No Borrowing Without Taxing? Fiscal Solidarity of Next Generation EU in Light of the American Experience

This article argues that the EU response to the pandemic, the Next Generation EU (NGEU), dubbed a "Hamiltonian moment" for Europe, can be better understood if compared to the US under the Articles of Confederation. The key aspect of the original Hamiltonian moment was the assumption of states’ debts after the Union was given tax power. None of this happened with the NGEU. The EU was not given any significant new sources of revenue, apart from some environmental levies, and was only allowed to borrow more on the financial markets to finance new fiscal solidarity mechanisms. In the US, this kind of borrowing power gave rise to monetary financing of the debt and enormous inflation. Instead of backing the enlarged borrowing powers with a fiscalization process leading to tax powers, the EU created a hybrid system of temporary, limited quasi-fiscalization in the form of the NGEU, which has legitimacy gaps. Simultaneously, the EU introduced enhanced fiscal regulation with conditionalities in the form of the new European Semester (an annual EU cycle of economic and fiscal coordination) tied to the allocation of the NGEU funds. Additionally, the EU has only promised to work in the future on various forms of revenue needed to pay the new debt. Hence, I will show that the NGEU could be better described as a "Morrisian moment" for Europe, as Robert Morris, the superintendent of finance of the US (1781–1784), was the very first finance minister of a similar kind of a union, with the power to borrow but no power to tax, governed by the unanimity rule in fiscal matters, which led to the failure of his proposals for national revenue

Towards fiscalization of the European Union? : the European and American fiscal unions in a comparative historical perspective

Defence date: 15 March 2018Examining Board: Professor Alexander H. Trechsel, University of Luzern/European Univeristy Institute (Supervisor); Professor Sergio Fabbrini, LUISS Guido Carli, Rome; Professor Alojzy Z. Nowak, University of Warsaw; Professor Sven H. Steinmo, University of Colorado, BoulderMy original contribution to knowledge is a demonstration that fiscalization, a concept I defined as a process that leads to the emergence of a federal power to tax, is triggered by an internal threat. This dissertation focuses on the economic governance of the European Union (EU) from a comparative historical perspective and shows that the emergence of the federal fiscal union is the result of a sovereign debt crisis at the state level. More specifically, it analyzes the conditions under which a supranational power to tax is likely to emerge by investigating the emergence of the United States (US) fiscal union in the late 18th century. I analyze the fiscal history of the early US to demonstrate how the institutional flaws of the Articles of Confederation, mainly the central budget based on contributions from the states, so-called ‘requisitions’, led to a sovereign debt crisis at the state level, which triggered taxpayers’ revolts in 1786/1787. I argue that an endogenous threat, exemplified by this social unrest caused by the heavy taxation that the states imposed to pay off the debt from the War of Independence, constituted such a condition. Consequently, this threat paved the way for the ‘fiscal bargain’, which led to fiscalization of the federal government, i.e. the creation of a fiscal union with the federal power to tax (‘federal fiscal union’) based firmly in the new Constitution of 1789. I then confronted the US experience with the EU ‘post-crisis’ economic governance through the lens of two instruments of integration: fiscalization and regulation. A comparison can shed a different light on a polity such as the EU. In a classical fiscal union such as the US, the federal government has fiscal capacity, but it does not have the power to regulate the fiscal policies of the states. In the EU, we can observe the reverse situation: the European institutions in the last few years have acquired a good deal of power to regulate national economic policies. For instance, under the European Semester the EU can even impose sanctions on the member states if they fail to take ‘the corrective action’ on the excessive macroeconomic imbalances. Moreover, it was decided not to go forward with the fiscalization process. I argue that this is because a threat emerging from the Euro crisis was not perceived as large enough to trigger a ‘fiscal bargain’. Paradoxically, by not agreeing to give the EU fiscal capacity, so that they could protect their fiscal sovereignty, member states gave up more of this very fiscal sovereignty to the central institutions, than states in classical federations.Chapters 1.1 'Introduction', 1.2 'The puzzle', 1.3 'Research question', 1.5 'Contribution', 2.1 'State of the art', 2.3 'The concept of fiscalization', 2.4 'Hypothesis', 3.1 'Case selection', 4.1 'Introduction', 4.2 'How did fiscalization of the us federal government emerge?' and 7 'The insights for the EU from the US federal experience' of the PhD thesis draws upon an earlier version published as an article 'Why the sovereign debt crisis could lead to a federal fiscal union : the paradoxical origins of fiscalization in the United States and insights for the European Union' (2017) in the journal 'Journal of European public policy' and an earlier version published as a working paper 'Towards fiscalization of the European Union? : the US and EU fiscal unions in a comparative historical perspective' (2016) in the University of California, Berkeley, Institute of European Studies Working Papers Serie

