Papers Containing Tag(s): 'Center for Economic Studies'
The following papers contain search terms that you selected. From the papers listed below, you can navigate to the PDF, the profile page for that working paper, or see all the working papers written by an author. You can also explore tags, keywords, and authors that occur frequently within these papers.
See Working Papers by Tag(s), Keywords(s), Author(s), or Search Text
Click here to search again
Frequently Occurring Concepts within this Search
Viewing papers 1 through 10 of 449
-
Working PaperUnemployment Insurance Extensions, Labor Market Concentration, and Match Quality
April 2026
Working Paper Number:
CES-26-24
I investigate whether the effects of UI extensions are different for workers exposed to higher levels of local labor market concentration, a potential source of employer market power. I exploit measurement error in state unemployment rates that led to quasi-random assignment of UI durations in the U.S. during the Great Recession. Using matched employer-employee data from the Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics program, I find that UI extensions lengthen nonemployment durations by one week and cause economically meaningful but not statistically significant increases in earnings. The UI-earnings effect is significantly lower at higher levels of concentration, while there is no difference in the UI-duration effect. The lower UI-earnings effect is driven by the extremes of the distribution of concentration. My results suggest that match improvements from UI are attenuated at higher levels of concentration.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperDid Foreigners Pay America's Tariffs? Quantity Discounts, Scale Economies and Incomplete Pass-Through
February 2026
Working Paper Number:
CES-26-17
Transaction-level quantity discounts are a pervasive feature of US trade, shaping both price variation and tariff incidence. Using administrative microdata, we show that these discounts reflect transaction-level scale economies rather than market power. Accounting for these micro-level economies resolves a key puzzle: while observed import prices rose one-for-one with 2018-2019 US tariffs, we show this was driven by the loss of scale economies as transaction sizes collapsed. Controlling for this scale effect, the strategic pass-through of tariffs to scale-free prices falls to 60 percent, implying foreign exporters absorbed a significant share of the burden through reduced markups.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperSame Shock, Separate Channels: House Prices and Firm Performance in the Great Recession
January 2026
Working Paper Number:
CES-26-03
Combining confidential business-level microdata with housing and banking data, I document large and persistent effects of local house prices on employment at small businesses, and particularly young businesses, during the Great Recession. I show that the effect on entry is important for explaining the disproportionate effect on young businesses, while young firm exit is also disproportionately affected. I then explore the channels through which house prices affect business outcomes. I use survey data to show that reliance on either personal assets or home equity is associated with increased sensitivity to house prices. I then use local bank balance sheet information to show both young and old firms are sensitive to local credit shocks, with some evidence of a larger effect on young businesses. I develop a macroeconomic model that is consistent with these findings where house prices work through two channels: a bank credit supply channel and a housing collateral channel.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperIntegrating Multiple U.S. Census Bureau Data Assets to Create Standardized Profiles of Program Participants
January 2026
Working Paper Number:
CES-26-01
The Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act of 2018 (Evidence Act) directed federal agencies to systematically use data when making policy decisions. In response, the U.S. Census Bureau established the Evidence Group within its Center for Economic Studies (CES). With an interdisciplinary team of economists, sociologists, and statisticians, the Evidence Group can support the broader federal government in their efforts to use existing data to improve program operations without increasing respondent burden. For federal agencies administering social safety net and business assistance programs in particular, the team provides a no-cost evidence-building service that links program records to Census Bureau data assets and creates a series of standardized tables describing participants, their economic outcomes prior to program entry, and the communities where they live. These tables provide partner agencies with the detailed information they need to better understand their participants and potentially make their programs more accountable and effective in reaching their target populations. In this working paper, we describe the standardized tables themselves as well as the data assets available at the Census Bureau to create these tables, the data files produced by the table production process, and the methodology used to merge and harmonize data on participants and subsequently calculate unbiased and accurate estimates. We conclude with a brief discussion of steps taken to ensure confidentiality and data security. This documentation is intended to facilitate proper use and understanding of the standardized tables by partner agencies as well as researchers who are interested in leveraging these tools to explore characteristics of their samples of interest.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperTechnology-Driven Market Concentration through Idea Allocation
December 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-78
