Budget Issues: Fiscal Year 1993 Budget Estimates and Actual Results
(Letter Report, 02/04/94, GAO/AIMD-94-68).
This report compares the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB)
original and revised estimates of the deficit, outlays, receipts, and
economic conditions with the actual fiscal year 1993 results. GAO (1)
identifies reasons for the major difference between OMB's original
estimates and actual results; (2) assesses whether patterns of
estimating problems are discernable; and (3) includes, for comparison
purposes, the recent estimates reported by the Congressional Budget
Office (CBO). Excluding deposit insurance, OMB's estimate of the budget
deficit for fiscal year 1993 tracked closely to the final adjusted
deficit. The budget estimation process is, however, unlikely to become
any easier given upcoming tax changes and the proposals for health care
and welfare reform. Although the fiscal year 1993 budget deficit was the
lowest in three years, it still added more than $250 billion to the
nation's debt; in fiscal year 1993, interest payments on this borrowing
totaled another $293 billion. CBO projects that the deficit will shrink
to $166 million in fiscal year 1996 but will turn upward at the end of
the decade unless additional action is taken. In GAO's view, now is the
time--while the economy is growing and the deficit is not--to adopt
policies to put the deficit on a downward path.
--------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------
REPORTNUM: AIMD-94-68
TITLE: Budget Issues: Fiscal Year 1993 Budget Estimates and Actual
Results
DATE: 02/04/94
SUBJECT: Budget deficit
Deficit reduction
Budget outlays
Trust funds
Budget receipts
Budget administration
Fiscal policies
Macroeconomic analysis
Future budget projections
Balanced budgets
IDENTIFIER: Medicaid Program
Medicare Program
OMB Budget Preparation System
Bank Insurance Fund
FSLIC Resolution Fund
Savings Association Insurance Fund
Defense Business Operations Fund
Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund
Supplemental Security Income Program
BIF
SAIF
**************************************************************************
* This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a GAO *
* report. Delineations within the text indicating chapter titles, *
* headings, and bullets are preserved. Major divisions and subdivisions *
* of the text, such as Chapters, Sections, and Appendixes, are *
* identified by double and single lines. The numbers on the right end *
* of these lines indicate the position of each of the subsections in the *
* document outline. These numbers do NOT correspond with the page *
* numbers of the printed product. *
* *
* No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although figure *
* captions are reproduced. Tables are included, but may not resemble *
* those in the printed version. *
* *
* A printed copy of this report may be obtained from the GAO Document *
* Distribution Facility by calling (202) 512-6000, by faxing your *
* request to (301) 258-4066, or by writing to P.O. Box 6015, *
* Gaithersburg, MD 20884-6015. We are unable to accept electronic orders *
* for printed documents at this time. *
**************************************************************************
Cover
================================================================ COVER
Report to the Chairman
House Committee on the Budget
February 1994
BUDGET ISSUES - FISCAL YEAR 1993
BUDGET ESTIMATES AND ACTUAL
RESULTS
GAO/AIMD-94-68
Budget Estimates
Abbreviations
=============================================================== ABBREV
BIF - Bank Insurance Fund
BPS - Budget Preparation System
CBO - Congressional Budget Office
DBOF - Defense Business Operations Fund
DOD - Department of Defense
DI - Disability Insurance
EPA - Environmental Protection Agency
FDIC - Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
FRF - Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation Resolution
Fund
GSA - General Services Administration
HCFA - Health Care Financing Administration
HHS - Department of Health and Human Services
HUD - Department of Housing and Urban Development
HI - Hospital Insurance
MVPS - Medicare Volume Performance Standard
MTS - Monthly Treasury Statement of Receipts and Outlays of the
United States Government
NASA - National Aeronautics and Space Administration
OMB - Office of Management and Budget
OPM - Office of Personnel Management
OASI - Old Age and Survivors' Insurance
RDT&E - research, development, test, and evaluation
RRB - Railroad Retirement Board
RTC - Resolution Trust Corporation
S&E - salaries and expenses
SAIF - Savings Association Insurance Fund
SNFs - skilled nursing facilities
Letter
=============================================================== LETTER
B-256129
February 4, 1994
The Honorable Martin Olav Sabo
Chairman, Committee on the Budget
House of Representatives
Dear Mr. Chairman:
This report responds to your request that we compare the Office of
Management and Budget's (OMB) original and revised estimates of the
deficit, outlays, receipts, and economic conditions with the actual
fiscal year 1993 results. Specifically, you asked that we (1)
identify reasons for major differences between OMB's original
estimates and actual results, (2) assess whether patterns of
estimating problems are discernable, and (3) include, for comparison
purposes, the receipt estimates reported by the Congressional Budget
Office (CBO).
We share your conviction that an increased understanding of the
factors that affect estimates of outlays and receipts is important to
both sound financial management and to the credibility of efforts to
reduce the federal deficit. To that end, this report, the third in a
series of annual reports,\1 highlights factors that have led to large
differences between budget estimates and actual results. This is
also the second year in which we examine account-level budget
estimates. This analysis, which we plan to continue in future years,
highlights components of the budget that are persistently difficult
to estimate and that would be priority targets for financial
management reform.
--------------------
\1 Budget Issues: A Comparison of Fiscal Year 1992 Budget Estimates
and Actual Results (GAO/AFMD-93-51, February 12, 1993) and Budget
Issues: 1991 Budget Estimates: What Went Wrong (GAO/OCG-92-1,
January 15, 1992).
RESULTS IN BRIEF
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :1
The $254.9 billion federal budget deficit for fiscal year 1993 was
the government's lowest since fiscal year 1990 and represented 4
percent of gross domestic product. This result contrasts sharply
with OMB's original (February 1992) fiscal year 1993 estimate of
$349.9 billion. The $95 billion improvement over OMB's estimate of
20 months earlier was primarily a function of lower-than-anticipated
outlays for deposit insurance programs. Overall, outlays were $107.2
billion lower and receipts $12.2 billion lower than the original
estimates.
The original outlay estimate for deposit insurance was $75.7 billion.
However, the deposit insurance programs resulted in $28 billion in
net receipts (negative outlays). This meant that actual outlays were
$103.7 billion lower than OMB's original estimate. This sharp
difference reflects (1) the improved health of the banking and thrift
industries as a result of higher earnings due to low interest rates
and improved economic conditions and (2) the delay in providing
appropriations for the Resolution Trust Corporation to close or merge
institutions.
Excluding deposit insurance from OMB's original estimate and the
actual deficit, the adjusted estimate would have been $274.2 billion,
which was only 3.2 percent below the comparably adjusted deficit of
$282.9 billion. Although the original deficit estimate without
deposit insurance outlays was close to the adjusted final result,
offsetting differences between original estimates and actual results
occurred in several components of the budget. On the outlay side,
Medicaid outlays were lower than originally estimated, but the
difference was partially offset by higher-than- anticipated outlays
for Medicare. On the revenue side, lower-than-
estimated receipts from individual and social insurance taxes and
contributions were partially offset by higher-than-estimated
corporate income tax receipts.
Actual economic conditions that differed from OMB's original
assumptions also contributed to offsetting differences between budget
estimates and actual results. Higher-than-expected unemployment and
slightly slower-than-anticipated economic growth increased outlays
for unemployment benefits, while the steep decline in interest rates
reduced net interest outlays. Lower-than-expected inflation also
reduced actual receipts.
In examining patterns of estimation variations at the account level
for fiscal years 1992 and 1993, estimation difficulties were
discernable primarily for mandatory programs. During this period,
outlays for mandatory programs experienced the largest changes
between the revised estimates made midway through each fiscal year
and actual results. The average change for mandatory spending
accounts, measured as a percent of the revised outlay estimate, was
more than twice as large as the average change for discretionary
spending accounts.
BACKGROUND
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :2
On October 28, 1993, the Department of the Treasury released the
Final Monthly Treasury Statement of Receipts and Outlays of the
United States Government (MTS) for fiscal year 1993, which reported a
$254.9 billion deficit for the year. The President's budget request
for fiscal year 1993,\2 transmitted to the Congress in January and
February 1992, presented detailed estimates of receipts and outlays
and a total deficit estimate of $349.9 billion. As part of the
President's fiscal year 1994 budget request submitted to the Congress
in April 1993, OMB revised its fiscal year 1993 estimates to show a
$322 billion deficit.\3 Throughout this report, we will refer to the
fiscal year 1993 estimates in the January/February 1992 and April
1993 budget requests as OMB's original and revised estimates,
respectively.
--------------------
\2 Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 1993, January
1992 and Supplement, February 1992, Executive Office of the
President, Office of Management and Budget.
\3 Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 1994, April
1993, Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and
Budget.
SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :3
To identify large differences between original fiscal year 1993
estimates and actual results, we compared OMB's estimates to actual
results both in the aggregate and on an account-level basis.
For analysis on an aggregate basis, we used OMB's original and
revised estimates of total outlays, receipts, and the resulting
deficits as reported in the President's budget requests for fiscal
years 1993 and 1994. We compared these estimates with the fiscal
year 1993 results published in the Department of the Treasury's final
MTS.
For detailed analysis of receipts, we focused on the Department of
the Treasury's estimates for seven "receipt source" categories
contained in the President's budget requests and Treasury's final
MTS. We reviewed more detailed estimates of individual, corporate,
and social insurance receipts obtained from Treasury and the Social
Security Administration. We obtained CBO's original (January 1992)
and revised (January 1993) receipt estimates, which are included in
table 6,\4 from its reports.\5
To analyze OMB's estimates of economic conditions, we compared its
macroeconomic projections for calendar year 1993 to those of CBO and
the Blue Chip consensus of private forecasters.\6 Appendix III
displays these forecasts and the actual data.
For analysis of outlays on an account-level basis, we obtained data
from OMB's Budget Preparation System (BPS)--the automated system used
to collect and process information for the President's budget
request. Using these data, we identified the 182 accounts that
together represented 95 percent of OMB's revised estimate of gross
outlays. For each account, we compared OMB's original and revised
net outlay estimates to the actual outlay data obtained from
Treasury.\7 Appendix I displays the estimates and actual outlays for
the 182 accounts. Throughout this report, in the tables as well as
the narrative, account-level detail may not add to totals because
calculations were performed prior to rounding.
