<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Yikai Wang | Macro Paper Warehouse</title><link>https://macropaperwarehouse.com/authors/yikai-wang/</link><description>Yikai Wang</description><generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator><language>en-us</language><atom:link href="https://macropaperwarehouse.com/authors/yikai-wang/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>The Optimum Quantity of Capital and Debt</title><link>https://macropaperwarehouse.com/papers/the-optimum-quantity-of-capital-and-debt/</link><guid>https://macropaperwarehouse.com/papers/the-optimum-quantity-of-capital-and-debt/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;What are the optimal long-run levels of capital and government debt, and should capital be taxed at all, in a heterogeneous-agent, incomplete-markets economy of the kind studied by Aiyagari (1995)? Most of the prior literature answers a narrower question &amp;ndash; which steady state maximizes welfare &amp;ndash; but this paper instead solves the full dynamic Ramsey taxation problem, in which a planner commits at date zero to an entire path of linear labor and capital taxes and government debt to maximize the discounted present value of households&amp;rsquo; lifetime utility, and derives three main theoretical results. First, exactly as under complete markets, the long-run pre-tax return to capital equals the rate of time preference &amp;ndash; the capital stock satisfies the modified golden rule &amp;ndash; even though, unlike the representative-agent case, genuine distributional concerns are present throughout. Second, and in sharp contrast to representative-agent Ramsey economies (where the steady state depends on the initial government debt level, since the planner smooths tax distortions relative to whatever fiscal burden it inherits), the long-run steady-state levels of capital, debt, and both tax rates in this incomplete-markets economy are independent of initial conditions &amp;ndash; the same long-run policy is reached no matter where the economy starts. Third, building on this independence result, the authors develop a new Lagrangian computational method &amp;ndash; solving for the known terminal steady state analytically first, then finding the transition path of taxes and debt that connects it to the calibrated initial economy via a system of first-order conditions &amp;ndash; avoiding the essentially unverifiable global numerical search that would otherwise be required over hundreds or thousands of variables. Quantitatively, calibrating the model to U.S. income inequality with a unit Frisch elasticity of labor supply, the optimal long-run policy features a government debt level of about 1.1 times GDP, a capital income tax around 21 percent (positive, but low relative to most developed economies), and a labor income tax around 50 percent &amp;ndash; a pattern of high debt, low capital taxation, and high labor taxation that the paper finds is robust across a wide range of alternative calibrations of labor supply and income-risk parameters. The paper also offers a reinterpretation of Aiyagari&amp;rsquo;s (1995) original finding of a positive long-run capital tax: rather than existing to correct households&amp;rsquo; precautionary over-accumulation of capital, the tax is positive because the planner instead uses government debt to satisfy households&amp;rsquo; demand for extra liquidity, which brings the capital stock itself back down to its efficient (modified-golden-rule) level; the capital tax&amp;rsquo;s remaining role is only to make households willing to hold exactly the optimal quantities of both capital and government debt simultaneously. Moving from a U.S.-calibrated initial steady state to the optimal transition path yields an average lifetime welfare gain of about 2.6 percent of consumption.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>