Optimal student loans and graduate tax under moral hazard and adverse selection

We characterize the set of second‐best “menus” of student‐loan contracts in an economy with risky labor‐market outcomes, adverse selection, moral hazard, and risk aversion. We combine student loans with optimal income taxation. Second‐best optima provide incomplete insurance because of moral hazard. Optimal repayments must be income contingent, or the income tax must comprise a graduate tax. Individuals are ex ante unequal because of differing probabilities of success, and ex post unequal, because taxation trades off incentives and redistribution. In addition, second‐best optima exhibit an interim equalization property: the poststudy but prework expected utilities of newly graduated student types must be equal.     

The Welfare State in a Changing Environment

We analyse how the welfare state, i.e., social insurance that works through redistributive taxation, should respond to increases in risks and to increases in the cost of operating the welfare state. With respect to risks, we distinguish between risks that can be insured and such that cannot (background risks). Insurable risks can be reduced by costly individual self-insurance and by costly social insurance. We show: (i) Self-insurance will be higher the more costly is the welfare state and the larger are background or insured risks. (ii) Full social insurance can only be optimal in a costless welfare state. (iii) The optimal welfare state is not necessarily larger the less costly it is. (iv) The welfare state need not optimally expand when risks increase that it insures. (v) It should, however, expand when risks increase that it does not insure.     

Redistributive taxation and social insurance under adverse selection in the insurance market

This paper extends the analysis of optimal income taxation under uncertainty studied by Cremer and Pestieau (International Tax and Public Finance, 3, 281–295, 1996). We introduce asymmetric information in the insurance market whereby private insurance companies cannot identify the risk probability of the agents, and we examine its effect on public policy. We consider the separating equilibrium of Rothschild and Stiglitz (Quarterly Journal of Economics, 90, 629–649, 1976) and Riley (Econometrica, 47, 331–359, 1979) where the low risk agent is only partially insured. The presence of the distortion in the insurance market changes the affinity of labor, and in some cases, we show that the scope of redistribution and the resulting social welfare are higher under asymmetric information than under full information. We also show that the increase in social insurance affects the utility and labor incentive of the low risk type by relaxing the self-selection constraint in the insurance market. The policy implications of the redistributive taxation and social insurance are analytically and numerically examined.      

Was spricht eigentlich gegen eine private Arbeitslosenversicherung?

This article wants to base the current discussion about the privatization of unemployment insurance on a perspective of insurance economics. The arguments against private unemployment insurance are separated in two prospects: insurance technique and social policy. Therefore, the mixing of objective-technical and normative arguments, which is widely spread in the literature, is broken down. It is shown that the only criterion, which holds against private unemployment insurance, is that of “relative poorness”. Consequently, from a social policy perspective the monetary burden of actuarial premiums on people at high and medium risk is not acceptable. Arguments like positively correlated risks, moral hazard, insufficient differentiation of premiums and collectively underestimated individual unemployment risks appear to be poorly valid. As a solution of the problem of “relative poorness” a new outline for privatization of unemployment insurance is presented. The proposal focuses on a combination of private unemployment and pension insurance.     

Capital income taxation and risk taking under prospect theory

This research examines capital income taxation for a prospect theory investor under some acceptable in the literature reference levels relative to which are the changes in the level of wealth valued. Depending on the reference level, some results indicate that it is possible for a capital income tax increase not to stimulate risk taking even if the tax code provides attractive full loss offset provisions. However, risk taking can be stimulated when investors compare their reference level with others. Risk taking can increase also if the investor interprets part of the tax as a loss instead as a reduced gain. Then the investor becomes risk seeking and moves away from the discomfort zone of relative losses. This later response to taxation causes private risk taking to increase.     

