERP. They are targeted at disadvantaged groups and in most cases temporary.

In view of the assessment, Slovakia is invited to: (i) implement the anti-crisis measures in line with the EERP as planned; (ii) ensure consolidation from 2010 onwards as the economy recovers and back up the budgetary strategy with specific measures for reducing expenditure from 2010 onwards. This should be supported by the introduction of legally binding expenditure ceilings for the general government to ensure fiscal discipline in a less buoyant revenue scenario; (iii) ensure stable rules for the fully-funded pension pillar, given the upcoming challenges of an ageing population, in order to improve the long-term sustainability of public finance.

2. Procedury nadmiernego deficytu

POLSKA

Zgodnie z danymi przekazanymi przez władze Polski w kwietniu 2009 r. deficyt sektora instytucji rządowych i samorządowych w 2008 r. wyniósł 3,9 % PKB i tym samym przekroczył wartość referencyjną wynoszącą 3 % PKB. Wynik ten znacznie przekracza przewidywany wynik za 2008 r. wynoszący 2,7 % i przedstawiony w programie konwergencji z grudnia. W zgłoszeniu władze Polski przedstawiły skorygowany docelowy deficyt za 2009 r. wynoszący 4,6 %, podczas gdy w prognozie służb Komisji z wiosny 2009 r., przyjmującej mniej optymistyczny scenariusz i niezmienny kurs polityki, przewiduje się deficyt na poziomie 6,6 %. Władze Polski skorygowały niedawno w dół wzrost przewidywany na bieżący rok i ogłosiły, że deficyt sektora instytucji rządowych i samorządowych może znacznie przekroczyć poziom 4,6 % PKB, planowany na bieżący rok w zgłoszeniu w ramach procedury nadmiernego deficytu z wiosny 2009 r. W sprawozdaniu Komisji sporządzonym na mocy art. 104 ust. 3 i opublikowanym dnia 13 maja stwierdzono, że deficyt nie zbliżał się do wartości referencyjnej, tj. 3 % PKB i że jej przekroczenie nie ma charakteru wyjątkowego lub tymczasowego w znaczeniu postanowień Traktatu i paktu na rzecz stabilności i wzrostu.

Występowanie szczególnych okoliczności, wynikających głównie ze światowego kryzysu gospodarczego, obejmujących załamanie eksportu, poważne zaostrzenie warunków udzielania kredytów hipotecznych i kredytów dla przedsiębiorstw, a także trwająca restrukturyzacja gospodarki, prowadząca również do szybkiego wzrostu stopy bezrobocia, upoważnia Radę do udzielenia pozwolenia na korektę nadmiernego deficytu w średnim okresie, a nie w roku następującym po wszczęciu procedury nadmiernego deficytu. Zgodnie z zaleceniem Komisji do Rady władze Polski powinny zlikwidować nadmierny deficyt najpóźniej do 2012 r. Pociąga to za sobą średnią roczną konsolidację budżetową o około 1,25-1,5 punktu procentowego PKB począwszy od 2010 r. Aby ograniczyć recesję i jednocześnie zapewnić utrzymanie długoterminowego wzrostu w 2009 r. Polska powinna wdrożyć planowe budżetowe środki stymulacyjne, w szczególności plan inwestycji publicznych, usiłując zapobiec dalszemu pogorszeniu stanu finansów publicznych. Wiarygodna i trwała korekta nadmiernego deficytu wymaga: (i) szybkiego określenia szczegółowych środków niezbędnych do osiągnięcia ścieżki konsolidacji umożliwiającej ograniczenie bieżących wydatków pierwotnych, szczególnie w obszarze wydatków socjalnych, w nadchodzących latach oraz (ii) wzmocnienia wiążącego charakteru średniookresowych ram budżetowych Polski, na przykład poprzez wprowadzenie prawnego pułapu wzrostu bieżących wydatków pierwotnych, a także poprzez poprawę monitorowania wykonania budżetu w ciągu roku.

HUNGARY

An excessive deficit procedure was opened in July 2004 right after EU accession that recommended the country to bring the deficit below 3% of GDP by 2008. The recommendation was repeated in March 2005 and again in October 2006 in view of the inadequate action taken by Hungary. In October 2006, the Council also extended the deadline for the correction of the excessive deficit to 2009.

