 Facts and figures about UK taxes, benefits and public spending.
Income distribution, poverty and inequality.
Analysing government fiscal forecasts and tax and spending.
Analysis of the fiscal choices an independent Scotland would face.
Case studies that give a flavour of the areas where IFS research has an impact on society.
Reforming the tax system for the 21st century.
A peer-reviewed quarterly journal publishing articles by academics and practitioners.
|
Type: Journal Articles Authors: Colin Thain and Maurice Wright ISSN: Print: 0143-5671 Online: 1475-5890
Published in: Fiscal Studies, Vol. 11, No. 4, November 1990
Volume, issue, pages: Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 63-81
The Treasury struggled hard to reassert short-term control of public spending following the economic crises of the mid-1970s. The result has been an evolutionary move to annualised cash control of public spending with the introduction of cash limits in 1976, cash planning in 1982, and running costs control in 1986. What has been a gain to the Treasury in terms of its ability to control spending has been a loss to the Whitehall departments in terms of their ability to plan ahead on programmes which do not fit neatly into the one-year cycle. This article focuses on the tensions inherent in this, prompting the Treasury eventually to concede to departmental demands for some modification to the principle of firm annual cash limits by introducing in July 1983 the end-year flexibility (EYF) scheme. Search |
|
|
|
© The Institute for Fiscal Studies
Limited by Guarantee,Registered in England: 954616 7 Ridgmount Street London WC1E 7AE Registered Charity: 258815 VAT no: GB 394 5830 17 Website design by Pynk and Fluffy |
||||||
