"What do trade agreements really do?" a new NBER working paper by Dani Rodrik.
Abstract:
As trade agreements have evolved and gone beyond import tariffs and quotas into regulatory rules and harmonization, they have become more difficult to fit into received economic theory. Nevertheless, most economists continue to regard trade agreements such as the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) favorably.The default view seems to be that these arrangements get us closer to free trade by reducing transaction costs associated with regulatory differences or explicit protectionism. An alternative perspective is that trade agreements are the result of rent-seeking, self-interested behavior on the part of politically well-connected firms - international banks, pharmaceutical companies, multinational firms. They may result in freer, mutually beneficial trade, through exchange of market access. But they are as likely to produce purely redistributive outcomes under the guise of "freer trade."
My commentary will follow at a later date.
A very readable overview of monetary policy in the United States by Robert L. Hetzel, a staff economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond.
Abstract:
Since the establishment of the Federal Reserve System in 1913, policymakers have always pursued the goal of economic stability. At the same time, their understanding of the world and of the role of monetary policy has changed dramatically. This evolution of views provides a laboratory for understanding what kinds of monetary policy stabilize the economy and what kinds destabilize it.
Available here.
A study that should have implications for tax reform. An optimal tax system collects revenue from the broadest base. Economists have long believed that the homeowner mortgage deduction misallocates capital to the housing sector. This new study, "Do People Respond to the Mortage Interest Deduction?: Quasi-Experimental Evidence from Denmark," from Jonathan Gruber, Amalie Jensen and Henrik Kleven finds that prospective homeowners are not swayed by the tax incentive.
Using linked housing and tax records from Denmark combined with a major reform of the mortgage interest deduction in the late 1980s, we carry out the first comprehensive long-term study of how tax subsidies affect housing decisions. The reform introduced a large and sharp reduction in the mortgage deduction for top-rate taxpayers, while reducing it much less or not at all for lower-rate taxpayers. We present three main findings. First, the mortgage deduction has a precisely estimated zero effect on homeownership. This holds even in the very long run. Second, the mortgage deduction has a sizeable impact on housing demand at the intensive margin, inducing homeowners to buy larger and more expensive houses. Third, the largest effect of the mortgage deduction is on household financial decisions, inducing them to increase indebtedness. These findings suggest that the mortgage interest deduction distorts the behavior of homeowners at the intensive margin, but is ineffective at promoting homeownership at the extensive margin and any externalities that may be associated with it.
The paper is available at the National Bureau of Economic Research.