Since mid-2006 Hungary has made marked progress to correct its fiscal imbalances. The nominal deficit targets were overachieved by large margins as the deficit was reduced from over 9% of GDP in 2006 to 3.4% in 2008. However, the impact of the current financial crisis has heavily affected the Hungarian economy. As a response, the authorities adopted a new economic policy programme in October 2008, supported by an international financial assistance package of €20 billion, chiefly from the EU and the IMF 2 . But in spite of additional corrective measures taken in several rounds, because of the significant deterioration in the economic outlook, with GDP now expected to contract by around 6½% this year, the 2009 deadline is no longer achievable. Given that the country has taken effective action but the deficit outcome was affected strongly by unexpected adverse economic developments, the revised Pact provides for the possibility to issue a revised recommendation, which can extend the deadline for the correction.

Against this background, the Commission recommends to the Council to ask the Hungarian Government to correct the excessive deficit by 2011, which seems to be appropriate in view of the exceptional situation characterised by the depth and length of the current recession and the fragility of the financial sector. This should be done by limiting the deterioration of the fiscal position in 2009 as well as by rigorously implementing the necessary consolidation measures to ensure a renewed decline of the headline deficit starting from 2010, with an increased reliance on structural steps. Moreover, Hungary will be requested to spell out and adopt in a timely manner additional consolidation measures which will be necessary to achieve the correction of the excessive deficit by 2011. The budgetary adjustment also needs to be framed within a comprehensive structural reform strategy and supported by the rigorous implementation of the recently adopted fiscal responsibility law.

LITHUANIA

According to data notified by the Lithuanian authorities in April 2009, the general government deficit reached 3.2% of GDP in 2008. Although the deficit was close to the 3% Treaty reference value, the excess was not considered as being due to exceptional circumstances nor considered to be temporary. Based on available information, the Commission services' spring 2009 forecast projects that in the absence of new policy measures public finances would deteriorate significantly further in 2009 and 2010 (the deficit would reach 5.4% of GDP and 8.0% of GDP respectively).

In view of the very weak economic situation in Lithuania and the size of the deficit, a 2011 deadline appears warranted. This implies an average annual fiscal effort of at least 1½% of GDP over the period 2009-2011. In order to achieve this target, the Lithuanian authorities should implement the fiscal measures included in the 2009 budget and in the supplementary 2009 budget. Moreover, Lithuania is recommended to consider further measures to limit the deterioration of public finances in 2009 and to devise additional consolidation measures for 2010, so as to achieve this fiscal consolidation path. Lithuania is also recommended to strengthen fiscal governance and transparency, by enhancing the medium-term budgetary framework and reinforcing expenditure discipline, as well as to improve the monitoring of the budget implementation throughout the year.

MALTA

Following the submission of data by the Maltese authorities showing a deficit of 4.7% of GDP in 2008, the Commission adopted on 13 May a report under Article 104(3) of the Treaty as a first step in the excessive deficit procedure. The report concluded that neither the deficit nor the debt criterion in the Treaty is fulfilled.

The Commission recommends to the Council that Malta puts an end to the excessive deficit situation by 2010 in a credible and sustainable manner by rigorously implementing the budgetary measures planned for 2009 while avoiding any further deterioration in public finances. For 2010, new consolidation measures are called for. The recommendation also invites the Maltese authorities to ensure that budgetary consolidation towards the medium-term objective of a balanced budgetary position in structural terms is sustained after the excessive deficit has been corrected. To this end, the Maltese authorities are invited to spell out the measures necessary to achieve a lasting consolidation and to strengthen the medium-term focus of the budgetary framework.

ROMANIA

The budget deficit reached 5.4% in 2008 in Romania (see above). This reflects mostly spending slippages, notably on public wages and social benefits, as well as overly optimistic revenue projections and, to a lesser extent, a sudden drop in revenue collection in the last quarter of 2008 owing to the economic slowdown. Rising fiscal deficits have also been due to a lack of fiscal consolidation efforts when economic conditions were favourable. As from 2009, fiscal policy aims to correct the budgetary deficit, in line with the authorities' economic programme adopted in the framework of the international financial assistance extended to Romania.

