This paper studies the liquidity provision in a model where the roles of money are challenged by other financial instruments. Alternative to money, credit can be used as means of payment and rate dominating assets are available to serve as stores of value. Two features are found to be crucial in rendering money valuable in this environment: information asymmetry in credit trading relationship and uncertainty in individuals' liquidity demand. In general, the model economy can display a payment mechanism of money-only, credit-only, or mixed-use of money and credit in transactions, depending on the severity of the information asymmetry. The optimal quantity of money in our paper is shown to contrast those in other monetary models.

When consumption betas of stocks are computed using year‐over‐year consumption growth based upon the fourth quarter, the consumption‐based asset pricing model (CCAPM) explains the cross‐section of stock returns as well as the Fama and French (1993) three‐factor model. The CCAPM's performance deteriorates substantially when consumption growth is measured based upon other quarters. For the CCAPM to hold at any given point in time, investors must make their consumption and investment decisions simultaneously at that point in time. We suspect that this is more likely to happen during the fourth quarter, given investors' tax year ends in December.

This paper analyzes a firm's dynamic decisions: i) whether to issue a callable or non-callable bond; ii) when to call the callable bond; and iii) whether to refund it when it is called. We argue that a firm uses a callable bond to reduce the risk-shifting problem in case its investment opportunities become poor. Our empirical findings support this argument. We find that a firm facing poorer future investment opportunities is more likely to issue a callable bond than a firm facing better investment opportunities. In addition, a firm with a higher leverage ratio and higher investment risk is more likely to issue a callable bond. Finally, after a callable bond is issued, a firm with a poor performance and a low investment activity tends to call back a bond without refunding; a firm with the best performance and highest investment activity tends to call back a bond and refund its call; and a firm with mediocre performance and investment activity tends to not call its bonds.

This paper studies the political incentive of public pension funds in shareholder activism. Using a sample of shareholder proposals from 1993 to 2013 and a hand-collected data set of the political variables of public pension funds, we document evidence consistent with the “political attention hypothesis.” We find that the number of politicians on public pension fund boards is significantly positively related to the frequency with which portfolio firms are targeted. Moreover, the frequency of social-responsibility proposals by public pension funds increases significantly, as the funds have a greater number of board members running for election to public office. However the frequency of corporate governance proposals is not related to the number of board members running for elections to public office. Furthermore, we document that political connection between a portfolio firm and a public pension fund mitigates the firm’s likelihood of being targeted by the fund with social-responsibility proposals. This result supports the “political contribution hypothesis.” The paper provides direct evidence that public pension-fund board members employ shareholder proposals to enhance their political capital.