Social long-term care insurance and redistribution

We study the role of social long-term care (LTC) insurance when income taxation and private insurance markets are imperfect. Policy instruments include public provision of LTC as well as a subsidy on private insurance. The subsidy scheme may be linear or nonlinear. For the linear part we consider an arbitrary number of types, characterized by earnings and survival probabilities. In the nonlinear part, society consists of three types: poor, middle class and rich. The first type is too poor to provide for dependence; the middle class type purchases private insurance and the high income type is self-insured. The main questions are at what level LTC should be provided to the poor and whether it is desirable to subsidize private LTC for the middle class. Interestingly, the results are not totally similar under both linear and nonlinear schemes. First, whereas in the linear case a subsidy of private LTC insurance is desirable, it is not in the nonlinear case (at least at the margin). Second, the desirability of public provision of LTC services depends on the way the income tax is restricted. In the linear case, it may be desirable only if no demogrant (uniform lump-sum transfer) is available. In the nonlinear case, public provision is desirable when the income tax is sufficiently restricted. Specifically, this is the case when the income is subject only to a proportional payroll tax while the LTC reimbursement policy can be nonlinear.     

A Voluntary Deductible in Social Health Insurance with Risk Equalization: “Community‐Rated or Risk‐Rated Premium Rebate?”

On January 1, 2006 a new mandatory basic health insurance will be introduced in the Netherlands. One aspect of the new scheme is that the insured can choose to have a deductible. This option should increase the individual responsibility and reduce moral hazard. In the new scheme, a risk equalization system is aimed at avoiding preferred risk selection and insolvency of insurance companies with a relatively high‐risk pool. A crucial issue with respect to a voluntary deductible in this type of social health insurance is whether the premium rebate should be community rated or risk rated. The Dutch government has chosen the former, which means that the premium rebate will be independent of health status and risk. Our analysis shows that, in a situation with “accurate” risk equalization, a community‐rated premium rebate could lead to an adverse selection spiral. Over time, this spiral results in none of the insured taking a deductible and thus no reduction in moral hazard.     

Financial Innovation in the Management of Catastrophe Risk

Like the preceding article, this article argues that the high costs of reinsurance present the opportunity for hedging instruments to be offered to primary insurers that are both competitive with current reinsurance and that offer investors high rates of return. But the combination of high reinsurance premiums and the vast capacity of the capital market for diversification is not sufficient to ensure the success of these new instruments. If new instruments such as catastrophe options and catastrophelinked bonds are to compete successfully with reinsurance, they must provide a cost-effective means of resolving incentive conflicts between the primary insurer and the ultimate risk bearer that are known as "moral hazard." Without an effective solution of this moral hazard problem, the use of past insurance loss data to estimate the potential returns for purchasers of catastrophe bonds and other such instruments will be misleading and unreliable.
As the author demonstrates, both traditional reinsurance and each of the new catastrophe hedging instruments presents insurance companies and other hedgers with the challenge of managing a different combination of moral hazard, credit risk, and basis risk. For example, traditional catastrophe reinsurance is subject to significant credit risk and moral hazard, but little if any basis risk. By contrast, both catastrophe options and bonds can be designed in ways that reduce moral hazard and credit risk, but at the cost of taking on some basis risk. The risk manager's task in such circumstances is to design an instrument that embodies the optimal, or cost-minimizing, trade-off among these three sources of risk.     

Die Arbeitsteilung zwischen privater und sozialer Krankenversicherung aus ökonomischer Sicht

This contribution emphasizes adverse selection as the economists’ favored explanation of the preponderance of social insurance (SV) over private insurance (PV) since adverse selection creates an efficiency advantage of SV. However, the article also cites the limited ability of SV to effectively deal with moral hazard effects as an efficiency downside of SV. Moreover, three challenges are emerging that could well favor PV (and in particular, private health insurance PKV) rather than SV (and in particular, social health insurance GKV) – subject to the crucial condition that the PKV industry invest in product innovation.     

Concavity of utility,concavity of welfare,and redistribution of income

The marginal social value of income redistribution is understood to depend on both the concavity of individuals’ utility functions and the concavity of the social welfare function. In the pertinent literatures, notably on optimal income taxation and on normative inequality measurement, it seems to be accepted that the role of these two sources of concavity is symmetric with regard to the social concern about inequality in the distribution of income. Direct examination of the question, however, reveals that this is not the case. Concavity of utility has a simple, direct effect on the marginal social value of redistribution, as might be expected, whereas concavity of the social welfare function has a more subtle influence, one that in some cases may not be very significant. The implications of this difference are examined for some standard forms of utility and welfare functions, including particular versions that appear in the optimal income taxation literature.     

