Suchergebnisse

A letter report issued by the General Accounting Office with an abstract that begins "GAO reviewed the U.S. Marshals Service's (USMS) asset forfeiture programs, focusing on: (1) controls over selected categories of seized assets--namely vehicles, vessels, real property, financial instruments, and general property--at four large USMS districts: the Central District of California, the Southern District of Florida, and the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York; and (2) whether selected seized assets at the test locations under USMS control were accurately accounted for and safeguarded against theft, loss, and deterioration."

Objective. Over the past decade, federal and state governments have substantially liberalized asset limits in welfare. This article examines whether this policy change promotes asset accumulation among the target population of actual and potential welfare recipients.Methods. Utilizing household data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics as well as state data, this study employs a difference‐in‐difference approach in order to determine whether state asset limits affect the target population's financial and vehicle asset accumulation. This study develops a new policy measure that considers the time period following the adoption of liberalized asset limits.Results. Analysis results suggest that increased asset limits may have successfully encouraged the target population's asset accumulation. The earlier a state raised its asset limit, the more likely welfare recipients were to accumulate financial assets and to possess bank accounts.Conclusion. It is recommended to liberalize asset eligibility rules to promote long‐term economic advancement of poor households.

Lessons from New Labour's asset‐based welfare strategy

"This review article describes recent literature on asset allocation, covering both static and dynamic models. The article focuses on the bond--stock decision and on the implications of return predictability. In the static setting, investors are assumed to be Bayesian, and the role of various prior beliefs and specifications of the likelihood are explored. In the dynamic setting, recursive utility is assumed, and attention is paid to obtaining analytical results when possible. Results under both full and limited-information assumptions are discussed"--National Bureau of Economic Research web site

Abstract
This paper investigates the quantity of safe assets. First, we estimate that the average safe-asset ratio (ratio of safe to total assets) in 34 OECD countries was 37% in 2015. Further, we document that this ratio is relatively stable over time. Second, we build a heterogeneous-agent model with rare disasters and risk aversion coefficients that accounts for (i) the average level of the safe-asset ratio; (ii) the stability of this ratio over time; (iii) the observed risk-free rate of around 1.0% per year; and (iv) the empirical unlevered equity premium of about 4.2%. The model also replicates the observed highly concentrated distributions of wealth and equity. Finally, Ricardian equivalence holds in our model: issuing additional government bonds has no effect on rates of return and the net quantity of safe assets. Surprisingly, the crowding-out coefficient for private bonds with respect to public bonds is around −0.5, a value found in empirical studies.

Many classes of assets are illiquid or nonmarketable in that they cannot always be traded immediately. Thus, a portfolio position in these becomes at least temporarily irreversible. We study the asset-pricing implications of this type of illiquidity in an exchange economy with heterogeneous agents. In this market, one asset is always liquid. The other asset can be traded initially, but then not again until after a "blackout" period. Illiquidity has a dramatic effect. Agents abandon diversification and choose polarized portfolios instead. The value of liquidity can represent a large portion of the equilibrium price of an asset. (JEL G11, G12)