[The surge in public debt triggered by the financial crisis has raised uncertainty about future tax pressure and economic activity. We examine the asset pricing effects of fiscal policies in a production-based general equilibrium model in which taxation affects corporate decisions by: (1) distorting profits and investment; (2) reducing the cost of debt through a tax shield; and (3) depressing productivity growth. In settings with recursive preferences, these three tax-based channels generate sizable risk premia, making tax uncertainty a first-order concern. We document further that corporate tax smoothing can substantially alter the effects of public expenditure shocks.]

A standard assumption of structural models of default is that firms' assets evolve exogenously. In this paper, we examine the importance of accounting for investment options in models of credit risk. In the presence of financing and investment frictions, firm‐level variables that proxy for asset composition are significant determinants of credit spreads beyond leverage and asset volatility, because they capture the systematic risk of firms' assets. Cross‐sectional studies of credit spreads that fail to control for the interdependence of leverage and investment decisions are unlikely to be very informative. Such frictions also give rise to a realistic term structure of credit spreads in a production economy.

We document that the increasing polarization in Tobin’s Q within industries is closely connected to the growing divergence in rents and the emergence of superstar firms over the past four decades, while discount rates and growth rates did not exhibit the same increasing dispersion. We explain these industry polarization trends in an estimated general equilibrium model where each industry consists of large superstar oligopolists and small monopolistically competitive firms with endogenous transitions between them. Small firms make investments in speculative innovation to increase their probability of becoming superstars. Our model estimation finds that rising entry barriers in both small and superstar firms contribute to rising polarization in markups, but the rising barriers to creating small firms and increasing tastes for goods produced by superstars account for most of the divergence in Q. Stunting the creation of small firms generates greater incentives for speculative innovation, magnifying the impact of market power dispersion on industry polarization in Q.

Which financial frictions drive firms’ financing constraints? We structurally estimate dynamic firm financing models embedding many financial frictions, on panels of public firms and private firms. We focus on limited enforcement, moral hazard, and trade-off models and assess which models rationalize best observed corporate policies across various samples. Our tests, based on empirical policy function benchmarks, favor trade-off models for larger public firms, limited commitment models for smaller public firms, and moral hazard models for Private firms. Our estimates suggest significant financing constraints due to agency frictions and highlight the importance of identifying their sources for firm valuation.

In contrast to cash holdings, credit lines give firms financial flexibility by providing liquidity contingent on realized funding needs, but they are often limited by collateral and covenants. We embed this trade-off into an estimated dynamic model of financing and investment. Our model highlights the relevance of drawing down credit lines to fund investment options in an effective way and quantitatively matches well the levels and dynamics of cash, credit lines, and leverage. In the cross-section, modeling credit lines as contingent liquidity provides novel empirical predictions and rationalizes several stylized facts regarding credit line usage, covenant violations, and cash holdings.

This paper jointly examines the link between competition and expected returns in the time series and in the cross-section. To this end, we build a general equilibrium model where markups vary because of firm entry with oligopolistic competition. When concentration is high, markups are more sensitive to entry risk. We find that higher markups are associated with higher expected returns over time and across industries, in line with the data. The model can also quantitatively account for the persistent rise in aggregate risk premiums and macroeconomic volatility associated with the secular increase trend industry concentration since the mid-1980s.

We revisit evidence of real effects of uncertainty shocks in the context of interest rate uncertainty. We document that adverse movements in interest rate uncertainty predict significant slowdowns in real activity, both at the aggregate and at the firm levels. To understand how firms cope with interest rate uncertainty, we develop a dynamic model of corporate investment, financing, and risk management and test it using a rich data set on corporate swap usage. We find that interest rate uncertainty depresses financially constrained firms’ investments in spite of hedging opportunities, because risk management by means of swaps is effectively risky. Received December 11, 2016; editorial decision January 26, 2018 by Editor Itay Goldstein.

We examine the asset pricing implications of a production economy whose long‐term growth prospects are endogenously determined by innovation and R&D. In equilibrium, R&D endogenously drives a small, persistent component in productivity that generates long‐run uncertainty about economic growth. With recursive preferences, households fear that persistent downturns in economic growth are accompanied by low asset valuations and command high‐risk premia in asset markets. Empirically, we find substantial evidence for innovation‐driven low‐frequency movements in aggregate growth rates and asset market valuations. In short, equilibrium growth is risky.

We develop a theory linking “misallocation,” i.e., dispersion in marginal products of capital (MPK), to macroeconomic risk. Dispersion in MPK depends on (i) heterogeneity in firm-level risk and (ii) the magnitude of risk premia. Stock market-based measures imply that risk considerations explain about 25% of MPK dispersion among US firms and rationalize a large persistent component in firm-level MPK, consistent with the micro-level data. Time-varying risk premia lead to countercyclical MPK dispersion alongside procyclical capital reallocation. Risk-based MPK dispersion in part shapes the dynamic behavior of aggregate productivity, namely, its long-run level, volatility and skewness.