Why the Feldstein-Horioka “Puzzle” Remains Unsolved

This paper argues that the 40-year-old Feldstein-Horioka “puzzle” (i.e., in a regression of the domestic investment rate on the domestic saving rate, the estimated coefficient is significantly larger than expected in a world with high capital mobility) should have never been labeled as such. First,...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Felipe, Jesus, Fullwiler, Scott, Yusoph, Al-Habbyel
Format: text
Published: Animo Repository 2022
Subjects:
Online Access:https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/res_aki/3
https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/context/res_aki/article/1002/viewcontent/dlsu_aki_working_paper_series_2022_06_084.pdf
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: De La Salle University
id oai:animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph:res_aki-1002
record_format eprints
spelling oai:animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph:res_aki-10022023-05-23T06:29:49Z Why the Feldstein-Horioka “Puzzle” Remains Unsolved Felipe, Jesus Fullwiler, Scott Yusoph, Al-Habbyel This paper argues that the 40-year-old Feldstein-Horioka “puzzle” (i.e., in a regression of the domestic investment rate on the domestic saving rate, the estimated coefficient is significantly larger than expected in a world with high capital mobility) should have never been labeled as such. First, we show that the series of investments and savings typically used in empirical exercises to test the FeldsteinHorioka thesis are not appropriate for testing capital mobility. Second, and complementary to the first point, we show that the Feldstein-Horioka regression is not a model in the econometric sense, that is, an equation with a proper error term (a random variable). The reason is that by adding the capital account to their regression, one gets the accounting identity that relates the capital account, domestic investment, and domestic saving. This implies that the estimate of the coefficient of the saving rate in the Feldstein-Horioka regression can be thought of as a biased estimate of the same coefficient in the accounting identity, where it has a value of 1. Because the omitted variable is known, we call it pseudo bias. Given that this (pseudo) bias is known to be negative and less than 1 in absolute terms, it should come as no surprise that the Feldstein-Horioka regression yields a coefficient between 0 and 1 2022-06-01T07:00:00Z text application/pdf https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/res_aki/3 https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/context/res_aki/article/1002/viewcontent/dlsu_aki_working_paper_series_2022_06_084.pdf Angelo King Institute for Economic and Business Studies Animo Repository accounting identity Feldstein-Horioka paradox (puzzle) investment pseudo bias saving
institution De La Salle University
building De La Salle University Library
continent Asia
country Philippines
Philippines
content_provider De La Salle University Library
collection DLSU Institutional Repository
topic accounting identity
Feldstein-Horioka paradox (puzzle)
investment
pseudo bias
saving
spellingShingle accounting identity
Feldstein-Horioka paradox (puzzle)
investment
pseudo bias
saving
Felipe, Jesus
Fullwiler, Scott
Yusoph, Al-Habbyel
Why the Feldstein-Horioka “Puzzle” Remains Unsolved
description This paper argues that the 40-year-old Feldstein-Horioka “puzzle” (i.e., in a regression of the domestic investment rate on the domestic saving rate, the estimated coefficient is significantly larger than expected in a world with high capital mobility) should have never been labeled as such. First, we show that the series of investments and savings typically used in empirical exercises to test the FeldsteinHorioka thesis are not appropriate for testing capital mobility. Second, and complementary to the first point, we show that the Feldstein-Horioka regression is not a model in the econometric sense, that is, an equation with a proper error term (a random variable). The reason is that by adding the capital account to their regression, one gets the accounting identity that relates the capital account, domestic investment, and domestic saving. This implies that the estimate of the coefficient of the saving rate in the Feldstein-Horioka regression can be thought of as a biased estimate of the same coefficient in the accounting identity, where it has a value of 1. Because the omitted variable is known, we call it pseudo bias. Given that this (pseudo) bias is known to be negative and less than 1 in absolute terms, it should come as no surprise that the Feldstein-Horioka regression yields a coefficient between 0 and 1
format text
author Felipe, Jesus
Fullwiler, Scott
Yusoph, Al-Habbyel
author_facet Felipe, Jesus
Fullwiler, Scott
Yusoph, Al-Habbyel
author_sort Felipe, Jesus
title Why the Feldstein-Horioka “Puzzle” Remains Unsolved
title_short Why the Feldstein-Horioka “Puzzle” Remains Unsolved
title_full Why the Feldstein-Horioka “Puzzle” Remains Unsolved
title_fullStr Why the Feldstein-Horioka “Puzzle” Remains Unsolved
title_full_unstemmed Why the Feldstein-Horioka “Puzzle” Remains Unsolved
title_sort why the feldstein-horioka “puzzle” remains unsolved
publisher Animo Repository
publishDate 2022
url https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/res_aki/3
https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/context/res_aki/article/1002/viewcontent/dlsu_aki_working_paper_series_2022_06_084.pdf
_version_ 1767197079883481088