-
The Macroeconomic Implications of Coholding
with Andrej Mijakovic.
April 2024.
Bank of Canada Staff Working Paper 2024-16.
[abstract]
In the United States, over 25% of households are coholders who simultaneously borrow on credit cards and hold liquid assets. This generates a rich distribution of gross wealth positions that underpins the distribution of net wealth often used to calibrate macroeconomic models. We show that, beyond their role in constructing net wealth, gross positions in liquid assets and liquid debt are important in determining how households consume, save, and repay debt in response to positive income shocks. We build a quantitative model that generates the coholding observed in the data and matches observed marginal propensities to consume, save, and repay debt. The model highlights that fiscal transfers are more effective in stimulating demand if targeted at households with low gross positions instead of low net liquid wealth, while debt relief is less effective overall in the short run but achieves large consumption gains in the long run.
-
Backfiring in Bad Times: When Rent Control Keeps Rent Too High
with Geneviève Vallée.
April 2024.
[abstract]
Rent control, intended to benefit renters by capping rent increases, may disincentivize landlords from lowering rents during temporary negative demand shocks because they are unable to quickly increase rent afterward. To test this prediction, I use a unique combination of exogenous variation in rent control policy in Toronto and a negative demand shock induced by the COVID-19 pandemic. In line with theory, rent per square foot decreased by 1.7% for rent controlled units and 4.7% for exempt units. Using a model of differentiated demand, I construct a counterfactual exercise and estimate that in the absence of rent control, rent would have decreased by 8.3% for rent-controlled units and 8.1% for exempt units.
-
Targeted vs. Timely Fiscal Stimulus Payments.
March 2024.
[abstract]
This paper analyzes the tradeoff between targeted versus timely fiscal stimulus payments in a quantitative two-sector HANK model. In response to a negative sectoral shock, fiscal policy is specified as the total size of transfers, the degree of targeting towards households in the affected sector, and the length of periods until the policy can be implemented. The key trade-off in the model is that the degree of targeting is increasing in the delay until policy can be implemented. In the baseline calibration of symmetric equilibrium with one household wholly employed in each sector, the key result is that fully targeting the stimulus program to the household in the affected sector yields less total welfare than intermediate levels of targeting.
-
Evaluating the Impact of Economic Impact Payments
December 2020.
[abstract]
As part of the CARES Act, the IRS distributed $300 billion in Economic Impact Payments (EIPs) directly to US households. In the Census Bureau’s Household Pulse Survey (HPS), almost 75% of households receiving an EIP reported mostly spending it. Conditioning on labor status, 63% of employed households reported mostly spending their EIPs, compared to 84% of unemployed households. Both types of households reported spending largely on consumption goods, but unemployed households tended to pay regular bills while employed households paid down debt or increased savings. The evidence suggests that in designing an untargeted stimulus program and trading off potential efficacy for timeliness, Economic Impact Payments were overall very effective in supporting consumer spending.