Estimating the cost of regulation is difficult. Firms sometimes reveal costs indirectly, however, when they exploit loopholes to avoid regulation. We apply this insight to fuel economy standards for automobiles. These standards feature a loophole that gives automakers a bonus when they equip a vehicle with flexible-fuel capacity. Profit-maximizing automakers will equate the marginal cost of compliance using the loophole, which is observable, with the unobservable costs of strategies that genuinely improve fuel economy. Based on this insight, we estimate that tightening standards by one mile per gallon would have cost automakers just 9–27 per vehicle in recent years.

This paper analyzes "attribute-based regulations," in which regulatory compliance depends upon some secondary attribute that is not the intended target of the regulation. For example, in many countries, fuel-economy standards mandate that vehicles have a certain fuel economy, but heavier or larger vehicles are allowed to meet a lower standard. Such policies create perverse incentives to distort the attribute upon which compliance depends. We develop a theoretical framework to predict how actors will respond to attribute-based regulations and to characterize the welfare implications of these responses. To test our theoretical predictions, we exploit quasi-experimental variation in Japanese fuel economy regulations, under which fuel-economy targets are downward-sloping step functions of vehicle weight. Our bunching analysis reveals large distortions to vehicle weight induced by the policy. We then leverage panel data on vehicle redesigns to empirically investigate the welfare implications of attribute-basing, including both potential benefits and likely costs.

This paper analyzes the predictive power of a new data set of consumer gasoline price forecasts taken from the Michigan Survey of Consumers (MSC). MSC data generally perform as well as a no-change forecast in predicting future gasoline prices, and they substantially out-perform the no-change forecast during the recent economic crisis, during which time they track futures market prices. Finally, the cross-respondent dispersion of the MSC forecasts increases substantially during the economic crisis, paralleling the large increase in price volatility at this time.

The world has 1.4 billion passenger vehicles. How should governments regulate their air pollution emissions? A Pigouvian tax is technologically infeasible. Most countries instead rely on exhaust standards that limit air pollution emissions per mile for new vehicles. We assess the effectiveness and efficiency of these standards, which are the centerpiece of U.S. Clean Air Act regulation of transportation, and counterfactual policies. We show that the air pollution emissions per mile of new U.S. vehicles has fallen spectacularly, by over 99%, since standards began in 1967. Several research designs with a half century of data suggest that exhaust standards have caused most of this decline. Yet exhaust standards are not cost-effective in part because they fail to encourage scrap of older vehicles, which account for the majority of emissions. To study counterfactual policies, we develop an analytical and a quantitative model of the vehicle fleet. Analysis of these models suggests that tighter exhaust standards increase social welfare and increasing registration fees on dirty vehicles yields even larger gains by accelerating scrap, although both reforms have complex effects on inequality.

Corrective taxes can solve many market failures, but actual policies frequently deviate from the theoretical ideal because of administrative or political constraints. We present a method to quantify the efficiency costs of constraints on externality-correcting policies or, more generally, the costs of imperfect pricing, using simple regression statistics. Under certain conditions, the R2 and the sum of squared residuals from a regression of true externalities on policy variables measure relative welfare gains from policies. We illustrate via four empirical applications: random mismeasurement of externalities, imperfect electricity pricing, heterogeneity in the longevity of energy-consuming durable goods, and imperfect spatial policy differentiation.