Search results

According to independently developed hypotheses by Michael Darby (1975) and Martin Feldstein (1976) nominal interest rates will increase during an inflationary period by an amount which is greater than the expected rate of inflation. This occurs in order to compensate lenders for the expected loss of principal and for the taxation of the interest earned. While many authors comment on the plausibility of the Darby‐Feldstein effect, it has been difficult to support this hypotheses empirically.

In an earlier paper published in this journal, Michael Bond and Gerald Smolen (1986) set out to test for the presence of the Darby‐Feldstein effect. They regressed the nominal rate of taxable long‐term securities on the nominal yield of long‐term tax exempt municipal securities. They conclude that the parameter for the explanatory variable, which is significantly greater than one, serves as proof of the Darby‐Feldstein effect. In addition, the authors maintain that this approach yields the prospects of an inverted Fisher condition irrelevant.

William Gissy (1987) is absolutely correct when he asserts that the existence of a complete inverted Fisher Effect renders our test for the Darby Effect a simple measure of tax arbitrage. His mathematical development of this is well done and completely valid. Our statement on page 59 of our article (1986) that “it is irrelevant whether movements in expected inflation are reflected primarily in nominal rates or real rates” should have pointed out that, in the case of an inverted Fisher Effect, the statistical analysis does not measure the Darby‐Feldstein Effect. We do, however, have a few differences with the above point of view.

At the height of the recession in the early 1980s, a multitude of state and locally sponsored housing finance agency programs were legislatively introduced in response to populist pressure. Many of these controversial programs utilized lower cost municipal bonds to subsidize private sector housing programs and had remarkable diversity in their stated objectives. This study focuses on one of these programs, the Ohio Housing Finance Program, which purported to address the needs of mainly first‐time home buyers. Housing program evaluations,while rarely done, are very important where publicborrowing is used to support them. Using county‐level demographic data for 1983, the empirical results suggest that the Ohio program’s target clientele, first time homebuyers, were the major beneficiaries of the program.

The expanded sovereign bond portfolios from the sizeable public interventions in the financial sector during the current crisis need close monitoring and analysis of emerging vulnerabilities. This chapter presents some conventional and new measures of market, credit, and liquidity risks for government bond portfolios, considered from the perspective of a sovereign debt manager. In particular, it examines duration, convexity, and VaR statistics as measures of market exposure; the contingent-claims approach as the most promising measure of credit risk exposure; and a VaR statistic as a measure of liquidity risk.

This paper aims to introduce a method to couple truss finite elements to the material point method (MPM). It presents modeling reinforced material using MPM and describes how to consider the bond behavior between the reinforcement and the continuum.

The embedded approach is used for coupling reinforcement bars with continuum elements. This description is achieved by coupling continuum elements in the background mesh to the reinforcement bars, which are described using truss- finite elements. The coupling is implemented between the truss elements and the continuum elements in the background mesh through bond elements that allow for freely distributed truss elements independent of the continuum element discretization. The bond elements allow for modeling the bond behavior between the reinforcement and the continuum.

The paper introduces a novel method to include the reinforcement bars in the MPM applications. The reinforcement bars can be modeled without any constraints with a bond-slip constitutive model being considered.

As modeling of reinforced materials is required in a wide range of applications, a method to include the reinforcement into the MPM framework is required. The proposed approach allows for modeling reinforced material within MPM applications.

Interest rate risk, i.e. the risk of changes in the interest rate term structure, is of high relevance in insurers' risk management. Due to large capital investments in interest rate sensitive assets such as bonds, interest rate risk plays a considerable role for deriving the solvency capital requirement (SCR) in the context of Solvency II. This paper seeks to address these issues.

In addition to the Solvency II standard model, the author applies the model of Gatzert and Martin for introducing a partial internal model for the market risk of bond exposures. After introducing calibration methods for short rate models, the author quantifies interest rate and credit risk for corporate and government bonds and demonstrates that the type of process can have a considerable impact despite comparable underlying input data.

The results show that, in general, the SCR for interest rate risk derived from the standard model of Solvency II tends to the SCR achieved by the short rate model from Vasicek, while the application of the Cox, Ingersoll, and Ross model leads to a lower SCR. For low‐rated bonds, the internal models approximate each other and, moreover, show a considerable underestimation of credit risk in the Solvency II model.

The aim of this paper is to assess model risk with focus on bonds in the market risk module of Solvency II regarding the underlying interest rate process and input parameters.

The Bureau of Economics in the Federal Trade Commission has a three-part role in the Agency and the strength of its functions changed over time depending on the preferences and ideology of the FTC’s leaders, developments in the field of economics, and the tenor of the times. The over-riding current role is to provide well considered, unbiased economic advice regarding antitrust and consumer protection law enforcement cases to the legal staff and the Commission. The second role, which long ago was primary, is to provide reports on investigations of various industries to the public and public officials. This role was more recently called research or “policy R&D”. A third role is to advocate for competition and markets both domestically and internationally. As a practical matter, the provision of economic advice to the FTC and to the legal staff has required that the economists wear “two hats,” helping the legal staff investigate cases and provide evidence to support law enforcement cases while also providing advice to the legal bureaus and to the Commission on which cases to pursue (thus providing “a second set of eyes” to evaluate cases). There is sometimes a tension in those functions because building a case is not the same as evaluating a case. Economists and the Bureau of Economics have provided such services to the FTC for over 100 years proving that a sub-organization can survive while playing roles that sometimes conflict. Such a life is not, however, always easy or fun.

Long-term interest rates of small open economies (SOE) correlate strongly with the USA long-term rate. Can central banks in those countries decouple from the United States? An estimated Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium (DSGE) model for the UK (vis-á-vis the USA) establishes three structural empirical results: (1) Comovement arises due to nominal fluctuations, not through real rates or term premia; (2) the cause of comovement is the central bank of the SOE accommodating foreign inflation trends, rather than systematically curbing them; and (3) SOE may find themselves much more affected by changes in USA inflation trends than the United States itself. All three results are shown to be intuitive and backed by off-model evidence.