Economic Stimulus and the Marginal Propensity to Consume
Published on - April 9th, 2009 (by J.D. Roth) This is a guest post from Kevin, who writes about getting and staying out of debt at No-Debt Plan. Previously at GRS, Kevin wrote about the power of attentive spending.
Many Americans will begin receiving a few extra dollars in their paychecks this month. Thanks to the latest round of economic stimulus from the federal government, the monthly take-home pay of most workers will increase by about $50. Economists and politicians hope that this is enough to prompt recipients to spend. They want us to buy our way out of this recession.
The government tried something similar last year. But in 2008, the stimulus payments were issued as lump sums. Last year’s stimulus didn’t have the intended effect; large chunks of the population used the money to build savings or to pay down debt.
This time, however, you won’t be getting a check in the mail; the government has elected to simply reduce withholding taxes on our paychecks. The last round of stimulus checks cost millions of taxpayer dollars in postage and printing costs. (First with a letter telling us the checks were coming — then with the actual check!) At least they haven’t done that again.
That’s an obvious reason we won’t be getting a check. But there’s something much more subtle going on that I want to make you aware of.
The marginal propensity to consume
Marginal propensity to consume (MPC) is a fancy economic measure that shows how much more you’re likely to spend when your income goes up. If the United States’ average MPC is 90%, then for every extra dollar you earn (or are given) as an average American, you are likely to spend 90 cents of it as disposable income. And if you’ve paid any attention to our national savings rate recently, you might come to the conclusion that as a society we’ve been dancing right on the 99% MPC line. (That is, we spend 99% of every extra dollar we bring home.)
Whether or not it’s the intention of the government, they’re utilizing marginal propensity to consume with this tax/stimulus decision. Stretching out your stimulus “check” over nine months increases the likelihood that you will:
- not notice the difference in your check, and
- spend that difference — and in doing so stimulate the economy.
This was the problem with the stimulus checks we received in 2008. We were handed checks for $600 or $1200, no questions asked. But the checks landed in our hands right as we were starting to worry about the economy, our jobs, the housing market, the value of the dollar — and the end of the world!
With a one-time lump-sum payment, many Americans chose to pay down debt or t0 stick the money straight into a savings account. The end result? Very little economic stimulus. And that makes sense. This time, though, our leaders are sneaking that stimulus into each of our paychecks. Piece by piece, it will land in our checking accounts. The hope is that we’ll also spend the money piece by piece, boosting the economy.
Will you spend your stimulus?
The economy is in worse shape than it was twelve months ago, and I wonder if that will make a difference. Last year many people sensed the storm on the horizon, so they saved. This year the thunder is rolling and the rain falling all around. Will these small, incremental payments make a difference?
No matter whether you intentionally plan to spend the government’s money, or if you plan to apply it toward your saving/debt goals, you need to track where it comes from. This is the beauty of budgeting.
If you know your income is supposed to be $2,500 per month after taxes, you should be living off of that amount — or less. You should be tracking that money as it comes in. With an extra $50 per month, why not create a saving category specifically for this money? For example, you might:
- Set up an automatic draft from your checking account to put the money in a savings account.
- Change your direct deposit so that $50 per month goes into an account automatically.
- Automatically add $50 every month to your highest priority debt payment.
Do what works for you. Just don’t let the money come in and out of your pocket without knowing where it goes. It might stimulate the economy if you did spend it, but remember that your personal economy matters most.
J.D.’s footnote: Will you consciously do something to stimulate the economy? Why or why not? The last time I asked, most of you said, “No way! I’m saving!” But have things changed in the past few months? What’s your take?
This article is about Economics, News, Psychology
SEARCH FOR RECENT ARTICLES




@JerichoHill: I never claimed to be an economist
Oh yea, 401ks? Those things that we have to auto-force people to invest in otherwise they wouldn’t use them at all? I can definitely see how MPC would vary across income groups — lower income is much more likely to spend their dollars rather than the rich person who doesn’t need that extra dollar to pay for rent, etc.
