Yes / Purpose – The objective of this study is to understand the budgetary role of national legislatures in Euro Area (EA) countries and to analyse implications for fiscal discipline. Design/methodology/approach – Building on the budget institutions literature, a legislative budgetary power index for all the 19 EA countries is constructed using OECD and European Commission data as well as data generated from questionnaires to national authorities. A two-way fixed effects panel data model is then used to assess the effect of legislative budgetary power on the budget balance in the EA during 2006-15. Findings - Overall, in the EA, formal legislative powers vis-à-vis the national budgetary process are weak but there is more legislative involvement in SGP procedures and legislative budgetary organisational capacity is generally quite good. In contrast to the traditional view in the budget institutions literature, our empirical findings show that strong legislative budgetary power does not necessarily result in larger budget deficits. Research limitations/implications – Data on legislative budgeting was available from different sources and timeseries data was very limited. Practical implications – There is scope to improve democratic legitimacy of the national budgetary process in the EA, without necessarily jeopardising fiscal discipline. Originality/value – The constructed legislative budgetary power index covers all the 19 EA countries and has a broad scope covering various novel institutional characteristics. The empirical analysis contributes to the scarce literature on the impact of legislative budgeting on fiscal discipline.

This study assesses the quality of national budget institutions and legislative budgetary power in the Euro Area (EA) and examines their implications on fiscal discipline. Following the sovereign debt crises, common EA requirements have been introduced for national budget institutions, most notably for fiscal rules and independent fiscal councils. Meanwhile, the legislature has a key role to ensure that budgetary decisions are democratically legitimate, but strong legislative budgetary power is generally associated with less fiscal restraint. Two comprehensive composite indices are produced, based on recent data which captures reforms implemented after the Crisis. The findings show that overall, budget institutions in the EA are of medium quality, whilst legislative budgetary power is weak. Notwithstanding the thrust for a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach, the specific characteristics of budget institutions differ considerably among the EA countries. Furthermore, results from a two-way fixed effects panel model for 2006-2015 show a positive relationship between the quality of budget institutions and the budget balance, but, in contrast to previous studies, the effect is rather weak. Being supra-nationally mandated, recent reforms to budget institutions in EA member states may suffer from a lack of ownership, thus impinging on their effectiveness to instil fiscal discipline. A qualitative case study on Malta provides further insight into the limitations of centrally-mandated institutional reforms. Finally, the findings suggest that stronger legislative budgetary power does not necessarily jeopardise fiscal discipline, if this involves a broad role of the legislature in the budgetary process, beyond amendment powers.