We present an experiment designed to test the Modigliani-Miller theorem. Applying a general equilibrium approach and not allowing for arbitrage among firms with different capital structures, we find that, in accordance with the theorem, participants well recognize changes in the systematic risk of equity associated with increasing leverage and, accordingly, demand higher rate of return. Yet, this adjustment is not perfect: subjects underestimate the systematic risk of low-leveraged equity whereas they overestimate the systematic risk of high-leveraged equity, resulting in a U-shaped cost of capital. A (control) individual decision-making experiment, eliciting several points on individual demand and supply curves for shares, provides some support for the theorem.

How does the allocation of scarce jobs and production influence their supply? We present the results of a macroeconomics laboratory experiment that investigates the effects of alternative rationing schemes on economic stability. Participants play the role of worker-consumers who interact in labor and output markets. All output, which yields a reward to participants, must be produced through costly labor. Automated firms hire workers to produce output so long as there is sufficient demand for all production. In every period either output or labor hours are rationed. Random queue, equitable, and priority (i.e., property rights) rationing schemes are compared. Production volatility is the lowest under a priority rationing rule and is significantly higher under a scheme that allocates the scarce resource through a random queue. Production converges toward the steady state under a priority rule, but can diverge to significantly lower levels under a random queue or equitable rule where there is the opportunity for and perception of free-riding. At the individual level, rationing in the output market leads consumer-workers to supply less labor in subsequent periods. A model of myopic decision-making is developed to rationalize the results.

The international migration literature has highlighted four key stylized facts from the perspective of the source country: (i) Migration rates are notably high, with some nations seeing over ten percent of their population living abroad. (ii) Certain developing countries have witnessed a significant exodus of skilled workers, commonly referred to as brain drain, spanning several decades. (iii) Migrants often maintain strong ties to their country of origin, evidenced by the substantial remittances they send back to their relatives. (iv) Migration is not necessarily permanent, as a considerable number of individuals return to their home country after a period spent abroad. In this paper, we present a theoretical model that endogenously explains these facts. Our model allows us to explore key issues in migration literature from a theoretical standpoint. We analyze the general equilibrium effects of migration, its long-term implications, and its welfare consequences. Additionally, we investigate whether the combined impact of return migration and remittances can counterbalance the effects of skilled migration. Finally, we evaluate the efficacy of policy interventions designed to mitigate the adverse effects of brain drain.

We quantify the importance of idiosyncratic health risk in a calibrated general equilibrium model of Social Security. We construct an overlapping generations model with rational-expectations households, idiosyncratic labor income and health risk, profit-maximizing firms, incomplete insurance markets, and a government that provides pensions and health insurance. We calibrate this model to the US economy and perform two computational experiments: $\left (i\right)$ cutting Social Security’s payroll tax, and $\left (ii\right)$ modifying Social Security’s benefit-earnings rule. Our findings suggest that health risk amplifies the welfare implications of both experiments: downsizing Social Security always leads to higher overall welfare, but the welfare gain is larger when we account for health risk, and increasing the progressivity of Social Security’s benefit-earnings rule has a larger positive effect on welfare in the presence of health risk. We also find that allowing households additional tools to self-insure against health risk weakens the precautionary motive, so our experiments have similar welfare implications both with and without health risk.

This article fills a gap in the literature by quantifying impacts of fossil fuel subsidy reform on trade (inflow and outflow) in an oil-producing, “almost small”, economy, using Kuwait as an example. It employs a two-region economy-wide model with oligopoly behaviour in a general equilibrium framework. The model embodies unique elements of Kuwait's economic structure, idiosyncratic rigidities, and distortions, including oligopolistic industrial structure and labour markets. Simulations show that energy subsidies have minimal effects on trade and on non-energy exports, largely due to the pervasiveness of oligopolies that sustain large markups and their collusive pricing. Reforming energy subsidies generates higher pro-trade effects if implemented during low (not high) oil prices because its negative effects are partially offset by efficiency gains and reduction in oligopoly markups. Yet, contrary to claims by proponents of reforms, these effects remain largely constrained unless appropriate incentives are introduced. These results have important policy implications. In developing oil-exporting economies with pervasive oligopolies, microeconomic reform can be a channel through which to achieve pro-trade effects of energy subsidy reform. Further, benefits beyond export expansion, such as higher economic efficiency, could be better motivators of energy subsidy reform in oil economies.

We use a New Keynesian DSGE model with search frictions on the housing market to evaluate how financing a labor tax reduction by higher property taxation affects the real economy and welfare. Search on the housing market enables us to explicitly model stocks and flows, which is necessary to differentiate between recurrent property taxes (levied on stocks) and property transaction taxes (levied to flows). We find that using recurrent property taxation as financing instrument outperforms other instruments although all policy measures increase aggregate economy-wide welfare. Our simulations suggest that using property transaction taxation as financing instrument is the least favorable measure.

The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) renegotiation has resulted in an updated agreement known as the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA). Given the contentious nature of the renegotiation process, we analyze the impacts of the USMCA relative to a “what if” scenario of failed NAFTA renegotiation to examine the economy-wide impacts of USMCA on bilateral trade, production, consumption, prices, and domestic and cross-border labor markets. Our results show that, had NAFTA renegotiation failed, the ensuing economic conditions would have created incentive for more, not fewer, migrant workers to enter the United States. USMCA benefits Mexican and Canadian consumers marginally but harms U.S. consumers slightly.

In Mali's current context, where the crops sector is particularly exposed and vulnerable to agricultural drought, this study assesses the economy-wide impacts of such events and the potential effectiveness of some adaptation strategies. Using a dynamic computable general equilibrium model, we conduct counterfactual simulations of various scenarios accounting for different levels of intensity and frequency of droughts over a 15-year period. We first show how mild, moderate and intense droughts currently experienced by the country affect its economic performance and considerably degrade the welfare of its households. We also show how these negative impacts could be aggravated in the future by the likely increased number of intense droughts threatened by global climate change. However, we finally show that there appears to be some room for Mali to maneuver in terms of drought-risk management policies, such as fostering the use of drought-tolerant crop varieties, improving drought early warning systems or extending irrigation capacities.

A higher labor tax rate increases the equilibrium real interest rate and reduces the equilibrium wage in a heterogeneous-agent model with endogenous savings and indivisible labor supply decisions. I show that these general equilibrium (GE) adjustments, in particular of the real interest rate, reinforce the negative employment impact of higher labor taxes. However, the representative-agent version of the model, which generates similar aggregate employment responses to labor tax changes, implies that GE feedback is neutral. The cross-country panel data reveal that the negative association between labor tax rates and the extensive margin labor supply is significantly and robustly weaker in small open economies where the interest rate is less tightly linked to domestic circumstances. This empirical evidence supports the transmission mechanism of labor tax changes for employment in the heterogeneous-agent model.

Advances in theoretical and computable general equilibrium modeling brought their conceptual foundations more in line with standard microeconomic constructs. This reduced the theoretical gap between welfare measurements using a partial or a general equilibrium approach. However, the separation of the partial and general equilibrium literatures lingers in many applications that this manuscript seeks to bridge. The now shared conceptual foundations, the importance of functional specification, the role of common price movements and closure rules are discussed. The continuing stricture in U.S. Government guidelines against including secondary effects in welfare measures is questioned.