Modelling of Fiscal and Monetary Policy Interactions in the Republic of Belarus

Irina A. Loukianova, Maria A. Shkliarova, Stanislav Yu. Vysotsky


The article discusses classical and modern macroeconomic models of interaction of fiscal and monetary policies in Belarus. The hypothesis of this research is that the interaction of fiscal and monetary policies has a synergistic effect on economic growth and that at certain stages, one of these policies prevails over the other. This hypothesis was tested with the help of an IS-LM model, which was used to investigate the joint effects of monetary and fiscal policies on business activity in Belarus. A Markov switching model was developed in Eviews software to analyze the interaction between these policies. Regression dependences of the average tax burden (including the burden imposed by social security contributions) and GDP, investment and the refinancing rate were built by using Excel software. To solve the IS-LM model, the value of autonomous consumption was computed with the help of the adjusted value of the average propensity to consume. It was found that autonomous consumption is comparable with the budget of subsistence minimum in Belarus. The share of government spending in the GDP structure was on average 35.01%. The comparison of gross savings and investment showed that in the majority of periods, gross savings insignificantly exceeded the amount of investment, that is, the available funds were used for consumer lending rather than for investment. Analysis of the Markov switching model has led us to the conclusion that from the first quarter 2005 until the fourth quarter of 2009, the fiscal policy in Belarus was in the active regime. The passive fiscal policy regime was observed in the period between the first quarter of 2010 and the first quarter of 2019. In this period, a rise in the public debt was accompanied by an increase in the budget surplus. In the second quarter of 2019, there was a transition to a more active fiscal policy, which points to the need to intensify tax reforms.

For citation

Loukianova I. A., Shkliarova M. A., Vysotsky S. Yu. Modelling of Fiscal and Monetary Policy Interactions in the Republic of Belarus. Journal of Tax Reform. 2019;5(3):220–235. DOI: 10.15826/jtr.2019.5.3.069

 Article info

Received October 31, 2019; Revised November 20, 2019; Accepted November 24, 2019


taxation system, tax reform, tax burden, fiscal policy, monetary policy, economic growth


Kireeva E. F. Tax Reform: Necessity, Main Directions and Measures of their Implementation. Belarusian Economic Journal. 2018;(4):77–88. (In Russ.)
2. Mayburov I. A., Ivanov Y. B. (eds) Tax Reforms. Theory and Practice. Textbook for Master’s Students. Moscow: UNITA-DANA; 2015. (In Russ.)
3. Sargent T., Wallace N. Some Unpleasant Monetarist Arithmetic. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis Quarterly Review. 1981;(5):1–17.
4. Woodford M. Monetary Policy and Price Level Determinacy in a Cash-in-Advance Economy. Economic Theory. 1994;4(3):345–380.
5. Leeper E. Equilibria under ‘Active’ and ‘Passive’ Monetary and Fiscal Policies. Journal of Monetary Economics. 1991;27(1):129–147.
6. Cevik E. I., Dibooglu S., Kutan A. M. Monetary and Fiscal Policy Interactions: Evidence from Emerging European Economies. Journal of Comparative Economics. 2012;42(4):1–20.
7. Nordhaus W., Schulze C., Fisher S. Policy Games: Coordination and Independence in Monetary and Fiscal Policies. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity. 1994;(2):139–216.
8. Blanchard O. Fiscal Dominance and Inflation Targeting: Lessons from Brazil. NBER Working Paper, 10389. Available at:
9. Pekarsky S. E., Atamanchuk M. A., Merzlyakov S. A. Interaction of Fiscal and Monetary Policies in Export-Oriented Economy. Preprint WP12/2007/02. Moscow: Higher School of Economics; 2007. (In Russ.)
10. Zaretsky A. Methodology of Building, Solution and Parameter Estimation of DSGE Models. Preprint WP/12/05. Minsk: IPM Research Centre; 2012. Available at: (In Russ.)
11. Bezborodova A. V. SVAR: Analysis and Forecasting of the Main Macroeconomic Indicators. Bankovsky vestnik: issledovania banka. 2017;(11):1–30. (In Russ.)
12. Ferede E., Dahlby В. The Impact of Tax Cuts on Economic Growth: Evidence from the Canadian Provinces. National Tax Journal. 2012;65(3):563–594.
13. Lee Y., Gordon R. Tax Structure and Economic Growth. Journal of Public Economics. 2005;89(5–6):1027–1043.
14. Barro R. J., Redlick C. J. Macroeconomic Effects of Government Purchases and Taxes. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 2011;126(1):51–102.
15. Arnold J. M., Brys B., Heady C., Johansson A., Schwellnus C., Vartia L. Tax Policy for Economic Recovery and Growth. The Economic Journal. 2011;121(550):59–80. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-0297.2010.02415.x
16. Alberto F. Alesina S. A. Large Changes in Fiscal Policy: Taxes Versus Spending. NBER Working Paper No. 15438. Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research; 2009. Available at:
17. Romer C., Romer D. The Macroeconomic Effects of Tax Changes: Estimates Based on a New Measure of Fiscal Shocks. American Economic Review. 2010;(100):763–801.
18. Gale W. G., Samwick A. A. Effects of Income Tax Changes on Economic Growth. Economic studies at Brookings. 2014;(1):1–15.


Copyright (c) 2019 Irina A. Loukianova, Maria A. Shkliarova, Stanislav Yu. Vysotsky

eLibrary logoeLibrary logo  DOAJ logo ERIH PLUS logo 

© Journal of Tax Reform : ISSN 2414-9497 (online), ISSN 2412-8872 (print)