To determine the factors that contributed to variations between
original estimates and actual results, we interviewed OMB budget
examiners and agency officials. We also reviewed the economic
assumptions, policy proposals, and program information contained in
the President's budget requests for fiscal years 1993 and 1994 and
the midsession budget updates released in July 1992 and September
1993.
To assess whether patterns of estimating problems were discernable,
we analyzed differences between the revised estimates and the actual
results for fiscal years 1992 and 1993. We focused our analysis on
this comparison to highlight estimation difficulties and minimize
differences due to (1) unenacted presidential proposals contained in
the original estimates and (2) enacted congressional initiatives not
assumed in the original estimates. Appendix II lists major budget
accounts for which actual outlays differed by more than (1) 10
percent and (2) $250 million from the revised estimates in both
fiscal year 1992 and fiscal year 1993.
We did not attempt to audit the data discussed in this report which
were obtained from the President's budget requests, the final MTS, or
agency officials. We conducted our work from October 1993 to
December 1993.
--------------------
\4 The original request letter refers to the Joint Committee on
Taxation's receipt estimates reported by CBO. However, CBO develops
its own estimates for receipts under the law as it stands at the time
of the estimate. The Joint Committee on Taxation only estimates the
revenue impact of changes or proposed changes in law. Such estimates
are not comparable to the OMB receipt estimates and actual receipt
data included in this report. Thus, we included only the CBO
estimates, which are comparable.
\5 The Economic and Budget Outlook: Fiscal Years 1993-1997, January
1992 and The Economic and Budget Outlook: Fiscal Years 1994-1998,
January 1993, the Congress of the United States, Congressional Budget
Office.
\6 Eggert Economic Enterprises, Inc., publishes monthly the Blue Chip
Economic Indicators, a summary of major private sector estimates.
\7 This methodology is similar to that used in our February 1993
report.
DECLINE IN DEFICIT NOT FORECAST
BY OMB
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :4
The fiscal year 1993 deficit of $254.9 billion reversed a 3-year
trend in the growth of annual deficits. The $35.3 billion drop from
the 1992 deficit level of $290.2 billion was the largest single-year
decline since 1987. Aside from the positive development in deposit
insurance, which was the major factor in the lower deficit, there
were other positive trends. Nondeposit insurance outlays grew at a
slower rate (4.2 percent) than receipts, which were up 5.7 percent
over the fiscal year 1992 level.
Table 1
Fiscal Year 1993 Aggregate Estimates and
Actual Results
(Dollars in billions)
Actual Percent
Original Revised minus of
estimate estimate Actual original original
---------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------
Receipts $1,165.4 $1,145.7 $1,153.2 $-12.2 -1.0
Outlays 1,515.3 1,467.6 1,408.1 -107.2 -7.1
============================================================
Deficit $349.9 $322.0 $254.9 $-95.0 -27.1
------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Detail may not add to totals due to rounding.
Sources: Office of Management and Budget and Department of the
Treasury.
As table 1 shows, the final deficit was $95 billion below OMB's
original $349.9 billion estimate for fiscal year 1993. A $103.7
billion difference between the original estimate and actual outlays
for deposit insurance was by far the largest change affecting the
deficit estimates. Excluding deposit insurance, OMB's original
deficit estimate would have been $274.2 billion which closely tracked
with the adjusted $282.9 billion deficit, as shown in table 2. The
revised deficit estimate in table 2 included the President's proposed
economic stimulus plan which was not approved by the Congress. In
addition, the revised estimate reflected lower social insurance
receipts and higher outlays for unemployment benefits and disaster
relief. These increases to the deficit were offset by changes in
other components after the revised estimate had been made and are
discussed in following sections.
Table 2
Fiscal Year 1993 Aggregate Estimates and
Actual Results, Excluding Deposit
Insurance
(Dollars in billions)
Actual Percent
Original Revised Adjusted minus of
estimate estimate actual original original
---------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------
Receipts $1,165.4 $1,145.7 $1,153.2 $-12.2 -1.0
Outlays 1,439.6 1,464.8 1,436.1 -3.5 -0.2
============================================================
Deficit $274.2 $319.1 $282.9 $8.7 3.2
------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Detail may not add to totals due to rounding.
Sources: Office of Management and Budget, Department of the
Treasury, and Congressional Budget Office.
OUTLAYS WERE LOWER THAN
ORIGINALLY ESTIMATED PRIMARILY
DUE TO DEPOSIT INSURANCE
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :5
As table 3 shows, actual fiscal year 1993 outlays of $1,408.1 billion
were more than $107 billion lower than originally estimated. Nearly
97 percent of the net reduction from the original estimate was due to
the difference between estimated and actual outlays for deposit
insurance activities. Excluding outlays for deposit insurance, total
spending was lower than the original estimate by $3.5 billion or 0.2
percent. However, as shown in appendix I and summarized below, large
but offsetting differences between estimated and actual outlays were
observed in other areas of the budget.
Table 3
Outlay Estimates and Actual Results for
Fiscal Year 1993
(Dollars in billions)
Origina Actua Perce
l Revised l nt
outlay outlay minus of
Budget Enforcement estimat estimat Actual origi origi
Act category e e outlays nal nal
------------------- ------- ------- ------- ----- -----
Discretionary $537.3 $553.7 $544.3 $7.0 1.3
National defense 292.0 292.1 292.5 0.5 0.2
International 20.6 21.9 21.6 1.0 4.7
Domestic 224.7 239.7 230.3 5.6 2.5
Mandatory 804.5 749.7 702.2 - -
102.3 12.7
Social Security 299.7 302.2 302.0 2.3 0.8
Deposit insurance 75.7 2.8 -28.0 - -
103.7 137.0
Medicaid\a 84.5 80.5 75.8 -8.7 -
10.3
Medicare 126.5 129.8 127.8 1.3 1.1
Unemployment 25.5 35.9 35.4 9.9 38.6
compensation
Other 192.6 198.5 189.3 -3.3 -1.7
Net interest 213.7 201.5 198.9 - -6.9
14.8
Undistributed 40.1 - 37.2 - 37.4 2 .7 < b>6.8
offsetting -
receipts\b
============================================================
Total $ 1,515.3 1,467.6 $1,408. $- -7.1
$ 1 107.2
============================================================
Total excluding 1,439.6 1,464.8 $1,436. $- -0.2
deposit $ $ 1 3.5
insurance
------------------------------------------------------------
\a The original outlay estimate excludes approximately $100 million
in proposed offsetting collections which were categorized as domestic
discretionary.
\b Undistributed offsetting receipts, primarily the employer share of
employee retirement payments and rents and royalties on the Outer
Continental Shelf, are deducted from totals for the government as a
whole to avoid distortion of subtotals.
Note: Detail may not add to totals due to rounding.
Sources: Office of Management and Budget, Congressional Budget
Office, and Department of the Treasury.
IMPROVED HEALTH OF THE BANK
AND THRIFT INDUSTRIES
SHARPLY REDUCED OUTLAYS FOR
DEPOSIT INSURANCE
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :5.1
Outlays for deposit insurance programs were by far the most difficult
component of the budget to estimate in fiscal year 1993, continuing a
pattern observed in fiscal years 1991 and 1992. Actual results were
negative outlays (net receipts) of $28.0 billion, a change of $103.7
billion from the original estimate of $75.7 billion in outlays.
Approximately two-thirds of this change resulted from improvement in
the profitability of the banking and thrift industries due to
favorable economic conditions. Most of the remaining change was due
to the delay in providing appropriations to complete the savings and
loan cleanup. As table 4 shows, there were large variations in both
the Resolution Trust Corporation's (RTC) revolving fund and the
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation's (FDIC) Bank Insurance Fund
(BIF). The Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation Resolution
Fund (FRF) experienced a smaller but still significant variation.
Resolution of insolvent thrifts and banks, which involves selling the
assets of failed institutions and settling all claims including the
deposit guarantees of insured customers, is handled by two federal
agencies--RTC and FDIC. The Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery,
and Enforcement Act of 1989 established RTC as a temporary agency
charged with bailing out the thrift industry. Since February 1989,
thrift resolutions have been funded through the RTC's revolving fund.
FDIC administers the other bank and thrift deposit insurance
activities through (1) BIF for banks, (2) FRF for resolution
commitments stemming from thrifts which failed before RTC was
established, and (3) the Savings Association Insurance Fund (SAIF),
which is scheduled to take over the resolution of failed thrifts from
RTC in the first half of 1995.\8
Table 4
Deposit Insurance Estimates and Actual
Results for Fiscal Year 1993
(Dollars in billions)
Deposit Actual Percent
insurance Original Revised minus of
component estimate estimate Actual original original
---------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------
RTC $32.5 $-3.9 $-19.2 $-51.7 -159.0
BIF 38.0 4.0 -9.8 -47.9 -125.8
FRF 6.4 3.8 2.4 -4.0 -63.0
Other -1.2 -1.1 -1.3 -0.1 -7.4
============================================================
Total $75.7 $2.8 $-28.0 $-103.7 -137.0
------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Detail may not add to totals due to rounding.
Sources: Office of Management and Budget and Congressional Budget
Office.
--------------------
\8 The RTC Completion Act of 1993 extended RTC's resolution authority
to at least January 1, 1995, and no later than July 1, 1995. The act
authorized the Chairman of the Thrift Deposit Protection Board to
determine the specific date within this 6-month period.
RESOLUTION TRUST
CORPORATION
-------------------------------------------------------- Letter :5.1.1
RTC outlays were $51.7 billion lower than originally estimated by
OMB. Rather than spending $32.5 billion, RTC netted $19.2 billion
from asset sales. The large change from the original estimate to the
actual was a function of the (1) lack of available funding for the
savings and loan cleanup and (2) improving financial condition of the
thrift industry. We estimate that approximately half of the change
was attributable to the delayed funding, although estimates range
from $15 billion to $32 billion.
