Global Economic Intersection
Advertisement
  • Home
  • Economics
  • Finance
  • Politics
  • Investments
    • Invest in Amazon $250
  • Cryptocurrency
    • Best Bitcoin Accounts
    • Bitcoin Robot
      • Quantum AI
      • Bitcoin Era
      • Bitcoin Aussie System
      • Bitcoin Profit
      • Bitcoin Code
      • eKrona Cryptocurrency
      • Bitcoin Up
      • Bitcoin Prime
      • Yuan Pay Group
      • Immediate Profit
      • BitQH
      • Bitcoin Loophole
      • Crypto Boom
      • Bitcoin Treasure
      • Bitcoin Lucro
      • Bitcoin System
      • Oil Profit
      • The News Spy
      • Bitcoin Buyer
      • Bitcoin Inform
      • Immediate Edge
      • Bitcoin Evolution
      • Cryptohopper
      • Ethereum Trader
      • BitQL
      • Quantum Code
      • Bitcoin Revolution
      • British Trade Platform
      • British Bitcoin Profit
    • Bitcoin Reddit
    • Celebrities
      • Dr. Chris Brown Bitcoin
      • Teeka Tiwari Bitcoin
      • Russell Brand Bitcoin
      • Holly Willoughby Bitcoin
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Economics
  • Finance
  • Politics
  • Investments
    • Invest in Amazon $250
  • Cryptocurrency
    • Best Bitcoin Accounts
    • Bitcoin Robot
      • Quantum AI
      • Bitcoin Era
      • Bitcoin Aussie System
      • Bitcoin Profit
      • Bitcoin Code
      • eKrona Cryptocurrency
      • Bitcoin Up
      • Bitcoin Prime
      • Yuan Pay Group
      • Immediate Profit
      • BitQH
      • Bitcoin Loophole
      • Crypto Boom
      • Bitcoin Treasure
      • Bitcoin Lucro
      • Bitcoin System
      • Oil Profit
      • The News Spy
      • Bitcoin Buyer
      • Bitcoin Inform
      • Immediate Edge
      • Bitcoin Evolution
      • Cryptohopper
      • Ethereum Trader
      • BitQL
      • Quantum Code
      • Bitcoin Revolution
      • British Trade Platform
      • British Bitcoin Profit
    • Bitcoin Reddit
    • Celebrities
      • Dr. Chris Brown Bitcoin
      • Teeka Tiwari Bitcoin
      • Russell Brand Bitcoin
      • Holly Willoughby Bitcoin
No Result
View All Result
Global Economic Intersection
No Result
View All Result

Monthly Federal Government Budget Review for June 2014

admin by admin
July 8, 2014
in Uncategorized
0
0
SHARES
1
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

from the Congressional Budget Office

The federal government ran a budget deficit of $366 billion for the first nine months of fiscal year 2014, CBO estimates – 144 billion less than the shortfall recorded over the same span last year. Through the end of June, revenues were about 8 percent higher and outlays were about 1 percent higher than they were at the same point last year.


Budget Totals, October–June
(Billions of dollars)
Actual, FY 2013Preliminary, FY 2014Estimated Change
Receipts2,0872,259172
Outlays2,5972,62528
Deficit (-)-510-366144
Sources: Congressional Budget Office; Department of the Treasury. Based on the Monthly Treasury Statement for May 2014 and the Daily Treasury Statements for June 2014.
Note: FY = fiscal year.

Total Receipts: Up by 8 Percent in the First Nine Months of Fiscal Year 2014

Receipts for the first nine months of fiscal year 2014 totaled $2,259 billion, CBO estimates—$172 billion more than receipts in the same period last year. The largest increases were the following:

  • Individual income taxes and social insurance (payroll) taxes together rose by $123 billion, or 7 percent.
    • Increases in amounts withheld from workers’ paychecks—$97 billion (or 7 percent)—accounted for most of that gain. Growth in wages and salaries and changes in law were mostly responsible for the difference. In particular, the tax rates in effect from October 2013 through December 2013 (the first quarter of fiscal year 2014) were higher than those in effect from October 2012 through December 2012 as a result of two changes that took effect in January 2013: the expiration of the 2 percentage-point payroll tax cut and an increase in tax rates for income above certain thresholds.
    • Nonwithheld receipts rose by $28 billion (or 7 percent), because of payments made for the 2013 and 2014 tax years. Income tax refunds rose by $1 billion (or 1 percent), slightly offsetting those increases.