Interesting comments all around. GRS readers are a smart bunch — sounds like most of you will be diligently saving it. I need to look into the claim that it will be owed back in April 2010 — I hadn’t heard that.
loading....
Guns and ammo.
loading....
@JerichoHill
If the personal savings rate doesn’t factor in money saved for 401Ks, Roths, etc., then is personal income also calculated after 401k, Roth, etc. contributions?
loading....
I noticed a bump in my pay this month, but just socked away the extra money along with my usual monthly savings. I have no plans to adjust my spending upward because of the bump: I’ve already budgeted my spending for the next several months, including discretionary funds for a couple of trips and a couple of material goods. But I was planning on those things anyway.
As others have said, I’m very uncomfortable with the idea of “spending our way” out of the recession. Aren’t those habits partly what got us in this mess in the first place? I’d much rather that we collectively use the recession as an opportunity to make our culture more frugal and “green.” But even with the recession in progress, I haven’t seen fundamental change in the country’s habits. Even in hard times, the earn-and-spend treadmill is running pretty strong. As the recession ends, it will be business as usual.
loading....
Your complaint about spending millions on printing costs when the stimulus itself was billions of dollars is pathetic.
I don’t remember getting a letter or a mailed check (direct deposit for me, thankyouverymuch), but even if I had, what would it have cost them? $1? Out of $600? That’s not even 0.2%!!!
If you’re going to compare millions to billions, go work for Verizon. I hear they need people to help with their maths.
loading....
I have a preset budget, so any extra money will go to my savings.
I don’t see it as my patriotic duty to spend money; rather I think it’s more patriotic to build personal financial security. If Americans are financially secure as individuals, the nation will be financially secure as a whole.
loading....
There is not to much to think about this. Considering that i don’t live in US this situation does not apply in my case.
loading....
Not sure this affects us unemployed people, but either way most of the money I’ll be spending will be on my vacation European vacation this month, not locally. (And for anyone wondering, no this trip won’t put a large dent in my finances.)
loading....
Mine simply went straight into my debt snowball as all “surplus” goes there anyway.
So there you go, it didn’t change what I’m doing one bit. I’m ideologically very opposed to this measure, but since it’s happening without my approval anyway I might as well deal with reality.
loading....
Taxachusetts is returning. I may have to reduce my regular savings to pay what the state is going to be taking from us.
loading....
Since I haven’t really cut my spending in the past year, I see no reason to artificially increase it now. As a matter of fact, given the current home improvements I’ve put in place and spent money on, I’m thinking I’ve done my share of stimulation for this year and next. I’m taking a portion of the increase and adding it to the college savings. The rest is going into savings for future spending on home projects (I’ve still got a basement to finish).
loading....
We’re adding it to our snowflakes to pay down debt.
If I had no debt I’d be saving the extra money.
Great guest post, Kevin! Congrats and Happy (belated) birthday!
loading....
I did notice an extra $25/wk in my husband’s unemployment check. I have spent some this month on our gardening needs and then allocated the remaining dollars to pay down debt. Next month I will probably use a little for the boys clothing needs.
Basically it is just giving us a little wiggle room in our currently very tight budget.
loading....
Not spending, saving it. Have some debt, but Cash is King!
loading....
@Nick: I don’t recall ever saying I was fine with the trillions of dollars we are spending to bail out banks, etc.
I do recall that last year (before we spent billions of dollars) that there was quite the uproar about the stupidity of printing a letter and mailing it out to let people know checks were coming, when the media had covered it over and over and over.
Just because we’ve spent billions/trillions on the bailout doesn’t mean we should spend millions on unnecessary printing costs.
loading....
My $$ will go toward increasing my rent to my daughter. They are struggling with a 33% decrease in work hours. My bit will help the family.
loading....
