Neoclassical Investment Model Research Articles

Technological heterogeneity and corporate investment

We propose an importance-sampling procedure to improve the computational performance of the simulated method of moments (SMM) for the estimation of structural models with fixed parameter heterogeneity. The main advantage of the procedure is that it does not require to simulate observations every time that the structural parameters change during the minimization of the SMM criterion function. We illustrate the use of our method by estimating a neoclassical model of investment for a sample of US manufacturing companies, allowing the technological parameters to vary across firms.

The impact of depreciation savings on investment: Evidence from the corporate Alternative Minimum Tax

Over the past decade, the United States has offered investment incentives in the form of larger depreciation savings, namely, bonus depreciation. The neoclassical investment model implies that investment responds to changes in depreciation savings, but there have been few direct attempts to investigate this implication. This paper examines investment patterns surrounding the 1999 shortening of the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) depreciation recovery periods, finding strong evidence that firms subject to the AMT increase investment in response to the AMT reform. The empirical results show that firms subject to the AMT increase their investment, measured as the ratio of capital expenditures to capital stock, by around 0.0418 to 0.0622, compared to firms subject to the regular tax. Given their average annual investment rate of approximately 0.27 during this period, the results imply a relative increase in investment of 15%--23%. By contrast, I find that the 2002 introduction of bonus depreciation, available both for firms subject to the regular tax and for firms subject to the AMT, affects both groups of firms similarly. The estimation uses an empirical specification developed from the Summers (1981) tax-adjusted q model, and the results imply that the responsiveness of investment to the tax term is somewhat larger than previously estimated.

Technological Heterogeneity and Corporate Investment

We propose an importance-sampling procedure to improve the computational performance of the simulated method of moments (SMM) for the estimation of structural models with fixed parameter heterogeneity. The main advantage of the procedure is that it does not require to simulate observations every time that the structural parameters change during the minimization of the SMM criterion function. We illustrate the use of our method by estimating a neoclassical model of investment for a sample of US manufacturing companies, allowing the technological parameters to vary across firms.

Investment and CEO compensation under limited commitment

We extend the neoclassical investment model (Hayashi, 1982) to allow for limited commitment on compensation contracts. We consider three types of limited commitment: (i) managers cannot commit to compensation contracts that provide lower continuation utility than their outside options; (ii) shareholders cannot commit to negative net present value (NPV) projects; (iii) both the managers and the shareholders cannot commit. We characterize the optimal contract under general convex adjustment cost functions and provide examples for which closed-form solutions can be obtained. We show that, as in the data, small firms invest more, grow faster, and have a higher Tobin׳s Q than large firms under the optimal contract. In addition, the pattern of the dependence of chief executive officer (CEO) compensation on past performance implied by our model is also consistent with empirical evidence.

Biased Beliefs, Asset Prices, and Investment: A Structural Approach

ABSTRACTWe structurally estimate a model in which agents’ information processing biases can cause predictability in firms’ asset returns and investment inefficiencies. We generalize the neoclassical investment model by allowing for two biases—overconfidence and overextrapolation of trends—that distort agents’ expectations of firm productivity. Our model's predictions closely match empirical data on asset pricing and firm behavior. The estimated bias parameters are well identified and exhibit plausible magnitudes. Alternative models without either bias or with efficient investment fail to match observed return predictability and firm behavior. These results suggest that biases affect firm behavior, which in turn affects return anomalies.

Investment and CEO Compensation Under Limited Commitment

We extend the neoclassical investment model Hayashi (1982) to allow for limited commitment on compensation contracts. We consider three types of limited commitment: i) managers cannot commit to compensation contracts that provide lower continuation utility than their outside options; ii) shareholders cannot commit to negative net present value projects; iii) limited commitment on both the manager and the shareholder sides. We characterize the optimal contract under general convex adjustment cost functions and provide examples where closed form solutions can be obtained. We show that consistent with empirical evidence, small firms invest more, grow faster, have higher Tobin's Q, and are less likely to pay dividends than large firms do under the optimal contract.

Government investment and the stock market

High rates of government investment in public sector capital forecast high risk premiums both at the aggregate and firm-level. This result is in sharp contrast with the well-documented negative relationship between the private sector investment rate and risk premiums. To explain the empirical findings, we extend the neoclassical q-theory model of investment and specify public sector capital as an additional input in the firm's technology. We show that the model can quantitatively replicate the empirical facts with reasonable parameter values if public sector capital increases the marginal productivity of private inputs.