The Commission recommends that Romania corrects the excessive deficit by 2011 in view of the large imbalances and the economic and financial situation. The proposed timing is in line with the fiscal targets agreed in the framework of the international financial assistance.

To this end, the Romanian authorities are invited to (a) implement the fiscal measures in 2009 as planned in the February 2009 budget and the April 2009 amended budget, especially in the area of public sector wages and pension reform and adopt and implement further measures, if necessary, to achieve the 2009 deficit target; (b) ensure an average annual fiscal effort of at least 1½% of GDP starting with 2010 and (c) spell out the detailed measures that are necessary to achieve the consolidation path beyond 2009 and implement the envisaged corrective measures rigorously; in particular, the consolidation should be expenditure driven and measures should concentrate on containing current expenditure, notably with respect to the public sector wage bill; seize any opportunity to accelerate the reduction of the deficit; stand ready to adopt the additional measures which may be necessary to achieve the correction of the excessive deficit by 2011.

Wszystkie odpowiednie dokumenty są dostępne na stronie:

http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/thematic_ar ticles/article15413_en.htm

AUSTRIA

Comparison of key macro-economic and budgetary projections

 

 

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

Real GDP
(% change)

SP Apr 2009

3.1

1.8

-2.2

0.5

1.5

2.0

2.3

COM Spring 2009

3.1

1.8

-4.0

-0.1

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

SP Nov 2007

3.4

2.4

2.5

2.5

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

HICP inflation
(%)

SP Apr 2009

2.2

3.2

0.6

1.1

1.3

1.5

1.9

COM Spring 2009

2.2

3.2

0.5

1.1

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

SP Nov 2007

1.9

2.0

2.0

2.0

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

Output gap 1
(% of potential GDP)

SP Apr 2009

2.5

2.6

-0.9

-1.7

-1.6

-1.2

-0.5

COM Spring 2009 2

2.7

2.9

-2.2

-3.3

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

SP Nov 2007

0.4

0.4

0.5

0.5

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

Net lending/borrowing vis-à-vis the rest of the world
(% of GDP)

SP Apr 2009

3.2

2.9

1.6

0.6

1.0

1.3

1.4

COM Spring 2009

3.3

3.3

2.7

2.4

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

SP Nov 2007

3.5

3.7

3.7

3.7

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

General government revenue
(% of GDP)

SP Apr 2009

48.0

48.2

47.5

46.5

46.4

46.1

46.1

COM Spring 2009

48.0

48.2

47.4

46.7

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

SP Nov 2007

47.4

47.5

47.3

47.4

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

General government expenditure
(% of GDP)

SP Apr 2009

48.7

48.7

51.1

51.3

51.1

50.9

50.1

COM Spring 2009

48.5

48.6

51.6

52.1

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

SP Nov 2007

48.3

48.1

47.7

47.2

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

General government balance
(% of GDP)

SP Apr 2009

-0.5

-0.4

-3.5

-4.7

-4.7

-4.7

-3.9

COM Spring 2009

-0.5

-0.4

-4.2

-5.3

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

SP Nov 2007

-0.7

-0.6

-0.2

0.4

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

Primary balance
(% of GDP)

SP Apr 2009

2.3

2.2

-0.6

-1.7

-1.4

-1.3

-0.4

COM Spring 2009

2.2

2.1

-1.1

-2.1

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

SP Nov 2007

2.0

2.1

2.3

2.8

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

Cyclically-adjusted balance 1
(% of GDP)

SP Apr 2009

-1.7

-1.6

-3.1

-3.9

-4.0

-4.1

-3.7

COM Spring 2009

-1.8

-1.8

-3.2

-3.8

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

SP Nov 2007

-0.9

-0.8

-0.4

0.1

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

Structural balance 3
(% of GDP)

SP Apr 2009

-1.7

-1.6

-3.1

-3.9

-4.0

-4.1

-3.7

COM Spring 2009

-1.8

-1.8

-3.2

-3.8

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

SP Nov 2007

-0.7

-0.6

-0.4

0.1

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

Government gross debt
(% of GDP)

SP Apr 2009

59.4

62.5

68.5

73.0

75.7

77.7

78.5

COM Spring 2009

59.4

62.5

70.4

75.2

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

SP Nov 2007

59.9

58.4

57.0

55.4

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

Notes :

1 Output gaps and cyclically-adjusted balances from the programmes as recalculated by Commission services on the basis of the information in the programmes.

