 | Author's Name: Kalvinder Shields Date: Thu 16 Feb 2023 |
Kalvinder Shields
Kalvinder is a Professor of Economics in the Department of Economics, University of Melbourne. Since the completion of her PhD, Kalvinder's research has focused on the time-series econometric modelling of (1) real time data, data revisions, expectations data and their use in nowcasting and forecasting macroeconomic events, (2) structural macroeconomic modelling concentrating in particular on the formation of expectations, the use of survey data on expectations and the modelling of uncertainty and (3) nation-wide, region-wide and industry-wide disaggregated data and the implications for economic policy.
Kalvinder coordinated the construction of the Australian Real-Time Macroeconomic and Fiscal Database (resulting from two ARC Discovery Project grants) and has been awarded five ARC Discovery Project grants including one currently on "Nowcasting and Interpreting the Australian Economy" (2023 - 2025).
She has been a member of the Macroeconomic Economic Advisory Panel of the Treasury since 2019 and is the current Assistant Dean of Graduate Research at the Faculty of Business and Economics, University of Melbourne.
Subject area expertise:
Macroeconomic modelling, modelling real time data, survey based expectations data, macroeconomic uncertainty,
Website:
Responses (3)
Transition to net zero - ape the US Inflation Reduction Act?
Poll 62
Panellists were asked "Which of the options set out below best describes the kind of approach the Australian government should take to the US Inflation Reduction Act? (Pick 1)"
To support homegrown emerging green | The payoff to clean-energy innovation has increased
Provide more grants to innovative firms across the entire economy
Budget 2023
Poll 59
Our panellists were asked the following 2023 budget question: "On May 9, the government delivered a budget designed, in the Treasurer's words, to strike a balance between relief, repair and restraint'. What grade would you give the budget, given that objective: A, B, C, D, E or F?"
Wes Mountain/The Conversation, CC BY-ND - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/
Overall rating: B - Keeping inflationary pressures in check: B
B
INFLATION COMMENTS: Clearly, any injection into the economy has the potential for inflationary pressures. However, in this case, in my opinion, it is not clear that the budget measures proposed will definitively be inflationary for the following reasons: (i) the government has been smart in the mechanics of particularly the introduction of the energy subsidies ? meaning a short-term reduction in the consumer price index (ii) this short term reduction has the potential to influence and decrease inflation expectations ? since actual inflation is important in influencing expectations of inflation (iii) the government spending injections are targeted to the most vulnerable in our society ? which means that any extra spending is unlikely to be discretionary but rather cover essential needs.
How economists would raise $20 billion per year
Poll 58
When panellests were asked to find an extra A$20 billion per year to fund government priorities like building nuclear submarines and responding to climate change, Australia’s top economists overwhelmingly back land tax, increased resource taxes, an attack on negative gearing and extending the scope of the goods and services tax.
Photo credit by Joshua Hoehne on Unsplash
Efficiency picks: Introduce or increase land taxes (possibly with cut in stamp duty) Tax windfall profits Increase the GST Equity picks: Wind back superannuation tax concessions Introduce inheritance taxes Wind back deductions for negatively geared properties
Efficiency comments: A reduction/elimination of stamp duty would need to be introduced for an efficient broad based land tax. An increase the GST seems a sensible way forward without major inefficiencies. Equity picks: In terms of reducing socioeconomic inequalities, the above seems sensible given that they mostly affect higher income/wealthy individuals/families ? and therefore increasing their tax burden relative to those of lower income/wealth.