I struggle with this notion of “stimulating the economy”. I want a healthy economy, yes. But I think we need and are heading toward a NEW economy and it’s somewhat inevitable since we’re culturally moving toward (I hope) less consumerism and more like spending in line with personal values and desires (not artificially created by advertising). This new economy includes not just the exchange of money, but also the exchange of time and talents (good old fashioned bartering) that cuts out the corporate middlepersons.
Sooo, what I’m getting at is what is the “new economy” and does THAT need stimulating? In other words, do we spend our money keeping something on life support, or let it die its death and put our energy, time, money, and intelligence into the new baby?
We spent last year’s checks on debt reduction/prevention. This extra bit we will begin receiving in our paychecks will go toward the debt, and then all money currently going toward debt we will split between extra payment on mortgage, home repairs that will save us energy/money (our windows SUCK), and into savings/retirement. So it will get absorbed all right, but into our pockets, in anticipation of using it consciously.
loading....
Odd coincidence- since the stock price of my employer has tanked (down 75% from ’07 peak at one point) but has good long term potential, I signed up for the stock reinvestment plan for an amount that will pretty much equal my equal my stimulus increase.
My change in take home pay? A wash.
Not what the folks in charge intended, and not what I planned, but I have no doubt I can afford it now.
Peter
loading....
I’m wondering if this will actually hurt people in the long run since they will owe this money back, unlike last year’s stimulus.
Up until a couple days ago, I was unaware that this was a withholding adjustment and not the same “free money” we received last year dispersed differently.
I already planned on adjusting my automatic savings to match the increase.
While I support the current administration and applaud their attempt to stimulate the ecomony, I think it is a short term solution. (Not to criticize…I couldn’t come up with anything better!)
Can our nation evolve over time to make saving a priority and spend only what we can afford?
Are there “negative” side effects to this type of society?
loading....
I won’t be shopping to stimulate the economy, although I am more aware than ever about supporting local businesses with my day-to-day purchases. However, I *have* upped my monthly giving to charity. I’m putting money in the economy that way, hopefully helping to save some jobs, reducing my taxable income, and feeling good without adding more *STUFF* to my home.
loading....
I was with Egaas, in fact I (coincidentally) timed it perfectly that the same paycheck that my witholding decreased was the same one where my 401(k) contribution increased. Net tangible result: $2/week more to savings.
loading....
Can someone provide me a link showing that this stimulus will need to be paid back?
loading....
I am surprised at all the people who are angry about the government ‘seizing’ or ‘stealing’ their money.
Sure, you can look at some things the government does and say “I didn’t want to spend my tax dollars on that!” but in fact, your tax dollars are being spent to try to help you personally out in a number of ways, and you also get to vote and have a say in who makes those decisions etc. It’s a democracy, not a totalitarian regime. And I’m just thankful that we have a government and taxes so I can have my highways, and schools, and social supports. I don’t consider my taxes to be stolen or seized from me. I am politically active and I willingly pay my taxes to keep this country in working order because I like living here. I could always go live out in the wilderness somewhere and not pay taxes and get to hoard all my money to myself and only spend it on things that benefit me personally in my little cabin in the woods, but I suspect it would be much less satisfying.
loading....
I did my part to stimulate the economy last summer. When I got my stimulus check, I went to the bank and exchanged it for $600 in cash. Then I used that money to buy things from local stores. A new bike accounted for most of the money, but I also got some sweet chaco sandals and a couple other things I had been wanting.
loading....
This money will go towards everyday living: food, gas, utilities, daughters’ college, mortgage. My husband’s job was reduced to 4 days per week last month. Mine took a 10% salary cut in November, and starting in March, a week furlough out of every month – works out to about 30% cut for me. I had to reduce my 401K to help make ends meet and it’s killing me because this is the best time to invest. I’m looking for a second job, but we’ve got over 10% unemployment in this state – part time work is hard to come by.
loading....