2 Based on estimated potential growth of 1.8%, 1.7%, 1.3% and 1.3% respectively in the period 2007-2010.

3 Cyclically-adjusted balance excluding one-off and other temporary measures. There are no one-off and other temporary measures in the most recent programme and Commission services’ spring 2009 forecast

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Source :

Stability programme (SP); Commission services’ spring 2009 forecasts (COM); Commission services’ calculations

BELGIUM

Comparison of key macro-economic and budgetary projections

 

 

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

Real GDP
(% change)

SP Apr 2009

2.8

1.1

-1.9

0.6

2.3

2.3

2.1

COM Spring 2009

2.8

1.2

-3.5

-0.2

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

SP Apr 2008

2.8

1.9

2.0

2.0

2.0

n.a.

n.a.

HICP inflation
(%)

SP Apr 2009

1.8

4.5

0.7

1.8

1.8

1.7

1.8

COM Spring 2009

1.8

4.5

0.3

1.2

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

SP Apr 2008

1.8

3.0

1.7

1.8

1.8

n.a.

n.a.

Output gap 1
(% of potential GDP)

SP Apr 2009

2.3

1.5

-1.9

-2.7

-1.9

-1.2

-0.6

COM Spring 2009 2

2.5

1.9

-2.6

-3.8

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

SP Apr 2008

0.3

-0.1

-0.4

-0.5

-0.8

n.a.

n.a.

Net lending/borrowing vis-à-vis the rest of the world
(% of GDP)

SP Apr 2009

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

COM Spring 2009

2.1

-2.1

-2.5

-2.6

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

SP Apr 2008

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

General government revenue
(% of GDP)

SP Apr 2009

48.1

48.6

48.2

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

COM Spring 2009

48.1

48.6

48.4

48.2

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

SP Apr 2008

48.7

49.0

48.8

48.9

49.2

n.a.

n.a.

General government expenditure
(% of GDP)

SP Apr 2009

48.3

49.8

51.6

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

COM Spring 2009

48.3

49.8

52.9

54.3

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

SP Apr 2008

48.9

49.0

48.5

48.3

48.2

n.a.

n.a.

General government balance
(% of GDP)

SP Apr 2009

-0.2

-1.2

-3.4

-4.0

-3.4

-2.6

-1.5

COM Spring 2009

-0.2

-1.2

-4.5

-6.1

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

SP Apr 2008

-0.2

0.0

0.3

0.7

1.0

n.a.

n.a.

Primary balance
(% of GDP)

SP Apr 2009

3.6

2.5

0.4

-0.1

0.6

1.5

2.5

COM Spring 2009

3.6

2.5

-0.6

-2.1

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

SP Apr 2008

3.7

3.7

3.8

4.1

4.3

n.a.

n.a.

Cyclically-adjusted balance 1
(% of GDP)

SP Apr 2009

-1.5

-2.0

-2.4

-2.6

-2.4

-1.9

-1.2

COM Spring 2009

-1.6

-2.2

-3.1

-4.0

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

SP Apr 2008

-0.4

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.4

n.a.

n.a.

Structural balance 3
(% of GDP)

SP Apr 2009

-1.3

-2.0

-2.4

-2.6

-2.4

-1.9

-1.2

COM Spring 2009

-1.5

-2.2

-3.2

-4.0

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

SP Apr 2008

-0.3

0

0.5

1.0

1.4

n.a.

n.a.

Government gross debt
(% of GDP)

SP Apr 2009

84.0

89.6

93

95

94.9

93.9

92

COM Spring 2009

84.0

89.6

95.7

100.9

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

SP Apr 2008

84.9

81.5

778.1

74.7

71.1

n.a.

n.a.

Notes :

1 Output gaps and cyclically-adjusted balances from the programmes as recalculated by Commission services on the basis of the information in the programmes.

