A wide body of empirical evidence finds that around 25 percent of fiscal stimulus payments (e.g., tax rebates) are spent on nondurable household consumption in the quarter that they are received.To interpret this fact, we develop a structural economic model where households can hold two assets: a low-return liquid asset (e.g., cash, checking account) and a high-return illiquid asset that carries a transaction cost (e.g., housing, retirement account).The optimal life-cycle pattern of portfolio choice implies that many households in the model are "wealthy hand-to-mouth": they hold little or no liquid wealth despite owning sizeable quantities of illiquid assets.They therefore display large propensities to consume out of additional transitory income, and small propensities to consume out of news about future income.We document the existence of such households in data from the Survey of Consumer Finances.A version of the model parameterized to the 2001 tax rebate episode yields consumption responses to fiscal stimulus payments that are in line with the evidence, and an order of magnitude larger than in the standard "one-asset" framework.The model's nonlinearities with respect to the size of the rebate, its degree of phasing-out, and aggregate economic conditions have implications for policy design.

Fiscal stimulus payments (i.e., direct lump-sum payments from the government to households) were used in the recessions of 2001 and 2008 in an attempt to simultaneously alleviate households' economic hardship and stimulate aggregate demand. Despite the similarities between the two stimulus policies, there were important differences in both their design and the prevailing economic conditions. We use the model of Kaplan and Violante (2013) to compare the consumption response to these policies. Consistent with empirical evidence from microdata, we find that the consumption response was around one-third lower in 2008, primarily due to the larger size of the payments.

We develop a model with partial insurance against idiosyncratic wage shocks to quantify risk sharing. Closed-form solutions are obtained for equilibrium allocations and for moments of the joint distribution of consumption, hours, and wages. We prove identification and demonstrate how labor supply data are informative about risk sharing. The model, estimated with US data over the period 1967–2006, implies that (i) 39 percent of permanent wage shocks pass through to consumption; (ii ) the share of wage risk insured increased until the early 1980s; and (iii) preference heterogeneity is important in accounting for observed dispersion in consumption and hours.

We develop a framework where mismatch between vacancies and job seekers across sectors translates into higher unemployment by lowering the aggregate job-finding rate. We use this framework to measure the contribution of mismatch to the recent rise in US unemployment by exploiting two sources of cross-sectional data on vacancies, JOLTS and HWOL. Our calculations indicate that mismatch, across industries and three-digit occupations, explains at most one-third of the total observed increase in the unemployment rate. Occupational mismatch has become especially more severe for college graduates, and in the West of the United States. Geographical mismatch unemployment plays no apparent role.