TREASURY NEWS
FROM THE OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS
Text as Prepared for Delivery
July 22, 1998
RR-2605
SECRETARY ROBERT E. RUBIN
SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE
Mr. Chairman, members of this Committee, I appreciate this opportunity to say
a few words about the importance of savings to our economy and to make a few
observations about promoting savings.
Saving is obviously important for families; it is also critical for the nation
at large. Savings provides the capital that funds investment, and increased
investment, in turn, is critical to greater productivity and higher standards
of living.
Our national savings rate -- which is the sum of private and public savings
-- has increased in the last few years, from 3.1 percent of GDP in 1992 to 6.5
percent last year. But this increase has been the net of a large increase in
the public savings rate while the private savings rate has decreased the last
five years. The public savings rate reflects the move from a budget deficit
that equaled five percent of GDP in 1992 to a projected budget surplus this
year. Critical to this process was the President's deficit reduction program,
beginning with the 1993 Deficit Reduction Act, and the lower interest rates
and greater economic growth it generated, which set off a virtuous cycle and
further reduced the deficit.
Notwithstanding the recent increase in our national savings rate, it remains
among the lowest of the industrialized nations and well below where we were
twenty to thirty years ago. Raising our national savings rate further should
be a high priority for our nation especially as we approach the retirement of
the baby boom generation.
While new global capital markets allow us to draw on savings from abroad --
in fact, investment rates have substantially exceeded savings rates, and investment
in plant and machinery is now at historic highs -- funding investment from abroad
is not as desirable as funding it from domestic savings. Efficient as they are,
global capital markets aren't perfect -- domestic savers continue to have a
preference for investing in domestic assets, and the resulting dependance on
foreign capital increases the cost of capital for U.S. firms. Moreover, while
foreign-funded investment provides a net benefit to our economy, the return
on foreign-funded investment goes abroad. Perhaps most importantly, while capital
is flowing from abroad because of our attractive environment with respect to
economic policy and economic conditions, there is always a risk that this perception
might change and, as a result, capital will become more expensive. One conclusion
from this is the great importance of maintaining a sound macroeconomic environment,
including fiscal discipline, so that we continue to attract capital at a low
cost.
It is very tempting with the projected budget surplus to cut taxes or increase
spending, but I believe that instead, it is critical that we maintain the fiscal
discipline which has been central to our strong economic growth over the last
five years by adhering to the President's strategy of putting Social Security
on a sound footing. Moreover, while our surplus projections are soundly based,
we have had almost thirty years of deficits, and have not yet had one full year
in surplus. Projections are exactly that, projections, not certainties, and
subject to change, even great change. We shouldn't commit to any policy, let
alone to a large tax cut, to use the projected surplus until Social Security's
long term financial integrity has been effectively addressed. That strategy
will both protect retirement security and protect the fiscal discipline that
his so central to our economic well being. Fiscal discipline is the hard path,
not the easy path, but it is the right path for our economic well being. Large
tax cut proposals based on projected surpluses are an unsound and unwise strategy
for our future.
Let me make two other observations about what will and will not contribute
to increased savings.
Most economic work strongly suggests that transforming the tax system to some
form of consumption tax, whether the flat tax or a VAT, would have little impact
on the savings rate. The savings rate is not very sensitive to the after tax
return on savings. Therefore, I don't believe there is a savings argument for
reducing the progressivity of the tax system.
On the other hand, there is a broadly held view among economists that education
and measures to facilitate savings do have an impact on savings. Examples of
successful education campaigns include the Savings Bonds campaign, and the marketing
of IRA's and 401(K) plans. Pension reforms and IRA reforms also have facilitated
savings.
This Committee is making an important contribution to our nation's economic
health by focusing on the importance of savings. Deputy Secretary Summers and
Commissioner Apfel will also be discussing various aspects of retirement saving
in more detail. I look forward to working with all of you to promote savings,
and to protect our nation's fiscal discipline, and thereby benefit both families
and our nation as a whole as we approach a new century. Thank you very much.
|