RTC relies on appropriations from the Congress to cover the losses
incurred in resolving failed thrifts. The Congress did not
appropriate any new funds for RTC between December 1991 and the end
of fiscal year 1993, even though it received requests for additional
funding from both the Bush and Clinton administrations. Although
this lack of funding restricted RTC's ability to resolve insolvent
thrifts during fiscal year 1993,\9 RTC continued to sell off its
inventory of failed thrift assets. However, RTC cannot use the
proceeds of asset sales to resolve failed thrifts until it first
repays all funds borrowed from the Federal Financing Bank (part of
Treasury). Sale proceeds exceeded expenditures on resolution
activities for the fiscal year, producing the negative outlay
condition or net receipts in the account.
Favorable economic conditions, particularly lower interest rates,
also contributed to lower-than-estimated RTC outlays. First, lower
interest rates improve the profitability of thrifts by allowing them
to lower the average interest rates paid to depositors but to
maintain higher average interest rates on loans. This improvement in
profitability during fiscal year 1993 resulted in fewer thrift
failures than originally estimated. Second, generally improved
economic conditions have reduced RTC's losses on thrift resolutions
and increased rates of recovery on sales of failed thrift assets.
The improved financial position of the thrift industry has lowered
projections for the remaining cost of the cleanup. Between January
1992 and September 1993, OMB reduced its estimate of funds required
for thrift resolutions by about $23 billion for 1992 through 1997.
However, the overall cost of the bailout would have been even lower
if funding had been provided in a timely manner because insolvent
thrifts continued to operate and lose money. In November 1993, the
Congress made up to $18.3 billion available for RTC and authorized $8
billion for SAIF.\10
--------------------
\9 The availability of the loss funds appropriated in December 1991
ended on March 31, 1992. RTC was able to resolve 23 thrifts during
fiscal year 1993 with funds that had previously been reserved to
cover losses, when its loss estimates for earlier closures proved to
be too high. However, at the end of fiscal year 1993, RTC had a
backlog of 68 institutions--only one less than a year earlier.
\10 In December 1991, the Congress had appropriated up to $25 billion
for RTC, to be available until April 1, 1992. During this period,
RTC used only $6.7 billion. The RTC Completion Act of 1993 repealed
the April 1, 1992, cutoff date, thus making the remaining $18.3
billion available for RTC.
BANK INSURANCE FUND
-------------------------------------------------------- Letter :5.1.2
Actual outlays for BIF were -$9.8 billion, nearly $48 billion lower
than the original estimate of $38.0 billion. This difference
resulted primarily from favorable economic conditions. Declining
interest rates boosted bank profits and reduced the number of
estimated bank failures. The original estimate of failed bank assets
for fiscal year 1993 was reduced from $110.5 billion to $28.5 billion
in September 1993. FDIC reported in December that in the first 9
months of 1993, bank earnings were $32.6 billion, slightly exceeding
the $32.1 billion record earnings posted during all of 1992.
Premiums collected from banks, the primary financing source for BIF,
exceeded expenditures for losses associated with resolving failed
banks during fiscal year 1993. This excess, along with proceeds from
the sale of failed bank assets, produced the negative outlay
condition or net receipts in the account. At the beginning of
calendar year 1993, BIF changed its premium rate structure from a
flat system in which all banks paid the same rate to a risk-based
system. Banks that are financially sound now pay lower premiums than
banks in poor condition. Since the adoption of this structure, the
average level of assessed premiums has dropped, reflecting the
improved condition of the industry. In addition, FDIC was able to
pay back all borrowed Federal Financing Bank funds previously used to
acquire the assets of failed banks.
FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN
INSURANCE CORPORATION
RESOLUTION FUND
-------------------------------------------------------- Letter :5.1.3
Actual outlays for FRF were $4 billion (63 percent) lower than the
original estimate of $6.4 billion. FRF's costs for renegotiating
agreements from thrift resolutions completed before RTC was created
proved to be lower than initial projections. However, at least $700
million of the decline represents a shift in outlays to fiscal year
1994 rather than a real reduction in the cost of these agreements.
ESTIMATING SPENDING FOR
HEALTH PROGRAMS REMAINS
DIFFICULT
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :5.2
Outlays for the two largest health programs, Medicare and Medicaid,
continued to grow during fiscal year 1993 but more slowly than in
recent years. However, the program components experienced
significant but mostly offsetting changes from the original estimates
to actual outlays. The recent trend of higher-than-estimated actual
outlays for Medicaid was reversed in fiscal year 1993 with outlays
that were $8.6 billion (10.2 percent) lower than the original
estimate of $84.4 billion. This change was partially offset by
slightly higher-than-estimated ($1.2 billion) outlays for Medicare.
Although total Medicare spending exceeded the original estimate of
$144.7 billion by only $1.2 billion (less than 1 percent), this
narrow margin masked larger offsetting differences between the
original estimate and actual outlays for the two Medicare components.
Outlays for the Hospital Insurance component--Medicare Part A\11
--exceeded the original estimate by $8.0 billion (9.7 percent). This
difference was largely offset by the $6.8 billion (11.1 percent)
lower-than-estimated outlays for Medicare Part B\12 --the
Supplementary Medical Insurance component.
--------------------
\11 Medicare Part A funds hospital or related care for the elderly
and disabled.
\12 Medicare Part B covers expenses for physicians and other medical
services. Persons eligible for
Part A may purchase Part B.
MEDICAID
-------------------------------------------------------- Letter :5.2.1
Difficulty in anticipating state behavior was a key factor in the
difference between the original Medicaid estimate and actual outlays.
In particular, uncertainty in estimating the impact of the Medicaid
Voluntary Contribution and Provider-Specific Tax Amendments of 1991
(Public Law 102-234)--which sought to limit recent state actions to
unilaterally increase the federal government's share of program
cost--was cited by OMB and the Health Care Financing Administration
(HCFA) as a major factor for lower-than-estimated outlays for
Medicaid. Enactment of the legislation coincided with the
development of the original Medicaid budget estimate. In developing
this estimate, HCFA did not assume the legislation would dramatically
change spending trends. Final results indicate that state behavior
was different than that assumed by HCFA, resulting in
lower-than-expected outlays.
HCFA's revised estimate also did not assume a significant change in
the trend in Medicaid spending. Due to the unusually late
preparation of the fiscal year 1994 budget, HCFA had available
several months of actual state claims for federal Medicaid funds when
it prepared the revised fiscal year 1993 estimates. These claims
were lower than assumed in the original estimate, leading HCFA to
revise its estimate downward by 4.6 percent. However, HCFA indicated
that it was reluctant to base its outlay estimates entirely on an
extrapolation of these data. HCFA's caution may be attributed to its
awareness of the previous rapid growth in Medicaid spending, a
recognition that program spending had been underestimated in recent
years, and uncertainty about the effectiveness of the new
legislation.
MEDICARE
-------------------------------------------------------- Letter :5.2.2
As in recent years, payments to hospitals for Medicare Part A were
underestimated. The increase over the original estimate of Medicare
Part A outlays was primarily due to unanticipated growth in the use
of skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) and home health care services.
SNF outlays of $5.3 billion were nearly double the original estimate
of $2.9 billion. At the time the original estimate was developed,
growth in expenditures for SNFs was at its lowest since 1989.
However, the program experienced rapid growth in 1992, which
continued throughout 1993. OMB attributes the continued growth in
the use of SNFs to increased awareness of the existing skilled
nursing care benefit resulting from the enactment and subsequent
repeal of the Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act of 1988, which
contained provisions expanding some of the program's benefits.
Although spending levels initially decreased with the repeal of the
act, new awareness of the existing benefit continues to contribute to
the program's growth.
The other primary factor affecting Medicare Part A outlays was home
health care expenditures of $9.5 billion, which exceeded the original
estimate by $2.6 billion. Expenditures for home health care services
began to grow rapidly in 1989. However, the original estimate
assumed that after 2 years of rapid growth, the rate of program
expenditure growth would slow. As with skilled nursing facilities,
underestimation of the program's growth resulted in
higher-than-anticipated outlays. OMB attributes the unanticipated
pace of growth in home health care to expanded coverage resulting
from the out-of-court settlement of a 1989 lawsuit against HCFA.\13
As part of the settlement, certain guidelines in the Medicare
provider manual were rewritten to significantly expand coverage of
services. These revisions allowed home health care providers to
increase the number of home visits and made it more difficult to deny
benefit claims. However, the impact of these changes was not
factored into the original estimate. HCFA expects that growth in
home health service use due to these changes will slow in fiscal year
1995 but that total spending will remain at an elevated level.
Unanticipated reductions in the volume of services performed by
physicians in response to new reimbursement methods for Medicare
Part B resulted in an original estimate that was $6.8 billion higher
than actual spending. The changes to the reimbursement schedule
implemented in January 1992 were part of the 1989 legislated overhaul
of the program's payment system. The reforms included the
development of a nationwide fee schedule and volume standards.
Payment was changed from the previous reasonable charge reimbursement
system to a resource-based relative value scale system that reflects
the time and intensity of physician services, overhead expenses, and
geographic cost differences. In addition, the new system developed a
mechanism for updating annually the physician fee schedule based on
actual performance against a predetermined volume standard--the
Medicare volume performance standard (MVPS). The MVPS is a
prospectively set target for annual growth of physician services,
which was designed to prevent physicians from making up for a
reduction in fees by increasing the volume of services they provide.
Despite attempts to account for changes in physician behavior,
lower-than-anticipated increases in the volume of services resulted
in lower-than-expected outlays.
--------------------
\13 Duggan v. Sullivan, United States District Court for the
District of Columbia, Civil Action 87-0383-SS.
OTHER SIGNIFICANT BUT
OFFSETTING OUTLAY VARIATIONS
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :5.3
Components of the budget sensitive to fluctuations in economic
conditions experienced large outlay variations from their original
fiscal year 1993 estimates. Persistently
higher-than-originally-forecast unemployment levels pushed outlays
for unemployment insurance benefits $10.6 billion higher than the
original estimate of $29.1 billion. Economic growth expected to be
slower-than-originally-forecast also spurred the Congress and the
President to extend the length of time individuals could collect
unemployment benefits. In contrast, actual outlays for interest on
the public debt of $292.5 billion were $23.3 billion lower than the
original estimate. Approximately $13.6 billion of this decline was
due to lower interest rates. The remainder was due to
lower-than-originally-expected borrowing; this was at least partially
due to reduced outlays for deposit insurance resulting from lower
interest rates.