  • Receipts from corporate income taxes rose by $29 billion (or 14 percent), probably because of growth in taxable profits in calendar years 2013 and 2014. Receipts from April through June—largely representing corporations’ first two quarterly estimated tax payments for the 2014 tax year—increased by about $12 billion (or 11 percent).
  • Receipts from the Federal Reserve rose by $18 billion, or 32 percent. The increase was attributable in part to the larger size of the central bank’s portfolio of securities and to a higher yield on that portfolio. Almost all gains occurred from January through June.
Receipts, October–June
(Billions of dollars)
Major Program or CategoryActual,
FY 2013
Preliminary,
FY 2014
Estimated Change
Billions of DollarsPercent
Individual Income Taxes9921,046545.4
Social Insurance Taxes716784699.6
Corporate Income Taxes2062352914.1
Other Receipts1741942011.5
Total2,0872,2591728.2
Memorandum:
Combined Individual Income and Social Insurance Taxes
Withheld taxes1,4661,563976.6
Other, net of refunds2422682510.5
Total1,7081,8301237.2
Sources: Congressional Budget Office; Department of the Treasury.
Note: FY = fiscal year.

Total Outlays: Up by 1 Percent in the First Nine Months of Fiscal Year 2014

Outlays for the first nine months of fiscal year 2014 were $2,625 billion, by CBO’s estimates—$28 billion (or 1 percent) more than they were in the same period last year.

Outlays increased for several major programs or categories of spending, CBO estimates:

  • Spending for Social Security benefits rose by $28 billion (or 5 percent).
  • Outlays for two low-income health programs—Medicaid and the subsidies for health insurance purchased through the exchanges created under the Affordable Care Act (included in “Other Activities” in the table below)—were $27 billion (or 13 percent) higher in 2014 than they were for the same period in 2013, largely because some of that law’s provisions took effect in January 2014.
  • Outlays for student loans (also included in “Other Activities”) increased by $20 billion because the Department of Education made upward revisions this June, but downward revisions last June, in the estimated net subsidy costs of loans and loan guarantees issued in prior years.
  • Spending increased because payments made by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to the U.S. Treasury were $14 billion less than they were last year. (Such payments are recorded in the budget as offsetting receipts; that is, as reductions in outlays.) Because of a revaluation of certain tax assets that significantly increased the net worth of Fannie Mae, that government-sponsored enterprise made a onetime payment of roughly $50 billion to the Treasury in fiscal year 2013. Freddie Mac made a similar payment for a similar reason early in fiscal year 2014, but that payment was only half the amount that Fannie Mae paid in the previous fiscal year. The difference in those two onetime payments accounts for most of the change in outlays.

Decreases in spending for some other major programs during the first nine months of fiscal year 2014 partially offset the above-noted increases:

  • Total spending for military activities of the Department of Defense fell by $26 billion (or 6 percent).
  • Outlays for unemployment benefits declined by $19 billion (or 34 percent), mostly because fewer people have received those benefits since the Emergency Unemployment Compensation program expired at the end of December 2013.
  • Outlays of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC, included in “Other Activities” in the table below) declined by $15 billion for a pair of reasons: First, insured financial institutions did not pay premiums to FDIC during the first half of fiscal year 2013 because they had prepaid those premiums in fiscal year 2010. (Such payments are recorded in the budget as offsetting receipts.) Second, in June 2013, FDIC refunded excess insurance premiums that had previously been paid by certain institutions; no such refund occurred in 2014.
  • Spending by the Department of Homeland Security (also included in “Other Activities”) fell by $13 billion (or 29 percent), mostly because outlays for flood insurance and disaster relief were smaller than they were in the first nine months of fiscal year 2013.
Outlays, October–June
(Billions of dollars)
Major Program or CategoryActual,
FY 2013
Preliminary,
FY 2014
Estimated
Change
Estimated Change
With Adjustments for
Timing Shiftsa
Billions of DollarsPercent
DoD—Militaryb458432-26-26-5.6
Social Security Benefits59962728284.7
Medicarec367372551.2
Medicaid198218202010.0
Unemployment Insurance5637-19-19-33.9
Other Activities816810-7-3-0.3
Subtotal2,4942,496150.2
Net Interest on the Public Debt194202884.1
Troubled Asset Relief Program-9-555n.m.
Net Outlays for GSEs-82-681414n.m.
Total2,5972,62528321.2
Sources: Congressional Budget Office; Department of the Treasury.
Note: FY = fiscal year; DoD = Department of Defense; n.m. = not meaningful;
GSEs = the government-sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
a. Adjusted amounts exclude the effects of shifting payments that otherwise would have fallen on weekends or holidays and the effects of prepayments of deposit insurance premiums.
b. Excludes a small amount of spending by DoD on civil programs.
c. Medicare outlays are net of offsetting receipts.

