Cost estimates of bills are intended to estimate costs that are expected to accrue upon passage and enforcement of a bill that requires a net additional expenditure or a net reduction of revenues, thereby helping lawmakers consider its fiscal impact. Cost estimation is a means of examining the cost implications of a bill prior to its passage and enforcement, but it does not tell actual budget spending. Thus, the National Assembly Budget Office analyzes and publishes reports annually on the budget impact of legislation passed by the National Assembly.
This report reviews the 252 bills requiring expenditures passed in 2013 by the National Assembly, categorizing them by sponsors, government departments, and enactments or amendments, and analyzes how they were incorporated in the budget and the fiscal plan from 2013 to 2017. Only ninety-five bills out of the 252 bills were reflected in the budget and fiscal plan from 2013 to 2017, representing expenditure requirements of KRW 3.5 trillion over that period. A cost estimate report or abbreviated report were attached to 108 bills out of the 252 bills, or 42.9%, and no cost details were attached to 144 bills. Twenty-five bills of the 252 bills requiring expenditures were not reflected in the budget and fiscal plan from 2013 to 2017 even though they had been enacted and enforced. These bills contain a total of 35 clauses requiring budget to enforce.
Unlike previous reports, this report examines how a bill is reflected not only in the budgeting for the year following its passage but also in the budget and fiscal plan for the five years following its passage, including the year of its passage. The rationale for this is that it takes time before policies set forth by law become mature and it is only then that the budget outlays required to execute the policies are precisely ascertained.
Like the findings of previous analyses, cost estimates are attached to a mere 42.9% of bills requiring expenditures. Given the fact that cost estimates of bills have been introduced to help maintain fiscal soundness and ensure the sustainability of public finance, efforts need to be made to attach cost estimates to bills in oder to enable full review of their fiscal impact when they are proposed and voted on.
This report reviews the 252 bills requiring expenditures passed in 2013 by the National Assembly, categorizing them by sponsors, government departments, and enactments or amendments, and analyzes how they were incorporated in the budget and the fiscal plan from 2013 to 2017. Only ninety-five bills out of the 252 bills were reflected in the budget and fiscal plan from 2013 to 2017, representing expenditure requirements of KRW 3.5 trillion over that period. A cost estimate report or abbreviated report were attached to 108 bills out of the 252 bills, or 42.9%, and no cost details were attached to 144 bills. Twenty-five bills of the 252 bills requiring expenditures were not reflected in the budget and fiscal plan from 2013 to 2017 even though they had been enacted and enforced. These bills contain a total of 35 clauses requiring budget to enforce.
Unlike previous reports, this report examines how a bill is reflected not only in the budgeting for the year following its passage but also in the budget and fiscal plan for the five years following its passage, including the year of its passage. The rationale for this is that it takes time before policies set forth by law become mature and it is only then that the budget outlays required to execute the policies are precisely ascertained.
Like the findings of previous analyses, cost estimates are attached to a mere 42.9% of bills requiring expenditures. Given the fact that cost estimates of bills have been introduced to help maintain fiscal soundness and ensure the sustainability of public finance, efforts need to be made to attach cost estimates to bills in oder to enable full review of their fiscal impact when they are proposed and voted on.