Although total outlays for the Department of Defense (DOD) were only
$0.5 billion above the original estimate of $278.1 billion, seven
DOD-Military accounts differed from their original estimate by over
$1 billion. Weaknesses in DOD's financial management capabilities
contributed to the large outlay variations from original estimates in
several accounts. The largest difference occurred in the Defense
Business Operations Fund (DBOF), which showed a year-end balance of
$4.9 billion compared to the original estimate of $0.6 billion. As
we have previously reported,\14 accurate estimates for DBOF are
difficult to develop because DOD lacks effective cash management
practices and cost accounting systems. Further complicating
estimates is the newness of the fund, which was only established in
fiscal year 1992.
Weaknesses in DOD's cash management practices and systems also
contributed to differences between original estimates and actual
outlays for accounts with operational ties to DBOF. For example, the
Army, Navy, and Air Force operation and maintenance accounts used to
purchase goods and services through DBOF each exceeded its original
estimate by more than $2 billion. One contributing factor was the
advance billing by maintenance and selected research and development
activities between June and August of 1993 for $5.7 billion in goods
and services. This advance billing was initiated to avoid a
projected cash shortage in DBOF. Lastly, differences between outlay
estimates and final results are not unusual for DOD-Military
accounts. Reprogramming agreements between congressional committees
and DOD allow the shifting of funds within appropriations, and
transfer authority, which has routinely been provided by the
Congress, allows the shifting of funds between appropriations.
--------------------
\14 For a discussion of DOD's efforts to improve the operation of
DBOF and a list of related GAO reports see Defense Business
Operations Fund (GAO/AIMD-94-7R, October 12, 1993).
TOTAL RECEIPTS WERE CLOSE TO
ESTIMATE WITH OFFSETTING
DIFFERENCES
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :6
Actual receipts for fiscal year 1993 were $1,153.2 billion--only 1
percent less than the original estimate. This result represented a
significant improvement over fiscal years 1991 and 1992, in which
receipts fell short of the original estimates by an average of 7.6
percent. However, as summarized in table 5, the slight difference in
fiscal year 1993 masked larger offsetting estimate variations within
and among major receipt categories.\15 Overall, receipt estimates
were affected by discretion that individual and corporate taxpayers
have in determining the timing of certain types of tax liabilities.
Specifically, social insurance receipts were 4.1 percent lower than
the original estimate, while corporate tax receipts were 13.2 percent
higher than projected. Individual income taxes and miscellaneous
receipts were, respectively, 1.1 percent and 12.1 percent below the
original estimates. These results are summarized in table 5. For
comparison, CBO's estimates are shown in table 6.
Table 5
Receipt Estimates and Actual Results for
Fiscal Year 1993 Prepared by OMB and
Department of the Treasury
(Dollars in billions)
Percen
Origin Revise Actual t
al d minus of
estima estima origin origin
Receipt source te te Actual al al
-------------------- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
Individual
income taxes $515.2 $515.3 $509.7 $-5.5 -1.1
Corporate
income taxes 103.8 106.3 117.5 13.7 13.2
Social insurance
taxes and 446.7 426.8 428.3 -18.4 -4.1
contributions
Excise taxes 48.1 47.6 48.1 0.0 0.1
Estate and
gift taxes 12.9 12.6 12.6 -0.3 -2.3
Customs duties 18.0 19.2 18.8 0.8 4.7
Miscellaneous
receipts 20.7 17.9 18.2 -2.5 -12.0
============================================================
Total $1,165 $1,145 $1,153 $- -1.0
.4 .7 .2 12.2
------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Detail may not add to totals due to rounding.
Sources: Office of Management and Budget and Department of the
Treasury.
Table 6
CBO Receipt Estimates and Actual Results
for Fiscal Year 1993
(Dollars in billions)
Percen
Origin Revise Actual t
al d minus of
estima estima origin origin
Receipt source te te Actual al al
-------------------- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
Individual
income taxes $518 $501 $509.7 $-8.3 -1.6
Corporate
income taxes 109 110 117.5 8.5 7.8
Social insurance
taxes and 449 434 428.3 -20.7 -4.6
contributions
Excise taxes 49 48 48.1 -0.9 -1.9
Estate and
gift taxes 12 12 12.6 0.6 4.8
Customs duties 18 19 18.8 0.8 4.5
Miscellaneous
receipts 23 19 18.2 -4.8 -20.7
============================================================
Total $1,179 $1,143 $1,153 $- -2.2
.2 25.8
------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Detail may not add to totals due to rounding.
Sources: Congressional Budget Office and Department of the Treasury.
Actual social insurance receipts fell $18.4 billion short of the
original estimate. This difference was the net result of changes in
different social insurance funds. Three funds make up over 90
percent of social insurance receipts: Old Age and Survivors'
Insurance (OASI), Disability Insurance (DI), and Hospital Insurance
(HI). The original estimate for these funds was $19.1 billion lower
than actual receipts because of the following factors:
lower-than-estimated growth in salary and wage
income--approximately $10 billion,
bookkeeping adjustments\16 --$7.5 billion, and
an unenacted policy proposal to extend Hospital Insurance coverage
to all state and local government employees--$1.7 billion.
The $19.1 billion decline in the OASI, DI, and HI receipts was
partially offset by an unexpected repayment of a state loan to the
unemployment insurance fund (another component of social insurance
taxes and contributions), which helped boost actual unemployment
insurance receipts $1.0 billion above the original estimate.
Corporate receipts exceeded initial projections by $13.7 billion.
This result contrasts with fiscal years 1991 and 1992, during which
corporate receipts were originally overestimated by $30.5 billion and
$1.6 billion, respectively. For fiscal year 1993, approximately $7.1
billion of the difference between the original estimate and actual
receipts can be explained by (1) the completion of recent revisions
to the forecasting model,\17 (2) new data on liabilities and
collections, and (3) lower tax refunds than anticipated. Other
factors contributing to the difference in corporate receipts were
higher-than-expected payments due to higher corporate profits
partially offset by other economic factors--about $2 billion,
enacted legislation that increased estimated payment requirements
and prevented thrifts from deducting losses reimbursed by
tax-exempt federal assistance--about $2.5 billion, and
unenacted policy proposals such as investment tax breaks included
in the Bush and Clinton budgets--$2 billion.
Individual income tax receipts were $5.5 billion lower than the
original estimate. Economic factors including (1) lower inflation,
(2) slightly slower-than-expected economic growth, and (3) a lower
share of income subject to individual income tax caused Treasury to
lower its estimate by $15 billion. Internal Revenue Service
initiatives making it easier for taxpayers to obtain extensions or
make installment tax payments further reduced the estimate during the
fiscal year by $1.4 billion. These downward revisions from the
original estimate were partially offset by the following factors:
a $7.5 billion transfer from the social insurance accounts
partially offset by other data revisions--$4 billion,
an unexpected increase in taxes withheld--about $1.6 billion,
enacted legislation requiring the withholding of taxes on pension
income--$1.4 billion, and
unenacted policy proposals, including a proposal to expand the tax
exemption for families with children--$3.8 billion.
Miscellaneous receipts, which are primarily composed of earnings on
Federal Reserve assets, fell $2.5 billion short of the original
estimate. This difference was primarily due to changes in foreign
exchange rates and the decline in U.S. interest rates, which reduced
the value and the interest income of the Federal Reserve's foreign
and domestic holdings.
--------------------
\15 Although we discuss the individual income and social insurance
categories separately, they are interdependent. The allocation of
receipts between these two categories is affected by periodic
bookkeeping adjustments made to incorporate data from prior years.
These changes result only in transfers between the two categories and
have no impact on the combined total.
\16 As noted earlier in footnote 15, these bookkeeping adjustments
have no impact on total receipts.
\17 These revisions--which were completed after the original estimate
was made--represented the final installment of a multiyear overhaul
of the model, which fully incorporates the effects of the Tax Reform
Act of 1986.
OMB'S ECONOMIC ASSUMPTIONS
CONSISTENT WITH OTHER
FORECASTERS
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :7
OMB's economic assumptions for 1993 were generally in line with or
more conservative than forecasts developed by CBO and private
forecasters. Forecasts made in early 1992 were slightly optimistic
regarding economic growth and unemployment and too pessimistic about
inflation and interest rates. These unanticipated economic
conditions lowered receipts and had a mixed effect on outlays,
lowering them in some programs and increasing them in others.
The Council of Economic Advisers, with the Department of the Treasury
and OMB, prepares the economic forecast that is used in developing
the President's budget request. Estimates of major macroeconomic
indicators that affect outlays and receipts are included in the
budget documents. CBO and private forecasters also develop estimates
of these indicators. As shown in appendix III, the administration's
macroeconomic projections for calendar year 1993 were generally quite
close to those of CBO and the Blue Chip consensus of private
forecasters. In fact, in an effort to minimize disagreements between
the legislative and executive branches about the budget estimates,
the administration adopted CBO's economic projections for the revised
fiscal year 1993 estimates.
During the fiscal year 1993 budget cycle, the performance of the
economy had a mixed impact on the budget. Economic growth estimates
were revised downward, as the economy continued a
slower-than-expected recovery from the 1990-91 recession. Original
estimates of the unemployment rate, which generally declines as a
result of economic growth, proved to be overly optimistic. The
combination of higher-than-expected unemployment, lower-than-expected
inflation, and slightly slower-than-expected economic growth reduced
receipts and increased spending for income support programs.
Interest rates were also substantially lower than originally
projected. This reduced the deficit by (1) strengthening the banking
and thrift industries, which resulted in lower outlays for deposit
insurance activities and (2) lowering the cost of financing the
nation's debt. Inflation, which generally moves in tandem with
interest rates, was also lower than forecast. Lower inflation
reduced the projected level of taxable income which, in turn, lowered
receipts from the level originally estimated.