Comparative Fiscal Federalism and the Post‐Covid EU: Between Debt Rules and Borrowing Power

This thematic issue examines two main research questions: What are the features, the determinants, and the implications of fiscal integration in a system of multilevel governance like the EU? And, what can the post-pandemic EU learn from established federations when it comes to fiscal integration? We attempt to conceptualize the patterns of EU fiscal integration. In so doing, we identify eight instruments of fiscal integration in a federal or multilevel polity, equally divided between fiscal capacity and fiscal regulation, depending on the side of the budget and the mode of integration (autonomous or dependent). For instance, as part of the fiscal capacity instrument of integration, we propose to distinguish between revenue and expenditure capacity. Revenue capacity is then further divided into tax capacity, based on EU/federal taxes, and budgetary capacity, based on non-independent sources, for instance, contributions from the member states. Expenditure capacity is divided into autonomous spending capacity, meaning direct spending by the EU, and a dependent transfer capacity, where the EU merely distributes resources (both grants and loans) to the member states

Fiscal unions : economic integration in Europe and the United States

By building on a recent research comparing the EU and US and drawing on Riker's influential theory of federalism, this books explores the origins of fiscal unions. It investigates early American history and traces its constitutional debates to argue that an internal threat - such as sovereign debt crisis leading to social unrest threatening the Union - triggers emergence of federal taxing powers - i.e. a federal fiscal union. It then contrasts the American experience of fiscal integration with the European one and subsequently concludes with the insights for the EU. It is a first monograph to compare the American and European models of fiscal integration, making two original contributions to the theoretical and empirical literature. In reference to the former, it introduces the concept of fiscalization, which defines the emergence of a 'fiscal union' with federal tax powers. Concerning the latter, by analysing the Confederation period of the US and applying Riker's theory using mainly unexplored primary sources, such as the protocols from state ratification conventions of 1787/88, this book adds to the US-EU comparative federalism literature. It shows that paradoxically, by not agreeing to give the EU fiscal capacity, so that they could protect their fiscal sovereignty, member states gave up more of this very fiscal sovereignty to the central institutions, than states in classical federations. This research allows the reader to learn about the similarities - and the differences - between the pre-Constitution US and the modern EU with regards to their fiscal arrangements; a comparison of the arguments that were used while debating those arrangements; and finally - the conditions under which central level of government in the systems of multi-level government is likely to get a power to tax.1:Introduction 2:Fiscalization of the US Federal Government 3:The Debate over Fiscalization of the US Federal Government 4:Fiscal Regulation of the EU 5:Explaining National Preferences on Fiscalization of the EU 6:Comparative Analysis and Implications for the E

The fiscal origins of American power : federal tax policy and US territorial expansion in the nineteenth century

In this working paper, I argue that United States (US) territory quadrupled within the first three generations since 1789 because, in the nineteenth century, the US developed a fiscal-military state capable of mobilizing considerable resources without provoking any major tax rebellion. Relying on indirect taxes—customs duties and excises—meant that the federal government could draw on a stable and uncontentious stream of revenue. This fiscal capacity allowed the US government to finance different methods of its territorial expansion, including warfare and purchase.The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Research Council under the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007–2013)/ERC Grant Agreement n. 29567

Towards fiscalization of the European Union? : the US and EU fiscal unions in a comparative historical perspective

This is a revised version of the paper, which won the first College of Europe - Arenberg European Prize 'Exploring Federal Solutions'. This paper was presented at the Institute of European Studies at the University of California, Berkeley on April 23, 2015.This paper shows that the emergence of the federal power to tax is the result of a sovereign debt crisis at the state level. I analyse the fiscal history of the early United States (US) to demonstrate how the institutional flaws of the Articles of Confederation, mainly the central budget based on contributions from the states, so-called 'requisitions', led to a sovereign debt crisis on the state level, which triggered taxpayers' revolts in 1786/1787. This social unrest, in turn, was perceived by the political élite as an endogenous threat to the union and paved the way for the fiscalization of the federal government, i.e. the creation of a genuine fiscal union with the federal power to tax based firmly in the Constitution of 1789. This analysis is complemented with lessons for the European Union (EU) on how to handle such a debt crisis if the union is to be preserved