2 Based on estimated potential growth of 1.9%, 1.7%, 1.0% and 1.0% respectively in the period 2007-2010.

3 Cyclically-adjusted balance excluding one-off and other temporary measures. One-off and other temporary measures are 0.2% of GDP in 2007, deficit increasing, according to the most recent programme and 0.1% of GDP, deficit increasing, in 2007 and 0.1% of GDP, deficit reducing, in 2009 according to the Commission services' Spring 2009 forecast.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Source :

Stability programme (SP); Commission services’ Spring 2009 forecast (COM); Commission services’ calculations

ROMANIA

Comparison of key macroeconomic and budgetary projections

 

 

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Real GDP
(% change)

CP June 2009

6.2

7.1

-4.0

0.1

2.4

COM Spring 2009

6.2

7.1

-4.0

0.0

n.a.

CP Dec 2007

6.1

6.5

6.1

5.8

n.a.

HICP inflation
(%)

CP June 2009

4.5

7.9

5.8

3.5

3.2

COM Spring 2009

4.9

7.9

5.8

3.5

n.a.

CP Dec 2007

4.8

5.7

4.0

3.3

n.a.

Output gap 1
(% of potential GDP)

CP June 2009

4.3

8.7

-0.5

-2.5

-2.9

COM Spring 2009 2

6.6

8.5

0.2

-3.0

n.a.

CP Dec 2007

2.1

2.1

1.8

1.1

n.a.

Net lending/borrowing vis-à-vis the rest of the world
(% of GDP)

CP June 2009

-12.9

-11.9

-6.3

-5.4

-5.2

COM Spring 2009

-12.8

-11.8

-6.4

-5.1

n.a.

CP Dec 2007

-12.6

-10.5

-10.1

-10.2

n.a.

General government revenue
(% of GDP)

CP June 2009

34.0

33.1

33.2

33.7

34.2

COM Spring 2009

34.0

33.1

33.4

33.3

n.a.

CP Dec 2007

37.4

39.8

39.9

40.8

n.a.

General government expenditure
(% of GDP)

CP June 2009

36.6

38.5

38.3

37.8

37.0

COM Spring 2009

36.6

38.5

38.5

38.9

n.a.

CP Dec 2007

40.3

42.7

42.8

43.2

n.a.

General government balance
(% of GDP)

CP June 2009

-2.5

-5.4

-5.1

-4.1

-2.9

COM Spring 2009

-2.5

-5.4

-5.1

-5.6

n.a.

CP Dec 2007

-2.9

-2.9

-2.9

-2.4

n.a.

Primary balance
(% of GDP)

CP June 2009

-1.8

-4.7

-3.6

-2.4

-1.4

COM Spring 2009

-1.8

-4.7

-3.6

-4.0

n.a.

CP Dec 2007

-2.0

-2.1

-2.1

-1.6

n.a.

Cyclically-adjusted balance 1
(% of GDP)

CP June 2009

-3.9

-8.2

-5.3

-3.3

-2.0

COM Spring 2009

-4.5

-7.9

-5.2

-4.7

n.a.

CP Dec 2007

-3.6

-3.6

-3.5

-2.8

n.a.

Structural balance 3
(% of GDP)

CP June 2009

-3.7

-8.2

-5.3

-3.3

-2.0

COM Spring 2009

-4.4

-7.9

-5.2

-4.7

n.a.

CP Dec 2007

-3.4

-3.4

-3.4

-2.7

n.a.

Government gross debt
(% of GDP)

CP June 2009

12.7

13.6

18

20.8

22.0

COM Spring 2009

12.7

13.6

18.2

22.7

n.a.

CP Dec 2007

11.9

13.6

14.2

14.9

n.a.

Notes :

1 Output gaps and cyclically-adjusted balances from the programmes as recalculated by Commission services on the basis of the information in the programmes.

2 Based on estimated potential growth of 5.1%, 5.2%, 3.9%, 3.2% respectively in the period 2007-2010

3 Cyclically-adjusted balance excluding one-off and other temporary measures. One-off and other temporary measures are 0.2% of GDP in 2007 deficit-reducing and 0% over the period 2008-2011 according to the most recent convergence programme and 0.2% of GDP in 2007 deficit-reducing and 0% over the period 2008-2010 according to the Commission services' spring 2009 forecast.