Government Investment and the Stock Market

High rates of government investment in public sector capital forecast high risk premiums both at the aggregate and firm-level. This result is in sharp contrast with the well-documented negative relationship between the private sector investment rate and risk premiums. To explain the empirical findings, we extend the neoclassical q-theory model of investment and specify public sector capital as an additional input in the firm’s technology. We show that the model can quantitatively replicate the empirical facts with reasonable parameter values if public sector capital increases the marginal productivity of private inputs.

Up or Down? Capital Income Taxation in the United States and the United Kingdom

Empirical evidence suggests that the Eective Marginal Tax Rate (EMTR) on income from capital has increased considerably in both the United States and the United Kingdom over the period 1982-2005. This evidence contradicts the corporate tax literature which predicts that the EMTR should instead fall over time as a result of increasing international capital mobility and higher tax competition between governments. This paper argues that this inconsistency is entirely due to the fact that EMTRs on income from capital are currently computed from versions of the neoclassical investment model which do not take into account …nancial constraints on dividend policy faced by …rms investing in both the United States and the United Kingdom. The paper incorporates …nancial constraints on dividend policy into the analytical framework for the computation of the EMTR and employs the new model to re-calculate time series of the EMTRs in both countries. The new empirical results show that, in contrast to the existing evidence, the EMTR on investment …nanced by either retained earnings or new equity has indeed declined over time in both countries, while the EMTR on debt-…nanced investment has remained relatively stable.

The Timing of Investment and Stock Returns

In a neoclassical investment model, returns and investment are linked. We show that the timing of investment and returns are also linked. Conditional on total investment, firms investing earlier in the year have lower returns than firms investing later in the year. We show empirical evidence consistent with this prediction. Our model further predicts that the effects are strongest when the firm has cash flows early in the year. We confirm this prediction, as well. Moreover, regressing returns on annual investment year produces a much weaker relationship between returns and investment than regressing returns on semi-annual investment.

Biased Beliefs, Asset Prices, and Investment: A Structural Approach

We structurally estimate a model in which agents' information processing biases can cause predictability in firms’ asset returns and investment inefficiencies. We generalize the neoclassical investment model by allowing for two biases -- overconfidence and over-extrapolation of trends -- that distort agents' expectations of firm productivity. Our model’s predictions closely match empirical data on asset pricing and firm behavior. The estimated bias parameters are well-identified and exhibit plausible magnitudes. Alternative models without either bias or with efficient investment fail to match observed return predictability and firm behavior. These results suggest that biases affect firm behavior, which in turn affects return anomalies.

ON THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE MARGINAL PRODUCT OF CAPITAL ACROSS COUNTRIES

We extended the standard neoclassical model of investment for the case of an open economy. Our model shows that risk premium not only creates a wedge between the marginal product of capital across countries but also reduces an economy's savings rate. A riskier market thus presents a lower income per capita, ceteris paribus. Our empirical analysis, from 1950 to 2003, lends support to the conclusion that both risk and the correction for output price to investment ratio help to explain the differentials.

Cross-Sectional Tobin's Q

The neoclassical investment model matches cross-sectional asset prices both in first differences and in levels. With ten book-to-market deciles as the testing portfolios, the investment model largely matches the Tobin's Q spread and the average return spread across the extreme deciles. The parameter estimates imply low adjustment costs around 1.7% of sales. The model's fit results from three aspects of our econometric strategy: (i) We test the model at the portfolio level to alleviate the impact of measurement errors; (ii) we match the first moment to mitigate the impact of temporal misalignment between asset prices and investment; and (iii) we allow for nonlinear marginal costs of investment. Our evidence suggests that any differences between the intrinsic value of equity and the market value of equity tend to dissipate in the long run.

Investing in Turbulent Times: The Investment Behavior of Polish Firms in the Early Transition

We examine the investment behavior of a sample of Polish industrial firms over the period 1991–1993 by means of a model that views investment flows as part of the firm’s effort to adjust its assets and liabilities so as to maximize the returns to the firm. We argue that the application of neoclassical models of investment is more appropriate in cases where net investment is positive and where the returns to other assets and costs of liabilities are stable. If firms are seeking to reduce their capital stock, then the major constraints are not financial but rather set by the speed of physical depreciation. If the returns to other assets or the costs of liabilities change, then the firm will be forced to reconfigure its balance sheet in a way that may be inconsistent with the neoclassical model of investment. This paper examines the adjustments undertaken by Polish firms and shows that firms that did make positive net investments in this period were influenced by their capital intensity, profitability and by their costs of and returns to financial assets. The explanatory power of the model is relatively high when compared to previous studies of the investment behavior of firms in the early years of transition.