Using a newly-created measure of technology novelty, this paper identifies periods with and without technology breakthroughs from the 1980s to the 2020s in the US. It is found that market concentration decreases at the advent of revolutionary technologies. We establish a theory addressing inventors' decisions to establish new firms or join incumbents of selected sizes, yielding two key predictions: (1) A higher share of inventors opt for new firms during periods of heightened technology novelty. (2). There is positive assortative matching between idea quality and firm size if inventors join incumbents. Both predictions align with empirical findings and collectively contribute to a reduction in market concentration when groundbreaking technologies occur. Quantitative analysis shows the overall slowdown in technological breakthroughs can capture 95.9% of the rising trend in market concentration and the correlation between the model-generated and the actual detrended market concentration is 0.910.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperBorrowing Constraints, Markups, and Misallocation
December 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-75
We document new facts that link firms' markups to borrowing constraints: (1) less constrained firms within an industry have higher markups, especially in industries where assets are difficult to borrow against and firms rely more on earnings to borrow; (2) markup dispersion is also higher in industries where firms rely more on earnings to borrow. We explain these relationships using a standard Kimball demand model augmented with borrowing against assets and earnings. The key mechanism is a two-way feedback between markups and borrowing constraints. First, less constrained firms charge higher markups, as looser constraints allow them to attain larger market shares. Second, higher markups relax borrowing constraints when firms rely on earnings to borrow, as those with higher markups have higher earnings. This two-way feedback lowers TFP losses from markup dispersion, particularly when firms rely on earnings to borrow.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperSchool-Based Disability Identification Varies by Student Family Income
December 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-74
Currently, 18 percent of K-12 students in the United States receive additional supports through the identification of a disability. Socioeconomic status is viewed as central to understanding who gets identified as having a disability, yet limited large-scale evidence examines how disability identification varies for students from different income backgrounds. Using unique data linking information on Oregon students and their family income, we document pronounced income-based differences in how students are categorized for two school-based disability supports: special education services and Section 504 plans. We find that a quarter of students in the lowest income percentile receive supports through special education, compared with less than seven percent of students in the top income percentile. This pattern may partially reflect differences in underlying disability-related needs caused by poverty. However, we find the opposite pattern for 504 plans, where students in the top income percentiles are two times more likely to receive 504 plan supports. We further document substantial variation in these income-based differences by disability category, by race/ethnicity, and by grade level. Together, these patterns suggest that disability-related needs alone cannot account for the income-based differences that we observe and highlight the complex ways that income shapes the school and family processes that lead to variability in disability classification and services.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperGifted Identification Across the Distribution of Family Income
December 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-73
Currently, 6.1 percent of K-12 students in the United States receive gifted education. Using education and IRS data that provide information on students and their family income, we show pronounced differences in who schools identify as gifted across the distribution of family income. Under 4 percent of students in the lowest income percentile are identified as gifted, compared with 20 percent of those in the top income percentile. Income-based differences persist after accounting for student test scores and exist across students of different sexes and racial/ethnic groups, underscoring the importance of family resources for gifted identification in schools.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperDouble-Pane Glass Ceiling: Commercial Engagement and the Female-Male Earnings Gap for Faculty
September 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-68
I use administrative data from universities (UMETRICS) linked to the universe of confidential W-2 and 1040-C tax records to measure faculty commercial engagement and its role in female-male earnings gaps. Female faculty are 20 percentage points less likely to engage commercially, with the entire gap driven by self-employment. The raw earnings gap is $63,000 on a base of $162,000 and non-university earnings account for $18,000 (29 percent) of this total. Thus, while university pay explains most of the gap, commercial engagement substantially amplifies it. Earnings gaps appear in all components of non-university pay ' self-employment, and work for incumbent, young/startup, high-tech, and non-high-tech firms ' and remain large, though attenuated, after controlling publications, patents, field, university, scientific resources, age, marital status, childbearing, and demographics. Gaps widen as faculty move up the earnings distribution, and commercial engagement becomes a larger contributor. Men and women engage with similar industries, but men earn more in all shared industries.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperJob Tasks, Worker Skills, and Productivity
September 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-63
We present new empirical evidence suggesting that we can better understand productivity dispersion across businesses by accounting for differences in how tasks, skills, and occupations are organized. This aligns with growing attention to the task content of production. We link establishment-level data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics survey with productivity data from the Census Bureau's manufacturing surveys. Our analysis reveals strong relationships between establishment productivity and task, skill, and occupation inputs. These relationships are highly nonlinear and vary by industry. When we account for these patterns, we can explain a substantial share of productivity dispersion across establishments.View Full Paper PDF