As we noted in our February 1993 report, economic forecasting is an
enormously complex and imprecise process. The forecasts in appendix
III illustrate the limited capacity of economic models to accurately
predict economic performance. Because of the sensitivity of budget
outlays and receipts to changes in economic conditions, differences
between economic forecasts and actual conditions are a key factor in
the accuracy of outlay and receipt estimates.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ESTIMATED
AND ACTUAL OUTLAYS LARGER FOR
MANDATORY PROGRAMS
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :8
Our analysis showed that in both fiscal years 1992 and 1993, outlays
for mandatory programs experienced the largest differences between
the revised estimates made midway through the fiscal year and actual
outlays. This result was not unexpected. The larger differences
reflect the open-ended aspect of outlays for mandatory programs in
contrast to the specific appropriated amounts which limit outlays for
discretionary programs. Furthermore, estimates for mandatory
programs are heavily dependent on estimates for other variables such
as economic conditions and demographic characteristics.
The average difference, measured as a percent of the revised outlay
estimate, for mandatory spending accounts was more than twice as
large as the average difference for discretionary spending accounts.
Furthermore, in fiscal years 1992 and 1993, approximately 95 percent
of the total difference between revised estimates and actual outlays
in the major budget accounts listed in appendix I occurred in
mandatory spending accounts. Tables II.1 and II.2 in appendix II
list the major budget accounts for which actual outlays differed by
more than 10 percent and more than $250 million, respectively, from
the revised estimate in both fiscal year 1992 and fiscal year 1993.
Of the accounts that met these criteria, approximately 60 percent are
for mandatory expenditures.
Difficulties in estimating outlays for credit reform liquidating
accounts\18 resulted in 9 of these accounts being among the 31
accounts with variations of greater than 10 percent between the
revised estimate and actual outlays. The years we analyzed--fiscal
years 1992 and 1993--were the first 2 years of credit reform
implementation. We have reported\19 previously on agency problems in
implementing credit reform due to severe and long-standing financial
systems problems. Because of economic uncertainties and because
agencies had to rely on information that has historically been
incomplete and unreliable, estimates were inaccurate. Difficulties
in establishing initial account balances and estimating cash flows
from existing loans and guarantees, along with subsequent adjustments
to the accounts, are reflected in the differences between the revised
estimates and actual outlays.
Sensitivity to economic conditions is a common characteristic of the
mandatory programs with large dollar variations in fiscal years 1992
and 1993. Outlays for interest on the public debt were lower than
the revised estimates in both years due to the unforeseen decline in
interest rates. As previously discussed, the impact of lower
interest rates, as well as the overall improvement in the economy, is
reflected in the large differences between estimated and actual
outlays for the Bank Insurance Fund in both years. Other accounts
with large dollar variations primarily due to changes in economic
conditions include the Unemployment Trust Fund, the Supplemental
Security Income Program, and two Commodity Credit Corporation
accounts.
Some discretionary accounts--in which spending levels are specified
by the Congress in appropriation acts--also are prone to differences
between estimates and final results; these differences often are due
to inadequate agency financial and information management systems.\20
The tables in appendix II reveal that the majority of discretionary
spending accounts which had large differences between the revised
estimates and final results in both fiscal years 1992 and 1993 were
defense-related. As discussed previously, these reflect the
weaknesses in DOD's financial systems combined with the flexibility
given DOD to move funds among accounts.
Non-DOD outlay estimates are also plagued by inadequate management
information systems. For example, the Department of Housing and
Urban Development's (HUD) revised estimate of outlays for assistance
for the renewal of expiring Section 8 subsidies was nearly 20 percent
too low in fiscal year 1992 and nearly 20 percent too high in fiscal
year 1993. HUD currently lacks the financial management and
budgeting systems and data to estimate accurately program funding
needs. These problems have been well-documented in reports by GAO,
OMB, and HUD.\21 HUD expects new management information systems under
development to produce improved budget estimates no earlier than for
fiscal year 1995.
--------------------
\18 Liquidating accounts, established by the Federal Credit Reform
Act of 1990, reflect the cash flows to and from the government
resulting from direct loan obligations or loan guarantees made prior
to October 1, 1991.
\19 Federal Credit Programs: Agencies Had Serious Problems Meeting
Credit Reform Accounting Requirements (GAO/AFMD-93-17, January 6,
1993).
\20 For a discussion of financial management weaknesses in federal
agencies, see Financial Management Issues (GAO/OCG-93-4TR, December
1992).
\21 For a discussion of HUD's difficulties in estimating its Section
8 funding needs and a list of related reports, see Assisted Housing:
Evening Out the Growth of the Section 8 Program's Funding Needs
(GAO/RCED-93-54, August 5, 1993).
OBSERVATIONS
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :9
The impact of deposit insurance on the accuracy of future deficit
estimates should be considerably less due to the improved
profitability of the banking and thrift industries and the
availability of funds allowing RTC to continue its work. In recent
years, the volatility of deposit insurance outlays has distorted
changes between deficit estimates and final results. Excluding
deposit insurance, OMB's estimate of the budget deficit for fiscal
year 1993 tracked closely to the final adjusted deficit.
The budget estimation process is not likely to become any easier in
the near future given the tax and program changes contained in the
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 and the administration's
planned health care and welfare reforms. Unpredictable behavior of
individuals and state and local governments in response to changes in
law, in addition to unanticipated changes in economic conditions and
demographic variables, affects estimates for many large programs and
receipt sources. As previously discussed, unanticipated responses by
states and physicians to new regulations in the Medicaid and Medicare
programs contributed to significant variations from estimated outlays
in fiscal years 1992 and 1993. Receipt estimates were affected by
the discretion that individual and corporate taxpayers have in
determining the timing of certain types of tax liabilities. For this
reason, while annual receipt estimates may be relatively accurate
over a 2-year or 3-year period, estimating receipts for a given
fiscal year is more difficult.
Although the fiscal year 1993 budget deficit was the lowest in 3
years, it still added $255 billion to the nation's debt. In fiscal
year 1993 alone, interest payments on this borrowing were $292.5
billion--20.8 percent of outlays--and more than the deficit for the
year. CBO projects\22 that under the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation
Act of 1993 and with continued economic growth, the annual deficit
will shrink to $166 billion in fiscal year 1996 but will turn upward
near the end of the decade unless additional action is taken. In
previous reports\23 we have discussed the budget deficit in detail
and concluded that strategies to reduce it must include all major
areas of the budget--mandatory spending, discretionary spending, and
revenues. Today, while the economy is growing and the deficit is
not, is a good time to adopt policies to keep the deficit on a
downward path.
--------------------
\22 The Economic and Budget Outlook: Fiscal Years 1995-1999, January
1994, the Congress of the United States, Congressional Budget Office.
\23 For a discussion of the deficit, see Budget Issues
(GAO/OCG-93-1TR, December 1992); Budget Policy: Prompt Action
Necessary to Avert Long-Term Damage to the Economy (GAO/OCG-92-2,
June 5, 1992); and The Budget Deficit: Outlook, Implications, and
Choices (GAO/OCG-90-5, September 12, 1990).
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :9.1
As agreed with the Committee, unless you publicly release its
contents earlier, we plan no further distribution of this report
until 10 days from the date of this letter. At that time, we will
send copies of this report to the Ranking Minority Member of your
Committee, the Chairman and Ranking Minority Member of the Senate
Budget Committee, the Secretary of the Treasury, and the Directors of
the Office of Management and Budget and the Congressional Budget
Office. We will also make copies available to others upon request.
Please contact me at (202) 512-9142 if you or your staff have any
questions concerning the report. Other major contributors to this
report are listed in appendix IV.