Estimated Surplus in June 2014: $70 Billion

By CBO’s estimates, the federal government recorded a surplus of $70 billion in June 2014—$46 billion less than the surplus of June 2013. Because June 1 fell on a weekend in each year, certain payments that ordinarily would have been made in June were instead made in May. Without those shifts in the timing of payments, CBO estimates, the surplus in June 2014 would have been $48 billion smaller than it was in the same month a year ago. However, last June’s surplus was boosted by a large onetime payment from Fannie Mae (discussed above); absent that payment, this June’s surplus would have been slightly larger than that in June 2013.

CBO estimates that receipts in June 2014 totaled $324 billion—$37 billion (or 13 percent) more than those in the same month last year:

  • Individual income and social insurance (payroll) taxes rose by $29 billion (or 14 percent). Amounts withheld from workers’ paychecks rose by $20 billion (or 13 percent). Receipts increased in part because June 2014 had one more business day than June 2013 had. Nonwithheld taxes rose by $9 billion (or 15 percent), primarily because estimated individual income tax receipts in June 2014 were higher than the payments received in June 2013.
  • Corporate income tax receipts increased by $7 billion (or 11 percent), mostly because of higher estimated corporate tax payments, which may reflect larger taxable corporate profits.
  • Receipts from the Federal Reserve rose by $1 billion.
Budget Totals for June
(Billions of dollars)
Actual,
FY 2013
Preliminary,
FY 2014
Estimated
Change
Estimated Change With
Adjustments for Timing Shiftsa
Billions of DollarsPercent
Receipts287324373713
Outlays170253838542
Surplus11770-46-48-58
Sources: Congressional Budget Office; Department of the Treasury.
Note: FY = fiscal year.
a. Adjusted amounts exclude the effects of shifting payments that otherwise would have fallen on weekends or holidays and the effects of prepayments of deposit insurance premiums. Without those timing shifts, the surplus would have been $83 billion in June 2013 and $35 billion in June 2014.

Total spending in June 2014 was $253 billion, CBO estimates—$83 billion more than outlays in the same month of 2013. (Outlays would have been $85 billion greater than they were during June 2013 if not for the effects of timing shifts.) Among the larger changes in outlays in June, compared with outlays in June 2013 (with each adjusted to account for the timing shifts), were the following:

  • Outlays related to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac increased by $56 billion (or 84 percent), largely because of a payment (noted above) in June 2013 that did not occur in June 2014.
  • Outlays for education rose by $20 billion, a difference that stems mostly from a large downward revision (-$15 billion) in the estimated subsidy costs of loans and loan guarantees issued in prior years that was recorded last June and from a smaller, upward revision ($5 billion) recorded this June. Excluding the effects of those revisions, June outlays for student loans would have increased by less than $1 billion.
  • Outlays for Medicaid increased by $5 billion (or 25 percent), mostly because some provisions of the Affordable Care Act—notably those expanding eligibility to a larger group of low-income people—had not yet taken effect in June 2013.
  • Outlays for Medicare (net of offsetting receipts) increased by $3 billion (or 8 percent) as a result of several factors, including an extra business day in June 2014 and lower-than-average spending in June 2013.
  • Spending for Social Security rose by $3 billion (or 4 percent).
  • Outlays for the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation were $8 billion lower in June 2014, largely because in June 2013 FDIC refunded excess insurance premiums that had previously been paid by certain institutions (those refunds are recorded as outlays) and no such transaction took place in June 2014.