Investment Based Valuation and Managerial Expectations

A generalized version of the standard neoclassical investment model can explain the relatively high equity prices in the late 1990s and early 2000s in the US corporate nonfinancial and NASDAQ sectors along with the relatively low prices before and after this period. Stock returns predicted by the model are as volatile as the observed stock returns in both sectors. Three key model assumptions are multiple capital goods, investment-specific technological change and non-quadratic adjustment costs. During the “bubble” period, investment in equipment is relatively high — consistent with high expected cash flows and high prices. Investment rates subsequently fall — consistent with lower expected cash flows and lower prices. On average, managers’ forecasts are correct. Levels and changes in managerial expectations are correlated with proxies for investor sentiment. Increases in the growth rate of equipment investment coincide with decreases in measured productivity growth. This is consistent with the unobserved diversion of labor from producing output towards accumulating human capital or other intangible assets.

Cross-Sectional Tobin's Q

The neoclassical investment model matches cross-sectional asset prices both in first differences and in levels. With ten book-to-market deciles as the testing portfolios, the investment model largely matches the Tobin's Q spread and the average return spread across the extreme deciles. The parameter estimates imply low adjustment costs around 1.7% of sales. The model's fit results from three aspects of our econometric strategy: (i) We test the model at the portfolio level to alleviate the impact of measurement errors; (ii) we match the first moment to mitigate the impact of temporal misalignment between asset prices and investment; and (iii) we allow for nonlinear marginal costs of investment. Our evidence suggests that any differences between the intrinsic value of equity and the market value of equity tend to dissipate in the long run.

Up or Down? Capital Income Taxation in the United States and the United Kingdom

Empirical evidence suggests that the Effective Marginal Tax Rate (EMTR) on income from capital has increased considerably in both the United States and the United Kingdom over the period 1982-2005. This evidence contradicts the corporate tax literature which predicts that the EMTR should instead fall over time as a result of increasing international capital mobility and higher tax competition between governments. This paper argues that this inconsistency is entirely due to the fact that EMTRs on income from capital are currently computed from versions of the neoclassical investment model which do not take into account financial constraints on dividend policy faced by firms investing in both the United States and the United Kingdom. The paper incorporates financial constraints on dividend policy into the analytical framework for the computation of the EMTR and employs the new model to re-calculate time series of the EMTRs in both countries. The new empirical results show that, in contrast to the existing evidence, the EMTR on investment financed by either retained earnings or new equity has indeed declined over time in both countries, while the EMTR on debt-financed investment has remained relatively stable.

Financial Crises, Capital Liquidation and the Demand for International Reserves

Abstract We study a simple neoclassical model of investment in a developing country, modified to allow for long-term projects and short-term debt. Early signals indicating low productivity of investment may lead creditors to call loans in early. In such a crisis, firms protected by limited liability default and liquidate capital, even thought they do so at a loss (a “fire sale”). We show that short-term debt financing is beneficial in good (normal) times: when there is no adverse signal, and thus no need to liquidate capital, investment, the capital-labor ratio, wages and ex post worker utility are all higher than they would be if liquidation were not possible or was prohibited. Capital liquidation exacerbates the effects of negative shocks by lowering the capital-labor ratio and lowering wages in bad times (crises). Capital liquidation raises the variability of wages and hurts workers who cannot insure against wage income (this seems plausible in emerging market economies). Accumulating a stock of international reserves to be used during or after a crisis can mitigate the adverse effects of capital liquidation on wage variability and worker welfare.

How do Frictions affect Corporate Investment? A Structural Approach

This paper develops and empirically tests a model designed to distinguish the role of real and financing frictions on firms investment, debt financing and equity financing policies. Real frictions include fixed costs of investment and adjustment costs. Financing frictions include taxes, collateral constraints, flotation costs of equity and dividend constraints. Because of financing frictions, all corporate policies are interrelated and depend on average Q. Due to fixed costs of investment and binding financing constraints,the sensitivity of corporate policies to Q is non-linear. The empirical tests demonstrate that both the endogeneity and non-linearities created by real and financing frictions are economically significant. The paper provides a rationale for the documented poor performance of Q-theory in explaining investment, and for the differential performance of the neoclassical investment model in explaining investment and stock returns. The paper extends Q-theory to explain debt and equity issues, and shows that market to book sorts control for non-linearities in investment policies.

Determinants of investment and innovation expenditure in Polish manufacturing industries

This article analyses determinants of sectoral R&D and innovation expenditure as well as investment in Polish manufacturing industries in 1994–2004. The estimated coefficients for user cost of capital are generally in line with the neoclassical model of investment, except for R&D intensity. The latter are primarily discouraged by systemic uncertainty. The rate of growth of sales is not a prominent determinant of investment and innovation expenditure. Market concentration coupled with uncertainty has a damaging effect on physical capital investment but it promotes R&D expenditure and leaves innovation intensity unaltered.