Source :

Convergence programme (CP); Commission services’ spring 2009 forecasts (COM); Commission services’ calculations

SLOVENIA

Comparison of key macroeconomic and budgetary projections

 

 

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Real GDP
(% change)

SP Apr 2009

6.8

3.5

-4.0

1.0

2.7

COM Spring 2009

6.8

3.5

-3.4

0.7

n.a.

SP Nov 2007

5.8

4.6

4.1

4.5

n.a.

HICP inflation
(%)

SP Apr 2009

3.6

5.7.

0.4

1.6.

2.6.

COM Spring 2009

3.8

5.5

0.7

2.0

n.a.

SP Nov 2007

3.4

3.5

2.8

2.6

n.a.

Output gap 2
(% of potential GDP)

SP Apr 2009

4.7

4.4

-2.3

-3.5

-3.1

COM Spring 2009 2

4.5

3.2

-1.3

-2.7

n.a.

SP Nov 2007

0.7

0.5

0.1

0.2

n.a.

Net lending/borrowing vis-à-vis the rest of the world
(% of GDP)

SP Apr 2009

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

COM Spring 2009

-3.7

-5.6

-4.6

-4.4

n.a.

SP Nov 2007

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

General government balance
(% of GDP)

SP Apr 2009

0.5

-0.9

-5.1

-3.9

-3.4

COM Spring 2009

0.5

-0.9

-5.5

-6.5

n.a.

SP Nov 2007

-0.6

-0.9

-0.6

0.0

n.a.

Primary balance
(% of GDP)

SP Apr 2009

1.8

0.2

-3.6

-2.2

-1.6

COM Spring 2009

1.8

0.2

-3.9

-4.7

n.a.

SP Nov 2007

0.7

0.2

0.6

1.1

n.a.

Cyclically-adjusted balance 3
(% of GDP)

SP Apr 2009

-1.6

-2.9

-4.1

-2.3

-2.0

COM Spring 2009

-1.7

-2.5

-4.9

-5.2

n.a.

SP Nov 2007

-0.9

-1.1

-0.7

-0.1

n.a.

Structural balance 4
(% of GDP)

SP Apr 2009

-1.6

-2.9

-4.1

-2.3

-2.0

COM Spring 2009

-1.7

-2.5

-4.9

-5.2

n.a.

SP Nov 2007

-0.8

-1.0

-0.7

-0.1

n.a.

Government gross debt
(% of GDP)

SP Apr 2009

23.4

22.8

30.5

34.1

36.3

COM Spring 2009

23.4

22.8

29.3

34.9

n.a.

SP Nov 2007

25.6

24.7

23.8

22.5

n.a.

Notes :

 

 

 

 

 

 

1 Output gaps and cyclically-adjusted balances according to the programme as recalculated by Commission services on the basis of the information in the programme.

2 Based on estimated potential growth of 3.9%, 4.9%, 1.0% and 2.2% respectively in the period 2007-2010.

3 One-off and other temporary measures are zero according to the most recent programme and the Commission services' spring 2009 forecast.

4 For the programmes the CPI definition is shown.

Source :

Stability programmes (SP); Commission services’ spring 2009 forecasts (COM); Commission services’ calculations

SLOVAKIA

Comparison of key macroeconomic and budgetary projections

 

 

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Real GDP
(% change)

SP Apr 2009

10.4

6.4

2.4

3.6

4.5

COM Spring 2009

10.4

6.4

-2.6

0.7

n.a.

CP Nov 2007

8.8

6.8

5.8

5.0

n.a.

HICP inflation
(%)

SP Apr 2009

1.9

3.9

2.2

3.6

4.1

COM Spring 2009

1.9

3.9

2.0

2.4

n.a.

CP Nov 2007

1.7

2.3

2.6

2.7

n.a.

Output gap 2
(% of potential GDP)

SP Apr 2009

5.1

6.5

3.5

1.7

1.0

COM Spring 2009 2

6.5

8.0

0.9

-2.2

n.a.