Sincerely yours,
Susan J. Irving
Associate Director, Budget Issues
FISCAL YEAR 1993 ESTIMATED AND
ACTUAL OUTLAYS FOR MAJOR BUDGET
ACCOUNTS
=========================================================== Appendix I
(Dollars in billions in descending order
of original estimate)
Account Account Original Revised Actual
code Department title estimate estimate outlays
-- ---------- ------------------ -------- ---------- ---------- ----------
1 20-0550 Treasury Interest $315.8 $294.7 $292.5
on the
Public
Debt
2 20-8006 Health and Human Federal 269.9 270.1 270.0
Services (HHS) Old Age
and
Survivor
s
Insuranc
e Trust
Fund
3 75-0512 HHS Grants 84.4 80.5 75.8
to
States
for
Medicaid
4 20-8005 HHS Federal 83.6 91.5 91.6
Hospital
Insuranc
e Trust
Fund
5 20-8004 HHS Suppleme 61.1 56.2 54.3
ntal
Medical
Insuranc
e Trust
Fund
6 75-0580 HHS Payments 42.6 44.2 44.7
to
Health
Care
Trust
Funds
7 51-4064 FDIC Bank 38.0 4.0 -9.8
Insuranc
e Fund
8 24-8135 Office of Civil 35.0 34.6 34.9
Personnel Service
Management (OPM) Retireme
nt and
Disabili
ty Trust
Fund
9 22-4055 RTC RTC 32.5 -3.9 -19.2
Revolvin
g Fund
10 20-8007 HHS Disabili 32.3 34.8 34.6
ty
Insuranc
e Trust
Fund
11 20-8042 Labor Unemploy 29.1 40.2 39.7
ment
Trust
Fund
12 97-8097 Department of Military 25.6 25.6 25.7
Defense (DOD)- Retireme
Civil nt Trust
Fund
13 12-3505\a Agriculture Food 23.7 24.5 24.6
Stamp
Program
14 21-2010 DOD-Military Military 23.4 23.2 22.9
Personne
l, Army
15 75-0406 HHS Suppleme 21.2 23.6 22.6
ntal
Security
Income
Program
16 17-1804 DOD-Military Operatio 21.1 21.9 23.8
n and
Maintena
nce,
Navy
17 24-0200 OPM Payment 19.7 19.9 19.8
to Civil
Service
Retireme
nt and
Disabili
ty Trust
Fund
18 17-1453 DOD-Military Military 19.7 19.2 19.4
Personne
l, Navy
19 57-3500 DOD-Military Military 18.6 18.5 18.3
Personne
l, Air
Force
20 57-3400 DOD-Military Operatio 18.5 19.2 20.7
n and
Maintena
nce, Air
Force
21 21-2020 DOD-Military Operatio 18.5 20.5 20.5
n and
Maintena
nce,
Army
22 69-8083 Transportation Federal- 16.9 17.6 16.3
Aid,
Highway
Trust
Fund
23 36-0102\a Veterans Affairs Compensa 16.4 16.8 17.0
tion and
Pensions
24 75-1501 HHS Family 15.3 15.8 15.6
Support
Payments
to
States
25 86-0164 Housing and Urban Annual 14.9 13.4 14.4
Development (HUD) Contribu
tions
for
Assisted
Housing
Programs
26 36-0160 Veterans Affairs Medical 14.3 14.5 14.3
Care
27 57-3600 DOD-Military Research 14.1 12.8 12.3
,
Developm
ent,
Test,
and
Evaluati
on
(RDT&E),
Air
Force
28 97-0040 DOD-Civil Payment 11.8 12.3 12.3
to
Military
Retireme
nt Fund
29 57-3010 DOD-Military Aircraft 11.5 10.8 11.4
Procurem
ent, Air
Force
30 12-4336 Agriculture Commodit 11.3 15.5 15.0
y Credit
Corporat
ion
31 11-8242 Funds Appropriated Foreign 11.3 12.9 13.2
to Military
the President Sales
Trust
Fund
32 97-0400 DOD-Military RDT&E, 9.8 9.4 9.2
Defense-
Wide
33 97-0100 DOD-Military Operatio 9.7 9.2 9.6
n and
Maintena
nce,
Defense
Agencies
34 17-1611 DOD-Military Shipbuil 9.4 9.6 10.1
ding and
Conversi
on, Navy
35 75-9915 HHS National 9.1 9.2 9.5
Institut
es of
Health
36 17-1319 DOD-Military RDT&E, 8.2 9.1 8.9
Navy
37 57-3080 DOD-Military Other 8.1 7.8 8.1
Procurem
ent, Air
Force
38 60-8010 Railroad Railroad 8.0 7.9 7.9
Retirement Social
Board (RRB) Security
Equivale
nt
Benefit
Account
39 20-0906 Treasury Payment 7.9 8.4 8.8
Where
Earned
Income
Credit
Exceeds
Tax
Liabilit
y
40 17-1506 DOD-Military Aircraft 7.6 7.5 7.2
Procurem
ent,
Navy
41 97-0130 DOD-Military Defense 7.3 8.1 8.2
Health
Program
42 91-0200 Education Student 7.2 7.5 7.7
Financia
l
Assistan
ce
43 80-0108 National Research 6.8 6.9 7.1
Aeronautics and and
Space Developm
Administration ent
(NASA)
44 91-0900 Education Compensa 6.6 7.3 6.6
tory
Educatio
n for
the
Disadvan
taged
45 12-3539 Agriculture State 6.5 6.8 6.6
Child
Nutritio
n
Programs
46 75-0404 HHS Payments 6.4 6.0 6.2
to
Social
Security
Trust
Fund
47 51-4065 FDIC FSLIC 6.4 3.8 2.4
Resoluti
on Fund
48 17-1105 DOD-Military Military 6.1 6.0 5.9
Personne
l,
Marine
Corps
49 21-2040 DOD-Military RDT&E, 5.7 5.8 6.2
Army
50 57-3020 DOD-Military Missile 5.7 6.0 5.4
Procurem
ent, Air
Force
51 80-0105 NASA Space 5.1 5.0 5.0
Flight,
Control,
and Data
Communic
ations
52 17-1507 DOD-Military Weapons 5.1 5.1 4.7
Procurem
ent,
Navy
53 17-1810 DOD-Military Other 4.8 6.0 6.4
Procurem
ent,
Navy
54 89-0240 Energy Atomic 4.8 4.6 4.3
Energy,
Weapons
Activiti
es
55 16-0174 Labor Training 4.2 5.2 4.2
and
Employme
nt
Services
56 75-1536 HHS Children 4.2 4.6 3.4
and
Families
Services
Program
57 89-0242 Energy Defense 4.1 4.2 4.2
Environm
ental
Restorat
ion and
Waste
Manageme
nt
58 11-1082 Funds Appropriated Foreign 4.0 4.6 4.6
to Military
the President Financin
g Grants
59 24-0206 OPM Governme 3.9 3.7 3.8
nt
Payment
for
Annuitan
ts,
Employee
s Health
Benefits
60 20-0913 Treasury Tax Law 3.8 3.8 3.9
Enforcem
ent
61 86-0162 HUD Communit 3.3 3.8 3.2
y
Developm
ent
Grants
62 21-2060 DOD-Military National 3.2 3.1 3.3
Guard
Personne
l, Army
63 11-1037 Funds Appropriated Economic 3.2 3.2 3.2
to Support
the President Fund
64 91-0230 Education Federal 3.2 2.8 3.2
Family
Educatio
n Loan
Liquidat
ing
Account\
b
65 69-8104 Transportation Trust 3.2 2.3 2.3
Fund
Share of
FAA
Operatio
ns
66 60-0113 RRB Federal 3.1 3.1 3.0
Payments
to the
Railroad
Retireme
nt
Accounts
67 75-1362\b HHS Substanc 3.1 2.6 2.7
e Abuse
and
Mental
Health
Services
Administ
ration
68 21-2035 DOD-Military Other 3.0 3.3 3.9
Procurem
ent,
Army
69 89-0224 Energy Energy 3.0 3.0 2.8
Supply,
R&D
Activiti
es
70 12-3510 Agriculture Special 2.8 2.9 2.8
Suppleme
ntal
Food
Program
for
Women,
Infants,
and
Children
71 75-1534 HHS Social 2.8 2.8 2.8
Services
Block
Grant
72 60-8011 RRB Railroad 2.8 2.9 2.8
Industry
Pension
Fund
73 75-1545 HHS Payments 2.8 2.9 2.6
to
States
for
Foster
Care and
Adoption
Assistan
ce
74 91-0300 Education Special 2.8 2.8 2.6
Educatio
n
75 91-0231 Education Federal 2.6 2.3 2.4
Family
Educatio
n Loan
Program\
b
76 89-0243 Energy Material 2.6 2.9 2.2
s
Support
and
Other
Defense
Programs
77 57-3840 DOD-Military Operatio 2.5 2.4 2.6
n and
Maintena
nce, Air
National
Guard
78 69-0201 Transportation Operatin 2.4 2.6 2.5
g
Expense,
Coast
Guard
79 86-0163 HUD Low 2.3 2.4 2.5
Income
Housing
Projects
80 86-0194 HUD Assistan 2.3 3.1 2.5
ce for
the
Renewal
of
Expiring
Section
8
Subsidy
Contract
s
81 75-0350 HHS Health 2.3 2.5 2.3
Resource
s and
Services
82 20-1851 Treasury Payment 2.3 2.3 2.3
to the
Resoluti
on
Funding
Corporat
ion
83 97-0300 DOD-Military Procurem 2.3 2.0 1.7
ent,
Defense-
Wide
84 10-0920 The Judiciary S&E, 2.2 2.0 2.1
Court of
Appeals
85 20-0904 Treasury Refundin 2.2 2.6 2.1
g
Internal
Revenue
Collecti
ons,
Interest
86 68-0103 Environmental Water 2.2 2.4 2.1
Protection Agency Infrastr
(EPA) ucture
Financin
g\b
87 21-2065 DOD-Military Operatio 2.1 2.3 2.3
n and
Maintena
nce,
Army
National
Guard
88 19-0113 State Salaries 2.1 2.1 2.3
and
Expenses
89 21-2032 DOD-Military Missile 2.1 2.1 2.2
Procurem
ent,
Army
90 21-2070 DOD-Military Reserve 2.1 2.2 2.2
Personne
l, Army
91 91-0301 Education Rehabili 2.1 2.2 2.0
tation
Services
and
Disabili
ty
Research
92 69-8107 Transportation Faciliti 2.0 2.0 2.2
es &
Equipmen
t,
Airport
and
Airway
Trust
Fund
93 49-0100 National Science Research 2.0 2.0 1.8
Foundation and
Related
Activiti
es
94 15-0200 Justice S&E, FBI 1.9 2.0 2.0
95 21-2031 DOD-Military Aircraft 1.9 1.8 1.7
Procurem
ent,
Army
96 86-4238 HUD Guarante 1.9 -0.4 -0.5
es of
Mortgage
-
Backed
Securiti
es
97 17-1106 DOD-Military Operatio 1.8 2.1 2.2
n and
Maintena
nce,
Marine
Corps
98 69-8106 Transportation Grants 1.8 2.1 1.9
in Aid
for
Airports
99 12-3319 Agriculture Conserva 1.8 1.8 1.7
tion
Reserve
Program
10 15-1060 Justice S&E, 1.8 1.7 1.7
0 Federal
Prison
System
10 80-0103 NASA Research 1.7 1.6 1.6
1 and
Program
Manageme
nt
10 21-2033 DOD-Military Weapons 1.6 1.8 2.1
2 Procurem
ent,
Army
10 91-1000 Education School 1.6 1.7 2.0
3 Improvem
ent
Programs
10 20-0912 Treasury Processi 1.6 1.6 1.7
4 ng Tax
Returns
and
Assistan
ce
10 17-1405 DOD-Military Reserve 1.6 1.6 1.6
5 Personne
l, Navy
10 18-4020 Postal Service Postal 1.6 1.6 0.9
6 Service
Fund
10 13-1450 Commerce Operatio 1.5 1.7 1.6
7 ns,
Research
, and
Faciliti
es;
