I study how the cognitive demands of financial planning shape household decisionmaking with respect to consumption out of windfall income shocks. I build a quantitative model of bounded rationality in which reoptimization is costly. Households respond to windfall income shocks by choosing a finite planning horizon over which to reoptimize, and the optimal planning horizon is increasing in wealth and the magnitude of the income shock. Calibrated to U.S. data, the model’s distribution of consumption responses is consistent with three key facts: even highly liquid households have large consumption responses out of income shocks, the fraction of households with positive consumption responses increases with shock size, and conditional on responding, larger shocks generate smaller consumption responses.

In the U.S., student debt is currently the second largest component of consumer debt. Households are required to repay these loans early in their lifecycle, when marginal utility is particularly high. We study alternative contracts that offer partial or full payment deferral until later in life. We calibrate an economy with the current contracts, and then solve for counterfactual equilibria. The alternative contracts yield large welfare gains, which are robust to assumptions about the behavior of the lenders and borrower preferences. The gains are similar to those that could come from the debt relief program currently being considered in the U.S., but without its adverse fiscal implications.

We analyze a panel of over 28,400 S&P 500 return forecasts by CFOs to examine whether the extent of CFOs’ miscalibration—providing forecast confidence intervals that are too narrow—decreases over time. We find no improvement with task repetition nor evidence of learning, that is, no improvement in response to past performance. Across CFOs, miscalibration appears to be a persistent personal trait. We find some evidence that the degree of miscalibration is related to birth cohort and stock market familiarity.