-
Investments under Risk: Evidence from Hurricane Strikes
June 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-43
We demonstrate that firms with plants in areas subject to a significant hurricane strike reduce their capital expenditures at the hurricane-affected plants and shift capital expenditures to plants in non-hurricane-affected areas. This effect is not present prior to 1997 and only appears from 1997 on. Our evidence is consistent with the possibility that a significant climate event such as the signing of the Kyoto Protocol raised the salience of the perceived risk from actual hurricane strikes and shifted firm behavior.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Dynamics of High-Growth Young Firms and the Role of Venture Capitalists
June 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-38
Motivated by the substantial growth and upfront investments of venture capital (VC) backed firms observed in administrative US Census data, this paper develops a firm dynamics model over the life cycle. In the model, startups choose the source of financing from VC, Angel investors, or banks, depending on their growth potential, and invest in innovation. The calibrated model explains the life-cycle dynamics of firms with different sources of financing and implies that venture capitalists' advice accounts for around 22% of the growth of VC-backed firms. A counterfactual economy without VC financing would lose aggregate consumption by around 0.4%.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Private Equity and Workers: Modeling and Measuring Monopsony, Implicit Contracts, and Efficient Reallocation
June 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-37
We measure the real effects of private equity buyouts on worker outcomes by building a new database that links transactions to matched employer-employee data in the United States. To guide our empirical analysis, we derive testable implications from three theories in which private equity managers alter worker outcomes: (1) exertion of monopsony power in concentrated markets, (2) breach of implicit contracts with targeted groups of workers, including managers and top earners, and (3) efficient reallocation of workers across plants. We do not find any evidence that private equity-backed firms vary wages and employment based on local labor market power proxies. Wage losses are also very similar for managers and top earners. Instead, we find strong evidence that private equity managers downsize less productive plants relative to productive plants while simultaneously reallocating high-wage workers to more productive plants. We conclude that post-buyout employment and wage dynamics are consistent with professional investors providing incentives to increase productivity and monitor the companies in which they invest.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Property Rights, Firm Size and Investments in Innovation: Evidence from the America Invents Act
May 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-31
I analyze whether a change in patent systems differentially affects firm-level innovation investments at patent-valuing firms of different sizes. Using legally required, economically representative, U.S. Census Bureau microdata, I separate firms into groups based on a firm's response to a question asking it to rank the degree of patent importance to its business and firm-size. I then measure how firms' innovation inputs/outputs respond to the America Invents Act (AIA). Results show the AIA reduced innovation investments at smaller, patent-valuing firms while increasing innovation investments at larger, patent-valuing firms, highlighting differential firm-size effects of patent policy and policy's importance to investments.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Impact Investing and Worker Outcomes
May 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-30
Impact investors claim to distinguish themselves from traditional venture capital and growth equity investors by also pursuing environmental, social, and governance (ESG) objectives. Whether they successfully do so in practice is unclear. We use confidential Census Bureau microdata to assess worker outcomes across portfolio companies. Impact investors are more likely than other private equity firms to fund businesses in economically disadvantaged areas, and the performance of these companies lags behind those held by traditional private investors. We show that post-funding impact-backed firms are more likely to hire minorities, unskilled workers, and individuals with lower historical earnings, perhaps reflecting the higher representation of minorities in top positions. They also allocate wage increases more favorably to minorities and rank-and-file workers than VC-backed firms. Our results are consistent with impact investors and their portfolio companies acting according to non-pecuniary social goals and thus are not consistent with mere window dressing or cosmetic changes.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
The Rising Returns to R&D: Ideas Are Not Getting Harder to Find
May 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-29
R&D investment has grown robustly, yet aggregate productivity growth has stagnated. Is this because 'ideas are getting harder to find'? This paper uses micro-data from the US Census Bureau to explore the relationship between R&D and productivity in the manufacturing sector from 1976 to 2018. We find that both the elasticity of output (TFP) with respect to R&D and the marginal returns to R&D have risen sharply. Exploring factors affecting returns, we conclude that R&D obsolescence rates must have risen. Using a novel estimation approach, we find consistent evidence of sharply rising technological rivalry. These findings suggest that R&D has become more effective at finding productivity-enhancing ideas but these ideas may also render rivals' technologies obsolete, making innovations more transient.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
The Intangible Divide: Why Do So Few Firms Invest in Innovation?
