Three Essays On Heterogeneity In Macroeconomics PDF Download

This dissertation studies macroeconomics with regional heterogeneity in three general dimensions. First, it documents some novel empirical patterns of regional heterogeneity (in Chapter 1, 2, 3). Second, these empirical facts are used to identify key economic forces underlying theoretical models (in Chapter 1 and 3). Third, aggregate implications of regional heterogeneity are also studied (in Chapter 1). In the first chapter of this dissertation, I highlight time-varying regional risk and federal fiscal transfer policy as two competing forces driving regional risk sharing over the business cycle and in turn quantify their impacts on aggregate fluctuations. I find that during an economic downturn, increased regional risk worsens risk sharing and amplifies the impact of aggregate productivity shocks. However, state-contingent federal government transfers provide additional risk sharing and help stabilize the aggregate economy, by providing insurance to the regions that need it the most. In the second chapter (joint with Noah Williams), we first estimate a quarterly dataset for state-level aggregates by building a novel empirical framework that allows for mixed-frequency raw data with measurement errors. We then apply this dataset to study the monetary policy effects at the state levels. We find that states behave remarkably homogeneous with each other in their responses of output and price to an unanticipated monetary policy shock. In the third chapter (joint with Noah Williams), we use the state-level quarterly dataset to analyze the impact of unexpected changes in federal personal and corporate income taxes. We find substantial heterogeneity in the impact of federal fiscal policy across states, with more than half having no significant response to the tax cuts. In addition, less capital-intensive states have larger responses to corporate tax cuts. Although puzzling in standard models, a model with corporate and non-corporate sectors is consistent with this evidence. Overall, our results suggest the importance of variation and reallocation across states in evaluating federal policy.