This paper formalizes a classic idea that in second-best environments trade can induce welfare losses: incremental income losses from distortions can outweigh trade gains. In a Melitz model with distortionary taxes, we derive sufficient statistics for welfare gains/losses and show departures from the efficient case (Arkolakis, Costinot, and Rodríguez-Clare 2012) can be captured by the gap between an input and output share and domestic extensive margin elasticities. The loss reflects an endogenous selection of more subsidized firms into exporting. Using Chinese manufacturing data in 2005 and model-inferred firm-level distortions, we demonstrate that a sizable negative fiscal externality can potentially offset conventional gains.

We consider a multi-battle team contest in which players from two rival teams form pairwise matches to fight in distinct component battles, which are carried out sequentially or (partially) simultaneously. A team wins if and only if its players win a majority of battles. Each player benefits from his team's win, while he can also receive a private reward for winning his own battle. We find that the outcomes of past battles do not distort the outcomes of future battles. Neither the total expected effort nor the overall outcome of the contest depends on the contest's temporal structure or its feedback policy.

We examine the evolution of economics research using a machine-learning-based classification of publications into fields and styles. The changing field distribution of publications would not seem to favor empirical papers. But economics' empirical shift is a within-field phenomenon; even fields that traditionally emphasize theory have gotten more empirical. Empirical work has also come to be more cited than theoretical work. The citation shift is sharpened when citations are weighted by journal importance. Regression analyses of citations per paper show empirical publications reaching citation parity with theoretical publications around 2000. Within fields and journals, however, empirical work is now cited more.

We quantify reference dependence and loss aversion in the housing market using rich Danish administrative data. Our structural model includes loss aversion, reference dependence, financial constraints, and a sale decision, and matches key nonparametric moments, including a “hockey stick” in listing prices with nominal gains, and bunching at zero realized nominal gains. Households derive substantial utility from gains over the original house purchase price; losses affect households roughly 2.5 times more than gains. The model helps explain the positive correlation between aggregate house prices and turnover, but cannot explain visible attenuation in reference dependence when households are more financially constrained.