My husband and I try to do a bit of both — spending more locally, as well as socking some more away in savings. We already save almost $1k a month, some towards “general savings”, some toward retirement, kids’ college fund, etc. But we also put a fair bit into our “dates & meals” fund, and things like that, with which we try to consciously spend on worthwhile, locally produced food and products. As soon as I realized that our pay amount had changed, we had a little budget meeting, and decided not to make any changes to the budget. It just makes for a bigger unallocated amount at the bottom of the budget spreadsheet, so that if we have some unexpected expenditures, we have a little more each month to cover it, and if nothing comes up, it gets moved over to savings.
loading....
Can someone provide me a link showing that this stimulus will need to be paid back?
No link needed. This isn’t a stimulus where they’re giving you money. This is simply reducing the prepayment on the taxes you owe. The amount owed in the end is the same, you’ve just paid less up front to cover it.
If you’re not already overwithholding, then you will end up owing at the end. I think they are assuming most people overwithhold and this is basically doling out next year’s refunds early.
loading....
“No link needed.”
Harley, I’d still like to see a link. When I look at the Recovery page, the payroll adjustment is listed as ‘Tax relief’ and ‘tax credit’. Nothing in it leads me to believe that this is different than last year’s stimulus check. Where did you get your information? I’d like to adjust my withholding if necessary. Thx!
Edit: Here’s a link arguing the exact opposite
http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/106889/7-Misconceptions-About-the-Stimulus
Misconception #2: The adjustment to withholding will have to be paid back when you file your tax return next year.
Wrong — the stimulus is actually a tax credit of 6.2% of taxable wages in 2009 and 2010, to a maximum each year of $400 for single taxpayers and $800 for married couples filing jointly. The credit is refundable, which means that you can still receive the full credit even if it is worth more than your total tax liability.
Paychecks are being adjusted now to get more money into the economy faster. You’ll claim the credit when you file your return next year, so your tax bill should adjust in line with the stimulus money (and you might get some extra money at tax time if your withholding wasn’t adjusted enough to account for the extra credit during the year, which may happen for some married people in single-earner households).
loading....
I have decided that my personal economy is most important at this time. I am spending less and I am being more conscious of what I do spend. I try to support local business whenever possible, and avoid mass retailers. I utilize Freecycle as much as I can. Besides, if understand this whole stimulus thing correctly, they are not really giving the money to us, it’s more like a “loan” that is repaid with next year’s taxes??? So we have a little more money this year, but less next year? I am not sure how this helps. Maybe I am not clear on this.
loading....
I no longer receive a paycheck (quit my job in January and I’m living off of savings and working on getting self-employment going), but if I received such a stimulus increase, it would definitely go to savings.
The reason is because I pay myself last, which is an excellent strategy for maximizing your savings, as I wrote about on my blog recently. It works like this: I get my paycheck, I take out a fixed amount for rent, bills, debt payments, and general recurring expenses which are either fixed or fluctuate only slightly. Then I take out a fixed amount for day-to-day living expenses and entertainment and the “unpredictable” expenses. Everything that’s left over — including extra money from the stimulus, or a recent raise, or overtime, or whatever — goes into savings. All my money is earmarked by the end of payday, and savings is earmarked LAST for greatest value.
Paying myself last ensures that I’m saving as much as I can afford to without damaging my lifestyle (rather than picking an arbitrary amount and saving it even if I can afford more on a given paycheck), and it’s why, were I still working, my stimulus increase would go completely toward savings.
loading....
I think there is a myth that saving money does not stimulate the economy.
If you save that extra money in a credit union they can loan out that money to someone else to spend. Savings is just a way of you transferring your spending ability to someone else.
Where do you think a bank or credit union gets the money to make loans? From deposits!
As long as you don’t stuff your mattress with cash, that money should still circulate and stimulate the economy.
Of course this is also assuming that the credit union is doing its job and is still making loans!