金融摩擦、收入风险与财富不平等

本文通过构建带有职业选择的两部门异质模型,探讨了个体面临的金融摩擦和收入风险对财富分配的作用机制。结果发现,经济中存在的金融摩擦会通过职业选择、自我保险和自融资来影响个人的财富积累,从而导致财富的集中和不平等。对模型模拟的结果表明:降低金融摩擦在总体上会降低财富不平等程度,但对不同财富阶层的影响不同,其在大幅减少前1%和前10%阶层财富份额的同时,虽然也会在一定程度上提升后50%阶层的财富份额,但提升幅度并不大,过高或过低的企业家收入风险,都会加大财富不平等程度,因而存在一个使经济中财富不平等程度最低的适度企业家收入风险水平;虽然金融摩擦和收入风险都会影响经济中的财富不平等,但收入风险本身对财富不平等程度的影响较小,其主要是通过金融摩擦放大了经济中财富不平等的程度。     

Labor market institutions and the cohesion of the middle class

We develop a simple model to study how relative wage rigidity affects equilibrium taxation. It is argued that relative wage rigidity, by compressing incomes within the middle class, leads to a lower degree of redistributive conflict within the politically important core of society, even though income inequality may increase for society as a whole. In the model, people vote first on wage rigidity and second on redistributive taxation. The rigid society has a ower tax rate than the flexible one. it is supported by the middle-class in the first stage, while the poor, the rich and the unemployed suffer from it.CERAS is a CNRS associate unit, while DELTA is a joint research unit ENS-CNRS-EHESS. This paper was prepared for the International Institute for Public Finance Congress, Lisbon, August 1995.     

Redistribution as Social Insurance and Capital Market Integration

In this paper we claim that enhanced economic integration can call for an increase in redistribution among workers. When individuals are risk averse and no human capital insurance is available, the share of workers who choose to invest in specific human capital will be inefficiently low. Redistribution among workers plays the role of the missing insurance market by making the investment in the specific skills more attractive. Capital market integration has two different effects. On the one hand it makes labour income taxation more distortionary, therefore reducing the optimal tax rate on labour. On the other hand, it increases the variance of specific labour wage and widens the scope for risk protection of specific human capital through the redistribution implemented by a labour income tax. We show that the insurance effect of redistribution can be stronger than the distortionary effect, so that the optimal tax rate on labour income can increase when capital markets become more integrated.     

Inherent Virtue or Inevitable Evil: The Effects of Directors' and Officers' Insurance on Firm Value

Whether directors’ and officers’ (D&O) insurance improves firm value is a controversial issue. We perform a literature review about the effect of D&O insurance and find mixed results. The proponents of D&O insurance believe it enhances corporate monitoring and improves firm value, while the opponents of D&O insurance argue that it creates a moral hazard problem and diminishes firm value. Against this backdrop, we argue that the trade‐off between the monitoring and moral hazard effects depends on the information acquired by the outside directors. Using a sample of listed Canadian firms, we find that (1) a change in D&O insurance coverage has no net effect on a firm's subsequent value when we ignore the information acquired by outside directors, (2) an increase in D&O insurance coverage improves a firm's subsequent value when the outside directors are well informed, and (3) an increase in D&O insurance coverage reduces a firm's subsequent value when the outside directors are poorly informed. Our findings are robust to endogeneity checks and have important implications for the regulation of D&O insurance.     

Economic Growth and Inequality: Why It Matters and What's Coming Next

This article makes the case that the recent rise in income inequality in OECD countries reflects profound changes in the economic model that previously resulted in growth, prosperity, and social progress during the second half of the last century. The author begins by citing French economist Thomas Piketty's identification of the key driver of rising income inequality as the recent sharp increase in the share of national income going to capital (defined as interest, dividends and other investment returns) and the accompanying decline in the share going to labor (in the form of wages, salaries, pension, and other work‐related benefits). For most of the last 100 years, a successful balance was struck in a majority of OECD countries between the returns to capital and labor. Within the framework of nationally defined economies, labor could effectively advocate for its share of the productivity gains by capital, and governments had the ability to constrain the free movement of capital, set labor compensation standards, and redistribute income through progressive taxation. The author explores how two developments—globalization and the rise of machine intelligence—are disrupting this social contract and reshaping our economy and society. The combination of these two developments, by accelerating the flow of income to capital and away from labor, is eroding the historical relationship between capital, labor, and governments that has long prevailed in most OECD countries. As this happens, we are seeing rising income inequality and the erosion of the middle class, which had been the driver of economic growth for most of the past century. Indeed, the thesis of Piketty's book, Capital in the Twenty‐First Century, is that such an effect may well be taking us back to the pre‐20th century norm of high income inequality and low economic growth. In his closing arguments, the author suggests that avoiding this scenario will be more complicated than simply raising taxes on capital, as proposed by Piketty. It may well require a fundamental rethinking of the role of employment as the primary mechanism for income distribution in society and how we prepare our workforce for an economy and society in which the concept of work will be radically redefined.     

