Dynamic Revenue Estimating

Will it work for Michigan?

 

A joint report of the:

House Fiscal Agency
Senate Fiscal Agency
Department of Treasury

March 1997


This report was prepared by

 Mitchell E. Bean, Senior Economist, House Fiscal Agency;

 Jay Wortley, Senior Economist, Senate Fiscal Agency; and

 Mark P. Haas, Director and Chief Economist,
Office of Revenue and Tax Analysis,
Michigan Department of Treasury.
 
 

The report was prepared for publication by

 Jeanne Dee, Administrative Assistant, House Fiscal Agency.
 
 

Questions or comments regarding this report can be addressed to

 Mr. Bean (517-373-8080),

Mr. Wortley (517-373-2768),

 or Mr. Haas (517-373-2697).


 


TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
SEMINAR HIGHLIGHTS AND SUMMARY OF KEY ISSUES
  • Overview of Static Versus Dynamic Revenue Estimates 
  • Procedures Currently Used in Michigan
  • Dynamic Estimation Procedures Used by Other States
  • Dynamic Feedback Effects of Tax Law Changes
  • Dynamic Model Development and Operational Management Issues 
  • Other Issues and Observations
SUMMARY OF COMMENTS BY GUEST SPEAKERS
  • Input from Academia
    • The Role of The University of Michigan
    • Regional Economic Models, Inc. (REMI)
    • Issues in Making the Process Operational
  • Private Sector Experience
    • The Dynamic Revenue Estimating Process
    • Managing the Process
  • The California Experience
    • Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) Models
    • California's Dynamic Model
  • The Minnesota Experience
    • Minnesota's Dynamic Model
    • Model Assumptions
  • The Massachusetts Experience
SUMMARY OF A SYMPOSIUM SPONSORED BY THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON TAXATION
  • Strengths and Weaknesses of Models Currently Available 
    • Strengths 
    • Weaknesses
  • Conclusions
WHAT ARE THE OPTIONS?
RECOMMENDATIONS
APPENDIX A: DYNAMIC REVENUE ESTIMATING SEMINAR CONFERENCE
  • Seminar Announcement
  • Seminar Agenda
APPENDIX B: CONFERENCE REGISTRANTS
APPENDIX C: SURVEY OF THE STATES
BIBLIOGRAPHY