Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Investment Multiplier
Investment Multiplier
ASSIGNMENT
Submitted By Submitted To
Ayush Thakur Dr Hari Chand Thakur
1020202137 Economics Professor
Acknowledgements
I wish to take this opportunity to offer my sincere gratitude to
my academic supervisor, Dr Hari Chand Thakur, Professor
(Economics), Himachal Pradesh National Law University,
Shimla. Without his kind direction and proper guidance, this
study would have never come to fruition.
I am also greatly indebted to Himachal Pradesh National Law
University’s e-library resources for providing me with the
necessary online subscriptions in order to conduct this
research which helped me in making this assignment,
especially in these trying times when the physical resources of
the library are inaccessible.
Last but not the least; I would want to thank everyone who
guided me throughout the process of making this study a
successful venture.
INDEX
1) Concept of Investment Multiplier
7) Case Study
2
M. Agarwal, Multiplier Keynesian: Its Working, Operation, Importance and Criticism, Investopedia,
https://www.economicsdiscussion.net/keynesian-economics/multiplier-keynesian/multiplier-keynesian-its-
working-operation-importance-and-criticism/7806 .
(i) The table above shows that as a result of initial increase in
investment by Rs 100 crore, there is increase in income by Rs 100
crore in round-1. Our assumption is that MPC is 0.5. Hence, because
of the increase in income by Rs 100 crore, consumption will increase
by Rs 50 crore and remaining Rs 50 crore will be saved.
3
Supra 1, from 228 – 229.
Leakages or Limitations of the Investment
Multiplier
3. Imports:
In our previous analysis of how the multiplier process works, we took
the example of a closed economy, that is, an economy with no foreign
trade; When the economy is open, as is so often the case, part of the
increase in income is also spent on importing consumer goods. The
importation of consumer goods will generate income in other
countries and will not help to increase income and production in the
national economy.
Therefore, imports constitute another important leakage in the
multiplier process.
Suppose marginal propensity to save of an open economy is 1/4, i.e.,
marginal propensity to consume is 3/4.
Further, that marginal propensity to import is 1/4, the size of the
multiplier without imports will be equal 4 to equal to 4 but the size of
the multiplier with the marginal propensity to import equal to 1/4 and
the marginal propensity to consume equal to 3/4 will be smaller.
Multiplier in an Open Economy = 1/ 1 - (MPC-MPI) = 1/1 - MPC +
MPI where MFC stands for marginal propensity to consume and MP1
for marginal propensity to import.
In our example quoted above, where marginal propensity to consume
is equal to 3/4 and marginal 3/4 propensity to import is equal to 1/4,
the multiplier is: K = 1/1- (3/4 – 1/4) = 1/1/2 =2
We, therefore, see that the size of multiplier instead of being equal to
4, as it would have been in the case of a closed economy, is equal to 2
in the open economy with — as the marginal propensity to import.
4. Taxes:
Taxes are another important factor in the multiplier process. As a
result of the increase in investment, some of them are also used to pay
taxes, so the money used to pay taxes does not appear in successive
rounds of consumer spending in the multiplier process and the
multiplier is reduced to that extent. However, when the government
spends the money raised through taxes, the tax loss is offset by
increased public spending. However, it is not required that all of the
money raised through taxes be spent by the government, as is the case
with a budget surplus. Undoubtedly, increasing government spending
by a taxable amount would not have an adverse effect on the tax
increase. Income and investment and that way there would be no
leakage in the multiplier process.
5. Price increase:
Price inflation is another important leak in the real multiplier process;
the multiplier only works in real terms if, as a result of an increase in
money income and overall demand, the production of goods also
increases. If the production of consumer goods cannot easily be
increased, then part of the increase in monetary income and aggregate
demand increases the prices of the goods, not their production, so that
the multiplier is reduced by the amount of price inflation. As in India,
the additional income and demand is mainly spent on food crops, the
production of which cannot be easily increased.
Hence, increases in demand raise the prices of goods more than
increases in their production. In India, there is hardly any
overcapacity in many consumer goods industries, particularly
agriculture and other wage industries. As a result of an increase in
investments, it generally makes these goods more expensive than their
production and thus weakens the real functioning of the multiplier.
This is why it has often been claimed in the past that the Keynesian
multiplier theory is of little relevance for the conditions in developing
countries like India.
However, we will argue later that this old view of how the Keynes
multiplier works is not entirely true. The various previous leaks
reduce the multiplier effect of the investment made. If these leaks are
plugged, the impact of the change in investment on income and
employment would be greater.4
Case Study
Estimable Fiscal Multipliers for India
Analysis
It is important to note that revenue expenditure multipliers for the
central and state governments are less than unity. If revenue
expenditure is increased by one rupee, government final consumption
expenditure also increases by one rupee, which increases the output
by the same amount, provided capital expenditure remains
unchanged. This also induces a positive impact on consumption
demand.
Empirical estimates, however, suggest that there exists a negative
relationship between revenue and capital expenditure, given the
budget constraint. Consequently, an increase in revenue expenditure
by the central and state governments reduces capital expenditure
which, in turn, impacts private investment negatively, offsetting the
positive effects emanating from the consumption channel and
eventually increasing output only by 45 paise and 82 paise,
respectively.
In contrast, the capital expenditure multiplier is well above unity for
both the central and state governments: 3.25 for the central
government and 2.0 for state governments. This indicates that an
increase in capital expenditure by the central and state governments
by one rupee each crowds in private investment, induces a more than
proportionate increase in investment in the economy, and leads to an
increase in output by 3.25 rupees and 2.0 rupees, respectively.5
References
1) T.R. Jain and Dr. V.K. Ohri, Introductory Macroeconomics 225-227 (Edition: 2020-21).
2) M. Agarwal, Multiplier Keynesian: Its Working, Operation, Importance and Criticism, Investopedia,
https://www.economicsdiscussion.net/keynesian-economics/multiplier-keynesian/multiplier-
keynesian-its-working-operation-importance-and-criticism/7806 .
3)
5
RBI, Government of India, Monetary Policy Report – April 2019, available at
https://m.rbi.org.in/Scripts/PublicationsView.aspx?id=18941#3CPB31, last seen on 31/5/2021.
Plagiarism Report