National
Oceanic
and
Atmosphe
ric
Administ
ration
10 20-8145 EPA Hazardou 1.5 1.6 1.4
8 s
Substanc
e
Superfun
d
10 75-0943 HHS Disease 1.5 1.5 1.4
9 Control,
Research
, and
Training
11 89-0222 Energy General 1.5 1.4 1.4
0 Science
and
Research
Activiti
es
11 21-0702 DOD-Military Family 1.5 1.4 1.4
1 Housing,
Army
11 21-2034 DOD-Military Procurem 1.5 1.3 1.4
2 ent of
Ammuniti
on, Army
11 69-8191 Transportation Mass 1.5 1.3 1.3
3 Transit
Capital
Trust
Fund
11 20-0602 Treasury S&E, 1.5 1.5 1.5
4 U.S.
Customs
Service
11 97-0810 DOD-Military Environm 1.5 0.9 0.0
5 ental
Restorat
ion,
Defense
11 69-1301 Transportation Operatio 1.4 2.2 2.2
6 ns,
Federal
Aviation
Administ
ration
11 20-0919 Treasury Informat 1.4 1.6 1.2
7 ion
Systems,
Internal
Revenue
Service
11 97-0350 DOD-Military National 1.3 1.7 1.7
8 Guard
and
Reserve
Equipmen
t
11 64-4110 Tennessee Valley Tennesse 1.3 1.4 1.6
9 Authority e Valley
Authorit
y Fund
12 75-0390 HHS Indian 1.3 1.5 1.5
0 Health
Services
and
Faciliti
es
12 12-1106 Agriculture National 1.3 1.4 1.4
1 Forest
System
12 36-8132 Veterans Affairs National 1.3 1.2 1.1
2 Service
Life
Insuranc
e Fund
12 57-3300 DOD-Military Military 1.3 1.1 0.9
3 Construc
tion,
Air
Force
12 11-1021 Funds Appropriated Function 1.2 1.3 1.5
4 to al
the President Developm
ent
Assistan
ce
Program
12 14-2100 Interior Operatio 1.2 1.3 1.4
5 n of
Indian
Programs
12 57-3740 DOD-Military Operatio 1.2 1.2 1.3
6 n and
Maintena
nce, Air
Force
Reserve
12 91-0400 Education Vocation 1.2 1.3 1.2
7 al and
Adult
Educatio
n
12 57-3850 DOD-Military National 1.2 1.2 1.2
8 Guard
Personne
l, Air
Force
12 17-1205 DOD-Military Military 1.2 1.0 0.9
9 Construc
tion,
Navy
13 47-4542 GSA Federal 1.2 1.1 0.6
0 Building
s Fund
13 69-8350 Transportation Trust 1.2 1.2 0.6
1 Fund
Share of
Transit
Programs
13 68-0108 EPA Abatemen 1.1 1.3 1.3
2 t,
Control,
and
Complian
ce
13 57-0704 DOD-Military Family 1.1 1.1 1.0
3 Housing,
Air
Force
13 96-3122 DOD-Civil Construc 1.1 1.1 1.0
4 tion,
General
13 68-0200 EPA Program 1.1 0.9 0.9
5 and
Research
Operatio
ns\b
13 17-1109 DOD-Military Procurem 1.0 1.2 1.5
6 ent,
Marine
Corps
13 12-2278 Agriculture P.L. 480 1.0 1.2 1.1
7 Foreign
Assistan
ce
Grants
13 96-3123 DOD-Civil Operatio 1.0 1.2 1.1
8 n and
Maintena
nce,
General
13 21-2080 DOD-Military Operatio 1.0 1.1 1.0
9 n and
Maintena
nce,
Army
Reserve
14 15-1217 Justice Immigrat 1.0 1.1 1.0
0 ion &
Naturali
zation
Service
14 20-8144 Labor Black 1.0 1.0 1.0
1 Lung
Disabili
ty Trust
Fund
14 14-1036 Interior Operatio 1.0 1.1 1.0
2 n of the
National
Park
System
14 36-0137 Veterans Affairs Readjust 1.0 0.8 0.9
3 ment
Benefits
14 17-0703 DOD-Military Family 0.9 0.9 0.9
4 Housing,
Navy and
Marine
Corps
14 19-1126 State Contribu 0.9 0.9 0.9
5 tions to
Internat
ional
Organiza
tions
14 21-2050 DOD-Military Military 0.9 0.8 0.8
6 Construc
tion,
Army
14 17-1806 DOD-Military Operatio 0.8 0.8 0.9
7 n and
Maintena
nce,
Navy
Reserves
14 36-0151 Veterans Affairs General 0.8 0.9 0.8
8 Operatin
g
Expenses
14 16-0327 Labor Advances 0.7 4.7 5.0
9 to the
Unemploy
ment
Trust
Fund and
Other
Funds
15 58-0104 Federal Emergency Disaster 0.7 2.5 2.3
0 Management Agency Relief
15 75-1502 HHS Low 0.7 1.0 1.1
1 Income
Home
Energy
Assistan
ce
15 12-4155 Agriculture Rural 0.6 0.6 0.5
2 Developm
ent
Insuranc
e Fund
Liquidat
ing
Account
15 12-4141 Agriculture Rural 0.6 0.6 0.2
3 Housing
Insuranc
e Fund
Liquidat
ing
Account
15 12-4085 Agriculture Federal 0.6 0.5 0.1
4 Crop
Insuranc
e
Corporat
ion
15 69-1129 Transportation Formula 0.5 0.8 1.2
5 Grants
15 14-0804 Interior Surveys, 0.5 0.6 0.6
6 Investig
ations,
and
Research
15 86-0143 HUD S&E, 0.5 0.5 0.5
7 Manageme
nt and
Administ
ration
15 12-2081 Agriculture Rural 0.5 1.0 0.9
8 Housing
Insuranc
e Fund
Program
15 86-4072 HUD FHA 0.5 0.9 0.3
9 General
and
Special
Risk
Insuranc
e
16 16-1521 Labor Special 0.3 0.3 0.2
0 Benefits
16 83-4027 Export-Import Bank Export- 0.3 -1.3 -1.0
1 Import
Bank of
the
United
States
16 12-4338 Agriculture Commodit 0.2 0.9 0.5
2 y Credit
Corporat
ion
Guarante
ed Loans
Liquidat
ing
Account
16 86-4115 HUD Housing 0.2 0.3 0.1
3 for the
Elderly
or
Handicap
ped
16 16-0178\c Labor Payments 0.0 7.8 7.5
4 to the
Unemploy
ment
Trust
Fund
16 21-4528 DOD-Military Army 0.0 0.0 0.2
5 Conventi
onal
Ammuniti
on,
Working
Capital
Fund
16 36-4025 Veterans Affairs Loan 0.0 0.3 0.1
6 Guaranty
Revolvin
g Fund
Liquidat
ing
Account
16 75-0511 HHS Program 0.0 0.2 0.1
7 Manageme
nt
16 47-4548 GSA Informat 0.0 0.1 0.0
8 ion
Technolo
gy Fund
16 04-4505 Government Governme 0.0 0.0 0.0
9 Printing nt
Office Printing
Office
Revolvin
g Fund
17 47-4530 GSA General 0.0 0.0 0.0
0 Supply
Fund
17 20-4521 Treasury Federal 0.0 0.0 0.0
1 Financin
g Bank
17 16-0179 Labor State 0.0 0.0 0.0
2 Unemploy
ment
Insuranc
e and
Employme
nt
Service
Operatio
ns
17 36-4537 Veterans Affairs Supply 0.0 0.0 0.0
3 Fund
17 96-4902 DOD-Civil Revolvin 0.0 0.0 0.0
4 g Fund
17 86-4070 HUD FHA -0.1 -0.2 0.2
5 Mutual
Mortgage
and
Cooperat
ive
Housing
Insuranc
e Funds
17 12-4140 Agriculture Agricult -0.1 0.0 0.1
6 ural
Credit
Insuranc
e Fund
17 89-4045 Energy Bonnevil -0.2 0.6 0.6
7 le Power
Administ
ration
Fund
17 24-8440 OPM Employee -0.2 -0.1 -0.9
8 s Health
Benefits
Fund
17 12-4230 Agriculture Rural -0.2 -0.6 -1.4
9 Electrif
ication
and
Telephon
e
Liquidat
ing
Account
18 89-0226 Energy Uranium -0.3 -0.1 0.2
0 Supply
and
Enrichme
nt
Activiti
es
18 97-4930 DOD-Military Defense -0.6 -2.8 -4.9
1 Business
Operatio
ns Fund
18 24-8424 OPM Employee -1.2 -1.1 -1.1
2 s Life
Insuranc
e Fund
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a Represents a combination of accounts to ensure comparability
between original and/or revised estimates and actual outlays.
\b Reflects change in account code or title.
\c Account initiated subsequent to original estimate as a result of
amendments to the Emergency Unemployment Law (Public Law 102-164).
Sources: OMB's Budget Preparation System for fiscal years 1993 and
1994 and Department of the Treasury.