February 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-15
Investments in software, R&D, and advertising have surged, nearing half of U.S. private nonresidential investment. Yet just a few hundred firms dominate this growth. Most firms, including large ones, regularly invest little in capitalized software and R&D, widening this 'intangible divide' despite falling intangible prices. Using comprehensive US Census microdata, we document these patterns and explore factors associated with intangible investment. We find that firms invest significantly less in innovation-related intangibles when their rivals invest more. One firm's investment can obsolesce rivals' investments, reducing returns. This negative pecuniary externality worsens the intangible divide, potentially leading to significant misallocation.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Corporate Share Repurchase Policies and Labor Share
February 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-14
Using census data, we investigate whether share repurchases are responsible for the fall in labor share in U.S. corporations. Recent legislation imposes taxes on share repurchases, motivated by the assertion that share repurchases have led to reduced labor payments. Using several empirical approaches, we find no evidence that increases in share repurchases contribute to decreases in labor share. Top share repurchasing firms since 1982 did not decrease labor share. We also rely on exogenous changes in share repurchases around EPS announcements to pinpoint causality. Policies aimed at improving labor share by discouraging share repurchases will likely not achieve their objectives.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Leveraged Payouts: How Using New Debt to Pay Returns in Private Equity Affects Firms, Employees, Creditors, and Investors
January 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-12
We study the causal effect of a large increase in firm leverage. Our setting is dividend recapitalizations in private equity (PE), where portfolio companies take on new debt to pay investor returns. After accounting for positive selection into more debt, we show that large leverage increases make firms much riskier, dramatically raising exit and bankruptcy rates but also IPOs. The debt-bankruptcy relationship is in line with Altman-Z model predictions for private firms. Dividend recapitalizations increase deal returns but reduce: (a) wages among surviving firms; (b) pre-existing loan prices; and (c) fund returns, which seems to reflect moral hazard via new fundraising. These results suggest negative implications for employees, pre-existing creditors, and investors.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Investigating the Effect of Innovation Activities of Firms on Innovation Performance: Does Firm Size Matter?
January 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-04
Understanding the relationship between a firm's innovation activities and its performance has been of great interest to management scholars. While the literature on innovation activities is vast, there is a dearth of studies investigating the effect of key innovation activities of the firm on innovation outcomes in a single study, and whether their effects are dependent on the nature of firms, specifically firm size. Drawing from a longitudinal dataset from the Business Research & Development and Innovation Survey (BRDIS), and informed by contingency theory and resource orchestration theory, we examine the relationship between a firm's innovation activities - including its Research & Development (R&D) investment, securing patents, collaborative R&D, R&D toward new business areas, and grants for R&D - and its product innovation and process innovation. We also investigate whether these relationships are contingent on firm size. Consistent with contingency theory, we find a significant difference between large firms and small firms regarding how they enhance product innovation and process innovation. Large firms can improve product innovation by securing patents through applications and issuances, coupled with active participation in collaborative R&D efforts. Conversely, smaller firms concentrate their efforts on the number of patents applied for, directing R&D efforts toward new business areas, and often leveraging grants for R&D efforts. To achieve process innovation, a similar dichotomy emerges. Larger firms demonstrate a commitment to securing patents, engage in R&D efforts tailored to new business areas, and actively collaborate with external entities on R&D efforts. In contrast, smaller firms primarily focus on securing patents and channel their R&D efforts toward new business pursuits. This nuanced exploration highlights the varied strategies employed by large and small firms in navigating the intricate landscape of both product and process innovation. The results shed light on specific innovation activities as antecedents of innovation outcomes and demonstrate how the effectiveness of such assets is contingent upon firm size.
View Full
Paper PDF