Actual Deficit in May 2014: $130 Billion

The Treasury Department reported a deficit of $130 billion for May—$1 billion less than CBO estimated in the Monthly Budget Review for May 2014 on the basis of the Daily Treasury Statements.

Note: The amounts shown in this report include the surplus or deficit in the Social Security trust funds and the net cash flow of the Postal Service, which are off-budget. Numbers may not add up to totals because of rounding.

Source: http://www.cbo.gov/publication/45504


This document was prepared by Barbara Edwards, Amber Marcellino, David Rafferty, and Joshua Shakin.

Previous Post

California School District: Misleading Investors

Next Post

Alternative Measures of Inflation (Part 1): The Median CPI and Other Trimmed-Mean Estimators

Related Posts

Only 2 Exchanges Registered In Hong Kong As Crypto Ban Is Removed
Economics

Only 2 Exchanges Registered In Hong Kong As Crypto Ban Is Removed

by John Wanguba
May 31, 2023
Will Ethereum Outperform Bitcoin?
Economics

Will Ethereum Outperform Bitcoin?

by John Wanguba
May 30, 2023
Is ReFi The Future Of DeFi?
Finance

Is ReFi The Future Of DeFi?

by John Wanguba
May 30, 2023
What Is Regenerative Finance (ReFi)?
Finance

What Is Regenerative Finance (ReFi)?

by John Wanguba
May 30, 2023
How Will The US Debt Ceiling Crisis Affect Bitcoin Price
Economics

How Will The US Debt Ceiling Crisis Affect Bitcoin Price

by John Wanguba
May 29, 2023
Next Post

Alternative Measures of Inflation (Part 1): The Median CPI and Other Trimmed-Mean Estimators

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Browse by Category

  • Business
  • Econ Intersect News
  • Economics
  • Finance
  • Politics
  • Uncategorized

Browse by Tags

adoption altcoins bank banking banks Binance Bitcoin Bitcoin adoption Bitcoin market blockchain BTC business China crypto crypto adoption cryptocurrency crypto exchange crypto market crypto regulation decentralized finance DeFi Elon Musk ETH Ethereum Europe Federal Reserve finance FTX inflation investment market analysis Metaverse NFT nonfungible tokens oil market price analysis recession regulation Russia stock market technology Tesla the UK the US Twitter

Archives

  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • August 2010
  • August 2009

Categories

  • Business
  • Econ Intersect News
  • Economics
  • Finance
  • Politics
  • Uncategorized
Global Economic Intersection

After nearly 11 years of 24/7/365 operation, Global Economic Intersection co-founders Steven Hansen and John Lounsbury are retiring. The new owner, a global media company in London, is in the process of completing the set-up of Global Economic Intersection files in their system and publishing platform. The official website ownership transfer took place on 24 August.

Categories

  • Business
  • Econ Intersect News
  • Economics
  • Finance
  • Politics
  • Uncategorized

Recent Posts

  • Only 2 Exchanges Registered In Hong Kong As Crypto Ban Is Removed
  • Will Ethereum Outperform Bitcoin?
  • Is ReFi The Future Of DeFi?

© Copyright 2021 EconIntersect - Economic news, analysis and opinion.

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Contact Us
  • Bitcoin Robot
    • Bitcoin Profit
    • Bitcoin Code
    • Quantum AI
    • eKrona Cryptocurrency
    • Bitcoin Up
    • Bitcoin Prime
    • Yuan Pay Group
    • Immediate Profit
    • BitIQ
    • Bitcoin Loophole
    • Crypto Boom
    • Bitcoin Era
    • Bitcoin Treasure
    • Bitcoin Lucro
    • Bitcoin System
    • Oil Profit
    • The News Spy
    • British Bitcoin Profit
    • Bitcoin Trader
  • Bitcoin Reddit

© Copyright 2021 EconIntersect - Economic news, analysis and opinion.

en English
ar Arabicbg Bulgarianda Danishnl Dutchen Englishfi Finnishfr Frenchde Germanel Greekit Italianja Japaneselv Latvianno Norwegianpl Polishpt Portuguesero Romanianes Spanishsv Swedish