FISCAL YEAR 1992 AND 1993
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN REVISED
ESTIMATES AND ACTUAL OUTLAYS FOR
SELECTED ACCOUNTS
========================================================== Appendix II
Table II.1
Accounts With Differences From Revised
Estimates Greater Than 10 Percent in
Fiscal Years 1992 and 1993
(Dollars in billions in descending order
of 1993 absolute percent difference)
Difference Difference
as a as a
Actual percent of Actual percent of
Account Account outlay revised outlay revised
code Department title s estimate s estimate\a
-- -------- ------------ ---------- ------ ---------- ------ ------------
1 04-4505 Government Government $ 0.0 132.0 $ 0.0 -2714.1
Printing Printing
Office Office
Revolving
Fund
2 24-8440 OPM Employees -0.4 24.3 -0.9 498.4
Health
Benefits
Fund
3 22-4055 RTC RTC -9.0 -122.1 -19.2 386.2
Revolving
Fund
4 89-0226 Energy Uranium -0.3 40.1 0.2 -361.3
Supply and
Enrichment
Activities
5 51-4064 FDIC Bank 3.7 -88.9 -9.8 -345.3
Insurance
Fund
6 86-4070 HUD FHA Mutual 0.9 -603.1 0.2 -191.5
Mortgage
and
Cooperativ
e Housing
Insurance
Funds
7 12-4230 Agriculture Rural -1.0 -271.2 -1.4 145.2
Electrific
ation and
Telephone
Liquidatin
g Account
8 97-0810 DOD- Environmen 0.0 -100.3 0.0 -100.3
Military tal
Restoratio
n, Defense
9 47-4548 GSA Informatio 0.0 -89.8 0.0 -77.6
n
Technology
Fund
10 97-4930 DOD- Defense 3.2 -43.0 -4.9 71.9
Military Business
Operations
Fund
11 36-4025 Veterans Loan 0.1 -72.2 0.1 -71.4
Affairs Guaranty
Revolving
Fund
Liquidatin
g Account
12 86-4072 HUD FHA 1.1 21.8 0.3 -68.6
General
and
Special
Risk
Insurance
13 12-4141 Agriculture Rural 1.3 -18.9 0.2 -67.5
Housing
Insurance
Fund
Liquidatin
g Account
14 86-4115 HUD Housing 0.5 -25.5 0.1 -55.3
for the
Elderly or
Handicappe
d
15 12-4338 Agriculture Commodity 0.5 -46.0 0.5 -49.8
Credit
Corporatio
n
Guaranteed
Loans
Liquidatin
g Account
16 75-0511 HHS Program -0.1 -59.4 0.1 -49.6
Management
17 18-4020 Postal Postal 0.7 -20.1 0.9 -46.8
Service Service
Fund
18 51-4065 FDIC FSLIC 8.5 20.6 2.4 -38.4
Resolution
Fund
19 86-4238 HUD Guarantees -0.4 25.8 -0.5 25.5
of
Mortgage-
Backed
Securities
20 83-4027 Export- Export- -0.2 -155.9 -1.0 -24.2
Import Import
Bank Bank of
the United
States
21 64-4110 TVA Tennessee 1.5 295.1 1.6 19.4
Valley
Authority
Fund
22 57-3300 DOD- Military 0.9 21.0 0.9 -19.2
Military Constructi
on, Air
Force
23 91-1000 Education School 1.5 -12.7 2.0 18.5
Improvemen
t Programs
24 20-0904 Treasury Refunding 3.3 23.9 2.1 -18.0
Internal
Revenue
Collection
s,
Interest
25 86-0194 HUD Assistance 1.5 19.5 2.5 -17.8
for the
Renewal of
Expiring
Section 8
Subsidy
Contracts
26 16-1521 Labor Special 0.2 16.7 0.2 -16.6
Benefits
27 91-0230 Education Federal 1.5 -20.4 3.2 16.5
Family
Education
Loan
Liquidatin
g Account
28 21-2033 DOD- Weapons 2.2 -17.5 2.1 16.5
Military Procuremen
t, Army
29 11-1021 Funds Functional 1.4 27.2 1.5 15.3
Appropriated Developmen
to the t
President Assistance
Program
30 97-0300 DOD- Procuremen 1.4 -39.1 1.7 -13.2
Military t,
Defense-
Wide
31 20-8145 EPA Hazardous 1.3 -13.1 1.4 -11.3
Substance
Superfund
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a The fiscal year 1993 revised estimate for these accounts is shown
in appendix I.
Sources: OMB's Budget Preparation System for fiscal years 1991-1993
and Department of the Treasury.
Table II.2
Accounts With Differences From Revised
Estimates Greater Than $250 Million in
Fiscal Years 1992 and 1993
(Dollars in billions in descending order
of 1993 absolute dollar difference)
Actual Actual
outlays outlays
Actual minus Actual minus
Account Account outlay revised outlay revised
code Department title s estimate s estimate\a
-- -------- ------------ ----------- ------ ---------- ------ -----------
1 22-4055 RTC RTC $ - $-49.4 $ - $-15.2
Revolving 9.0 19.2
Fund
2 51-4064 FDIC Bank 3.7 -29.3 -9.8 -13.8
Insurance
Fund
3 75-0512 HHS Grants to 67.8 -4.7 75.8 -4.7
States for
Medicaid
4 20-0550 Treasury Interest on 292.3 -2.2 292.5 -2.2
the Public
Debt
5 97-4930 DOD- Defense 3.2 -2.4 -4.9 -2.0
Military Business
Operations
Fund
6 20-8004 HHS Supplementa 50.3 -3.9 54.3 -2.0
l Medical
Insurance
Trust Fund
7 57-3400 DOD- Operation 19.9 -1.1 20.7 1.5
Military and
Maintenance
, Air Force
8 51-4065 FDIC FSLIC 8.5 1.4 2.4 -1.5
Resolution
Fund
9 69-8083 Transportati Federal- 15.2 -0.6 16.3 -1.3
on Aid,
Highway
Trust Fund
10 75-0406 HHS Supplementa 19.4 -0.3 22.6 -1.0
l Security
Income
Program
86-0164 HUD Annual 13.6 -0.5 14.4 1.0
11 Contributio
ns for
Assisted
Housing
Programs
12 97-0810 DOD- Environment 0.0 -1.3 0.0 -0.9
Military al
Restoration
, Defense
13 12-4230 Agriculture Rural -1.0 -1.5 -1.4 -0.8
Electrifica
tion and
Telephone
Liquidating
Account
14 21-2035 DOD- Other 3.8 0.3 3.9 0.6
Military Procurement
, Army
15 57-3010 DOD- Aircraft 13.2 -0.5 11.4 0.6
Military Procurement
, Air Force
16 20-8042 Labor Unemploymen 41.3 5.6 39.7 -0.5
t Trust
Fund
17 17-1611 DOD- Shipbuildin 11.0 0.8 10.1 0.5
Military g and
Conversion,
Navy
18 20-0904 Treasury Refunding 3.3 0.6 2.1 -0.5
Internal
Revenue
Collection,
Interest
19 75-0580 HHS Payments to 39.4 -0.7 44.7 0.5
Health Care
Trust Funds
20 91-0230 Education Federal 1.5 -0.4 3.2 0.5
Family
Education
Loan
Liquidating
Account
21 12-4338 Agriculture Commodity 0.5 -0.4 0.5 -0.5
Credit
Corporation
Guaranteed
Loans
Liquidating
Account
22 12-4336 Agriculture Commodity 9.0 -1.9 15.1 -0.4
Credit
Corporation
23 57-3600 DOD- RDT&E, Air 12.0 -0.8 12.3 -0.4
Military Force
24 12-4141 Agriculture Rural 1.3 -0.3 0.2 -0.4
Housing
Insurance
Fund
Liquidating
Account
25 97-0100 DOD- Operation 14.8 -1.0 9.6 0.4
Military and
Maintenance
, Defense-
Agencies
26 86-4070 HUD FHA Mutual 0.9 1.1 0.2 0.4
Mortgage
and
Cooperative
Housing
Insurance
Funds
27 17-1810 DOD- Other 6.1 0.6 6.4 0.4
Military Procurement
, Navy
28 17-1507 DOD- Weapons 5.9 0.5 4.7 -0.3
Military Procurement
, Navy
29 11-8242 Funds Foreign 12.4 1.1 13.2 0.3
Appropriated Military
to the Sales Trust
President Fund
30 83-4027 Export- Export- -0.2 -0.7 -1.0 0.3
Import Import Bank
Bank of the
United
States
31 21-2033 DOD- Weapons 2.2 -0.5 2.1 0.3
Military Procurement
, Army
32 89-0240 Energy Atomic 4.4 -0.4 4.3 -0.3
Energy,
Weapons
Activities
33 64-4110 TVA Tennessee 1.5 1.1 1.6 0.3
Valley
Authority
Fund
34 24-8135 OPM Civil 33.7 -0.4 34.9 0.3
Service
Retirement
and
Disability
Trust Fund
35 97-0300 DOD- Procurement 1.4 -0.9 1.7 -0.3
Military , Defense-
Wide
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a The fiscal year 1993 revised estimate for these accounts is shown
in appendix I.
Sources: OMB's Budget Preparation System for fiscal years 1991-1993
and Department of the Treasury.
CALENDAR YEAR 1993 ECONOMIC
ASSUMPTIONS
========================================================= Appendix III
Blue
CBO OMB Chip Actual
-------------------- -------- -------- -------- --------
Real Gross Domestic
Product\a
(percent change, 2.9\b
4th quarter over
4th quarter)
Early 1992 3.3 3.0 3.0
Midyear 1992 3.2 3.0 3.1
Early 1993 2.8 2.8 3.0
Midyear 1993 2.3 2.3 2.2
Consumer Price
Index\c
(percent change, 2.7\b
4th quarter over
4th quarter)
Early 1992 3.6 3.3 3.8
Midyear 1992 3.4 3.3 3.6
Early 1993 2.8 2.8 3.2
Midyear 1993 3.4 2.9 3.3
Unemployment Rate\d
(annual average) 6.8\e
Early 1992 6.4 6.5 6.3
Midyear 1992 6.8 6.6 6.7
Early 1993 7.1 7.1 7.0
Midyear 1993 6.9 7.0 6.9
Long-term interest 5.9\e
rate\f
Early 1992 7.1 6.9 7.5
Midyear 1992 6.9 7.0 7.6
Early 1993 6.7 6.7 6.9
Midyear 1993 6.0 6.1 6.1
Short-term interest 3.0\e
rate\g
Early 1992 5.1 5.1 5.0
Midyear 1992 3.7 4.7 4.4
Early 1993 3.1 3.2 3.5
Midyear 1993 3.1 3.1 3.1
------------------------------------------------------------
\a Gross domestic product estimates are calculated using base year
1987 dollars.
\b Computed as compound annual average change using quarterly data.
\c All estimates use the consumer price index for urban consumers.
\d All estimates use the civilian labor force.
\e Computed as a simple average of quarterly rates.
\f OMB and CBO estimates are for 10-year Treasury notes. Blue Chip
does not project a similar estimate. The Blue Chip estimates
presented in the table are constructed by CBO based on an estimated
relationship between rates on 10-year bonds and the Blue Chip
projected Aaa bond rate.
\g Estimates are for 3-month Treasury bills.
Sources: Office of Management and Budget and Congressional Budget
Office.
MAJOR CONTRIBUTORS TO THIS REPORT
========================================================== Appendix IV
ACCOUNTING AND INFORMATION
MANAGEMENT DIVISION, WASHINGTON,
D.C.
Christine E. Bonham, Assistant Director, (202) 512-9576
James R. McTigue, Jr., Evaluator-in-Charge
Andrew D. Eschtruth, Evaluator
Elizabeth A. McClarin, Auditor