-Rick Francis
loading....
@ RJ
The personal savings rate is basically your year-end cashflow. If you make 10,000, and have 1,000 in the bank at the end of the month, your PSR is 10%. (to put it simply). The PSR is often a highly misused statistic, because it only measures the percent of what you don’t consume. Buying bonds, stocks, a 401k, a house, is all considered consumption by this statistic. It’s a BAD statistic to use!
To all:
As far as saving money and stimulating the economy, there is a trade-off. Think of the all the savings rates that are possible (0-100%, for rationality’s sake). For some segment of those rates, as the savings rate increases, the economy grows and grows at an increasing rate. At some point, there is a plateau, and then further saving decreases economic growth at an increasing rate. Like most things, moderation is key.
And again, the PSR is a terrible statistic to use. I wish BLS didn’t report it, because the name implies something that it isn’t.
loading....
@Lakita
“Can our nation evolve over time to make saving a priority and spend only what we can afford?
Are there “negative” side effects to this type of society?”
Yes, there are negative side effects to a society where everyone saves “too much.” It is the paradox of thrift–it’s good for an individual if he or she saves, for all of the reasons that people save money. However, if the entire economy saves at a high rate, then investment by firms will fall (i.e. they won’t build up inventory because you won’t buy it). We’ll have lower consumption, lower investment, and hence lower GDP. See Japan’s lost decade–excessive savings is by no means the only reason for it, but is a major cause. It is an interesting exercise to think what would happen if Americans had Japanese (I think 20% or so) savings rates–who would we lend (in the form of savings accounts/stocks/bond) to? They were only able to sustain their high rates because we were borrowing. If we lend, who borrows, and at what rate?
Additionally, one could argue that to keep city/state government spending (the bulk of, say, school budgets), property and sales taxes would have to increase.
loading....
$50 a month is an insulting joke. No one will notice the difference. Why can’t the tax payers get a real bailout like big business? I don’t know the exact numbers, but I recall reading that with all the bailout money spent so far, every US citizen could have received $75,000, or every US family around $300,000. Now, tell me a check of that size wouldn’t get spending back into the economy like a wildfire. (Of course, then we’d have an inflation problem, and I mean a more immediate inflation problem than the inevitable one we’re facing anyway.)
Is this the change everyone voted for?
loading....
Sarah: Great info! — this will not be paid back.
I didn’t think this was the case, but thanks for finding the details.
loading....
Sarah,
Please check the IRS.gov tax withholding calculator. The link is: http://www.irs.gov/individuals/article/0,,id=96196,00.html
When I ran this through, the exact amount that I will owe in taxes next year works out to be $30 per paycheck, or, the exact amount of taxes that is no longer being withheld from my paycheck. This calculator is an extremely valuable tool that I feel too few people know about. It helps you know exactly how much to have held from each paycheck so you don’t over or underpay.
My decision is to keep that ‘stimulus’ money and put it into a savings account so it will be ready for taxes next year but I will get to keep the interest. If I’m wrong and it doesn’t have to go back, then I’ll get a nice chunk of change out of savings and go buy something nice;)
loading....
When I saw that we would be getting about $40 more dollars a month, I did something I have wanted to do for some time. I opened an online stock purchasing account and started buying stock–dollar cost averaging style. It is huge thrill to see my decisions pay off with a sum of money so tiny I probably won’t shed too many tears over. If I have to give it back in next year’s taxes, it will have probably made me more money than a standard savings account. At least I hope it will…
loading....
Sulana,
Thanks for the link, but that’s not exactly what I was looking for.
Anybody else?
loading....
I’m stimulating my employer’s economy by having $480 a month docked from my paycheck in biweekly furloughs. I suppose in the sense that the $50 (or whatever the amount really is–I sure haven’t seen a fifty-dollar increase!) will help buy groceries, sure, it’ll get spent.