CP Nov 2007

1.8

2.3

2.1

1.4

n.a.

Net lending/borrowing vis-à-vis the rest of the world
(% of GDP)

SP Apr 2009

-4.6

-5.8

-4.2

-2.9

-2.6

COM Spring 2009

-4.7

-5.6

-7.6

-6.2

n.a.

CP Nov 2007

-3.4

-1.9

-1.1

-0.4

n.a.

General government revenue
(% of GDP)

SP Apr 2009

32.7

33.4

32.1

31.6

31.8

COM Spring 2009

32.5

32.7

33.6

34.1

n.a.

CP Nov 2007

33.2

33.0

31.8

31.8

n.a.

General government expenditure
(% of GDP)

SP Apr 2009

34.6

35.6

35.1

34.5

34.1

COM Spring 2009

34.4

34.9

38.3

39.4

n.a.

CP Nov 2007

35.7

35.3

33.7

32.6

n.a.

General government balance
(% of GDP)

SP Apr 2009

-1.9

-2.2

-3.0

-2.9

-2.2

COM Spring 2009

-1.9

-2.2

-4.7

-5.4

n.a.

CP Nov 2007

-2.5

-2.3

-1.8

-0.8

n.a.

Primary balance
(% of GDP)

SP Apr 2009

-0.6

-0.9

-1.7

-1.7

-1.0

COM Spring 2009

-0.5

-0.9

-3.3

-4.0

n.a.

CP Nov 2007

-1.0

-0.9

-0.3

0.5

n.a.

Cyclically-adjusted balance 3
(% of GDP)

SP Apr 2009

-3.4

-4.1

-4.0

-3.4

-2.5

COM Spring 2009

-3.8

-4.5

-4.9

-4.7

n.a.

CP Nov 2007

-3.0

-3.0

-2.4

-1.2

n.a.

Structural balance 4
(% of GDP)

SP Apr 2009

-4.2

-3.8

-4.4

-3.5

-2.6

COM Spring 2009

-3.8

-4.7

-5.0

-4.7

n.a.

CP Nov 2007

-3.0

-3.1

-2.4

-1.2

n.a.

Government gross debt
(% of GDP)

SP Apr 2009

29.4

27.6

31.4

32.7

32.7

COM Spring 2009

29.4

27.6

32.2

36.3

n.a.

CP Nov 2007

30.6

30.8

30.5

29.5

n.a.

Notes :

 

 

 

 

 

 

1 The 2007 data on real GDP, HICP inflation were provided on a bilateral basis.

2 Output gaps and cyclically-adjusted balances according to the programmes as recalculated by Commission services on the basis of the information in the programmes.

3 Based on estimated potential growth of 5.6%, 4.9%, 4.4% and 3.9% respectively in the period 2007-2010.

4 Cyclically-adjusted balance excluding one-off and other temporary measures. One-off and other temporary measures are 0.8% of GDP in 2007, 0.4% of GDP in 2009, 0.1 of GDP in 2009 and 2010 - deficit-increasing and 0.3% of GDP in 2008 deficit-reducing according to the most recent programme and 0.2% of GDP in 2008 and 0.1% of GDP in 2009 and 2011 deficit-increasing in the Commission services' forecast.

Source :

 

 

 

 

 

 

Stability programme (SP); Commission services’ April 2009 sp ring forecasts (COM); Commission services’ calculations

1 :

Zgodnie z rozporządzeniem Rady (WE) nr 1466/97 w sprawie wzmocnienia nadzoru pozycji budżetowych oraz nadzoru i koordynacji polityk gospodarczych państwa członkowskie zobowiązane są co roku przedstawiać zaktualizowane prognozy sytuacji makroekonomicznej i budżetowej. W przypadku krajów, które przyjęły euro, prognozy te określane są jako programy stabilności, natomiast w przypadku pozostałych krajów są to programy konwergencji. Wspomniane rozporządzenie określane jest również jako „część prewencyjna” paktu na rzecz stabilności i wzrostu.

2 :

For more recent developments see:

http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/thematic_articles/article15382_en.htm


Side Bar

My account

Manage your searches and email notifications


Help us improve our website