Disease‐Specific Moral Hazard and Optimal Health Insurance Design for Physician Services

This article analyzes disease‐specific moral hazard effects in the demand for physician office visits and explores whether optimal insurance for physician services should be designed to have disease‐specific cost sharing. Generalized method of moments is implemented to address the endogeneity of private health insurance, and the nonnegativity and the discreteness of physician services use. The results indicate that the moral hazard effect varies considerably across disease‐specific specialist care. The strongest moral hazard (for no‐condition related specialist visits) is almost twice the moral hazard effect of the weakest (for chronic condition related specialist visits). Although the findings indicate some variation in the moral hazard effect across disease‐specific general practitioner visits, the variation is less considerable. The main policy implication is that optimal insurance for physician services should be designed to have differential cost sharing based on disease status rather than to have uniform cost sharing.     

农业保险可以减轻自然灾害对农业经济的负面影响吗?

建立融合自然灾害、农业保险以及道德风险的动态模型.模型显示:自然灾害会降低农业产出,而农业保险可以降低自然灾害对农业生产的负面影响,但前提是道德风险的影响较小.实证表明,每增加1元农业保险保费对应的保障水平,可以降低由自然灾害导致的第一产业产出约8.19元的损失.同时,未发现农业保险市场在省级加总层面存在显著的道德风险.     

Unequal wages for equal utilities

When educational policy is supplemented by a redistributive income tax, and when individuals differ in their ability to benefit from education, the optimal policy is typically rather regressive. Resources are concentrated on the most able individuals in order to get a “cake” as big as possible to share among individuals through income taxation. In this paper, we put forward another reason to push for regressive education. It is not linked to heterogeneity in innate ability but to the property that welfare may be a convex function of an individual’s wage. For simplicity, we assume a linear education technology and a given education budget. To give the equal wage outcome the best chance to emerge, we also assume that individuals have identical learning abilities. Nevertheless, it turns out that in the first-best wage inequality is always preferable to wage equality. Even more surprisingly, this conclusion remains valid in the second-best when the feasible degree of wage differentiation is sufficiently large. This is in spite of the fact that wage equalization would eliminate any need for distortionary income taxation.     

国外银行存款保险制度的道德风险问题研究

存款保险制度的道德风险问题是指商业银行在存款保险制度的保护下有动机承担过度风险、追求超额利润、从而可能导致银行业危机的问题,是存款保险制度的核心理论问题,也是存款保险制度能否持续的关键问题,更是一国政府如何对商业银行进行监管的重大问题。对国外银行存款保险制度的道德风险的相关文献进行综述和分析的基础上,认为传统的存款保险制度存在严重的道德风险,其制度运行成本高昂,需要对存款保险制度进行改革和加强对商业银行的监管。建议我国建立存款保险制度需要考虑避免道德风险问题。     

Optimal taxation and public provision for poverty reduction

The existing literature on optimal taxation typically assumes there exists a capacity to implement complex tax schemes, which is not necessarily the case for many developing countries. We examine the determinants of optimal redistributive policies in the context of a developing country that can only implement linear tax policies due to administrative reasons. Further, the reduction of poverty is typically the expressed goal of such countries, and this feature is also taken into account in our model. We derive the optimality conditions for linear income taxation, commodity taxation, and public provision of private and public goods for the poverty minimization case and compare the results to those derived under a general welfarist objective function. We also study the implications of informality on optimal redistributive policies for such countries. The exercise reveals non-trivial differences in optimal tax rules under the different assumptions.