The furloughs are conveniently cutting the amount that goes into my 403(b), too, so if we believe that saving is unpatriotic and not saving stimulates the economy, my coworkers and I must be stimulating as the dickens.
loading....
Sarah & Everybody Else:
The extra money in your paychecks (decreased tax withholding) should equal the new “Making Work Pay” tax credit.
Therefore, just multiply the addition to your paychecks by the number of paychecks you will receive in that new amount during the year. Then, compare that to your expected tax credit.
If you’re paid weekly and have received 15 checks this year, you’d have 37 paychecks remaining through year end. If your very last check had the new withholding, that would mean that by year end, 38 checks will have reflected the new withholding rates.
For example, if your check went up $9, then $9 x 38 = $342. This would be less than the new $400 credit, and would cause you to receive a greater refund next year.
From IRS.gov:
“In 2009 and 2010, the Making Work Pay provision of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act will provide a refundable tax credit of up to $400 for working individuals and up to $800 for married taxpayers filing joint returns.”
“This tax credit will be calculated at a rate of 6.2 percent of earned income and will phase out for taxpayers with modified adjusted gross income in excess of $75,000, or $150,000 for married couples filing jointly.”
So, just compare your new credit to your bump in pay. You’ll feel better – they’re not getting the money back.
loading....
@Grant: That $75k or $300k value that was tossed around was completely wrong. It originated in an e-mail and no one bothered to do the math behind everything.
When you divide 2 trillion by 300 million you get roughly $6,666 per person in America. If you assume 100 million are children/don’t pay taxes it comes out to $10,000.
Still a large chunk of money, but no where near the $75k number that has been thrown around.
loading....
@No Debt Plan: You’re right. I didn’t do the math. I apologize.
However, if you read the white paper here[1] by Dr. Martin Weiss, he comes up with 13 trillion in commitments, which gives:
13 trillion / 300 million = 43 333.3333
And there’s no end in sight…
[1] http://www.moneyandmarkets.com/dangerous-unintended-consequences-32776
loading....
I noticed the extra 20 dollars per paycheck and began transferring an additional 20 dollars to savings each payday. I didn’t need it before, I don’t need it now. I am doing plenty to stimulate the economy with my regular paycheck as I never altered my spending patterns with the recession.
Of course, if my pay is reduced or I’m laid off I’ll definitely alter my spending patterns to only the minimum needed.
loading....
I just now spent my stimulus check from last year — I bought myself a new mountain bike (fitness plus fun!). In talking with the salesman, he said they have a pretty recession-proof business, as most people coming in to do bikes are using it to either reduce gas costs or get in better shape for cheaper than a gym membership.
loading....
I know I’m so far behind that my comment will likely not be read by those in the argument, but the government does earn the money through giving us all roads, bridges, schools, libraries, police, firefighters, armies, and more. What is better: to pay taxes and get many services provided for free, or to pay a fee every time you want to step on the sidewalk? Would we want to watch our house burn down because the firefighters couldn’t accept our credit card?
loading....
@Leah:
The services you cite are primarily funded by state and local taxes — not federal tax money. When you state these categories so plainly, they are valid enough, as these are some of the things our government should be responsible for because pooling resources is best for us as a whole (think if we each had to build our own part of the road, etc.). However, there are MANY projects funded through taxes that are a COMPLETE waste, not to mention all the inefficiencies of having the government in control of others.
loading....
Is it just me, or is this really not “free money” as some seem to think? If less taxes will be taken out, won’t we get a smaller refund next time around?
loading....
still no job –> no stimulus to spend or save
loading....
Re: Lynn
As far as I know, that’s exactly the case. People will either get a smaller refund or owe more. If this sort of thing isn’t illegal already, it should be made so. I’m diverting my excess into higher payments on my credit card, trying to get it to zero again. I got it down last year, then expen$ive things happened to the car. I’m trying to get back into reading GRS, I also owe J.D. two or three articles that I’ve never finished.
loading....