We review the main identification strategies and empirical evidence on the role of expectations in the New Keynesian Phillips curve, paying particular attention to the issue of weak identification. Our goal is to provide a clear understanding of the role of expectations that integrates across the different papers and specifications in the literature. We discuss the properties of the various limited-information econometric methods used in the literature and provide explanations of why they produce conflicting results. Using a common dataset and a flexible empirical approach, we find that researchers are faced with substantial specification uncertainty, as different combinations of various a priori reasonable specification choices give rise to a vast set of point estimates. Moreover, given a specification, estimation is subject to considerable sampling uncertainty due to weak identification. We highlight the assumptions that seem to matter most for identification and the configuration of point estimates. We conclude that the literature has reached a limit on how much can be learned about the New Keynesian Phillips curve from aggregate macroeconomic time series. New identification approaches and new datasets are needed to reach an empirical consensus.

This year marked the twenty-seventh volume of the Journal of Economic Perspectives. Throughout its history, the Journal has sought to contribute to the economics profession along multiple dimensions: introducing readers to state-of-the-art thinking on theoretical and empirical research topics; encouraging cross-fertilization of ideas among the fields of economics; providing analyses of public policy issues; providing readings for students; offering illustrations that are useful in lectures; sparking discussion among colleagues; suggesting directions for future research; and analyzing features of the economics profession itself

This research investigates the impact of interest rate volatility upon corporate bond yield spreads. We first consider the impact of interest rate volatility upon noncallable bond spreads. Because greater interest rate volatility likely increases the volatility of the firm's debt, we hypothesize that the relation will be positive. Given that we do find a positive relation, we thus investigate whether the positive effect of interest rate volatility on yield spreads is stronger or weaker for callable bonds. We find that the effect is weaker for callable bonds. This result indicates that there is a negative relation between default spreads and call spreads, which is consistent with the theory of Acharya and Carpenter (2002), but in contrast to the theory of King (2002). Furthermore, our results for the relationship between equity volatility and yield spread tend to support Acharya and Carpenter (2002) more than King (2002).

In this study we show that market uncertainty [measured by the Chicago Board Options Exchange Market Volatility Index (VIX)] exerts a large market-wide impact on liquidity, which gives rise to co-movements in individual asset liquidity. The effect of VIX on stock liquidity is greater than the combined effects of all other common determinants of stock liquidity. We show that the uncertainty elasticity of liquidity (UEL: percent change in liquidity given a 1% change in VIX) has increased around regulatory changes in the US markets that increased the role of public traders in liquidity provision, reduced the minimum allowable price variation, weakened the affirmative obligation of NASDAQ dealers, and abolished the specialist system on the NYSE.

We study the value gains from takeovers of firms with poor acquisition histories. We document that the premium received by target shareholders is higher when the value loss from the targets’ prior acquisitions is larger. However, the gains to target shareholders seem to be offset by losses to acquiring shareholders. The average announcement return to acquiring shareholders is negative and decreasing in the value loss from the targets’ prior acquisitions. Additionally, the combined acquirer-target value created in these takeovers is insignificant. These results suggest that the value lost from targets’ prior acquisitions is not recovered through changes in corporate control.

We analyze the effect of exposure to international trade on earnings and employment of U.S. workers from 1992 through 2007 by exploiting industry shocks to import competition stemming from China’s spectacular rise as a manufacturing exporter paired with longitudinal data on individual earnings by employer spanning close to two decades. Individuals who in 1991 worked in manufacturing industries that experienced high subsequent import growth garner lower cumulative earnings, face elevated risk of obtaining public disability benefits, and spend less time working for their initial employers, less time in their initial two-digit manufacturing industries, and more time working elsewhere in manufacturing and outside of manufacturing. Earnings losses are larger for individuals with low initial wages, low initial tenure, and low attachment to the labor force. Low-wage workers churn primarily among manufacturing sectors, where they are repeatedly exposed to subsequent trade shocks. High-wage workers are better able to move across employers with minimal earnings losses and are more likely to move out of manufacturing conditional on separation. These findings reveal that import shocks impose substantial labor adjustment costs that are highly unevenly distributed across workers according to their skill levels and conditions of employment in the pre-shock period.

We examine corporate payout policy in dual-class firms. The expropriation hypothesis predicts that dual-class firms pay out less to shareholders because entrenched managers want to maximize the value of assets under control and the associated private benefits. The pre-commitment hypothesis predicts that dual-class firms pay out more to shareholders because firms use corporate payouts as a pre-commitment device to mitigate agency costs. Our results support the pre-commitment hypothesis. Dual-class firms have higher cash dividend payments and total payouts, and they use more regular cash dividends rather than special dividends or repurchases, compared to their propensity-matched single-class firms. Dual-class firms with severe free cash flow-related agency problems and few growth opportunities rely even more on corporate payouts as a pre-commitment mechanism. We also rule out the alternative explanation that dual-class firms pay out more because super-voting shareholders lack the ability to generate home-made dividends by selling shares since super-voting shares are often non-tradable or very illiquid.

This article develops a dynamic asset pricing model with persistent heterogeneous beliefs. The model features competitive traders who receive idiosyncratic signals about an underlying fundamentals process. We adapt Futia's (1981) frequency domain methods to derive conditions on the fundamentals that guarantee non-invertibility of the mapping between observed market data and the underlying shocks to agents' information sets. When these conditions are satisfied, agents remain asymmetrically informed in equilibrium and must ‘forecast the forecasts of others’. An econometrician, who incorrectly imposes a homogeneous beliefs equilibrium, will find that the asset price displays violations of variance bounds, predictability of excess returns, and rejections of cross-equation restrictions.