Accountability in EU Economic Governance: European Commissioners in Polish Parliament

This article analyses the interactions between the members of the Polish parliament with the European commissioners in the context of the European Semester, the annual cycle of economic coordination. The Commission drafts crucial documents in this process which assess the implementation of the Country Specific Recommendations (CSRs): the Annual (Sustainable) Growth Survey and the Country Reports. The goal of this article is to assess how the Commission is held to account by a national parliament and how this affects the level of implementation of CSRs. The findings suggest that the Commission is accountable to this national parliament, even if the form of accountability taken is rather innovative and its policy impact limited, at both the EU (the CSRs tend to be immune to Members of [national] Parliament’s contestation) and the national level, as the implementation of CSRs seems to be independent of the level of their scrutiny

Rising to a Challenge? Ten Years of Parliamentary Accountability of the European Semester

As a result of the euro crisis, EU economic governance has been reformed and EU institutions have gained new competences regarding national budgets, with the European Semester (the annual cycle of economic surveillance of the member states) being the most prominent example. With the Commission and the Council being the main actors, and the European Parliament playing only a minor role, a debate about the democratic legitimacy of the Semester and the role of national parliaments (NPs) in this regard has unfolded. This thematic issue, therefore, addresses the question of how parliamentary accountability of the European Semester has evolved: Have NPs met the challenge by adapting to the new situation in a way that allows them to hold the executive accountable? While the contributions to this thematic issue show significant variation across NPs, overall they reveal a rather pessimistic picture: Despite several institutional innovations concerning the reforms of internal rules and procedures, the rise of independent fiscal institutions, inter-parliamentary cooperation, and hearings with the European Commissioners, NPs have remained rather weak actors in EU economic governance also ten years after the Semester's introduction. Whether recent changes linked to the establishment of the Recovery and Resilience Facility introduced in response to the Covid-19 crisis will change the picture significantly remains to be examined

Why fiscal justice should be reinstalled through European taxes that the citizens will support : a proposal

We must eliminate a blind spot in citizens’ minds, who tend to think “the more money for the EU, the less for our countries”. By demonstrating the importance of the own source of EU revenue, rather than focusing solely on the size of its budget, we can understand that financing the EU is not such a ‘zero-sum’ game. Therefore, we use the term ‘fiscalization’1 which implies the power to tax, rather than ambiguous terms such as ‘Eurozone budget’. History of other multilevel systems of government, such as the United States, teaches us that some types of taxes can only be effectively - and justly - levied by the highest level of government, the revenue from which could then be used for the common goods. Importantly, our data, based on a YouGov survey conducted in 11 member states, shows that the citizens support the introduction of European taxes, such as a tax on large internet companies. Such EU taxation could reinstall the tax justice, provide more revenues for delivering EU-wide common goods and to make the Economic and Monetary Union more resilient.European Research Council under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement no. 716923)

Why the sovereign debt crisis could lead to a federal fiscal union : the paradoxical origins of fiscalization in the United States and insights for the European Union

Published online: 09 Feb 2017This paper shows that the emergence of the federal power to tax is the result of a sovereign debt crisis at the state level. I analyse the fiscal history of the early United States (US) to demonstrate how the institutional flaws of the Articles of Confederation, mainly the central budget based on contributions from the states, so-called ‘requisitions’, led to a sovereign debt crisis on the state level, which triggered taxpayers’ revolts in 1786/1787. This social unrest, in turn, was perceived by the political élite as an endogenous threat to the union and paved the way for the fiscalization of the federal government, i.e., the creation of a fiscal union with the federal power to tax based firmly in the Constitution of 1789. This analysis concludes with four insights for the European Union (EU).This work was supported by the US State Department and the Directorate-General for Education and Culture of the European Commission, under Fulbright-Schuman Grant [25.04.2014], administered by the Commission for Educational Exchange between the United States and Belgium; the European University Institute under the Exchange Programme with University of California, Berkeley [04.02.2014]; Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Poland, under PhD Scholarship [09.07.2012]; College of Europe and Arenberg Foundation under ‘College of Europe-Arenberg European Prize: Exploring Federal Solutions’ (24.02.2015); and Fondation Jean Monnet pour l’ Europe under the Henri Rieben Scholarship (19.06.2015)