Importwettbewerb und Firmenproduktivität
Viktor Slavtchev
Wirtschaft im Wandel,
No. 1,
2021
Abstract
Dieser Beitrag untersucht für Unternehmen aus dem Verarbeitenden Gewerbe in Deutschland empirisch, ob der Wettbewerbsdruck durch Importe zu einer Steigerung der Produktivität führt. Um die Reaktionen der einheimischen Unternehmen besser zu verstehen, werden auch Effekte auf Output, Beschäftigung und FuE-Aktivitäten der Unternehmen analysiert. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass die Anreize der Unternehmen, in eine Erhöhung ihrer Produktivität zu „investieren“, von der Art der importierten Güter abhängen sowie davon, wie schwierig es für die einheimischen Unternehmen ist, mit der Konkurrenz mitzuhalten. Auf Importe von vergleichsweise technologisch einfachen und arbeitsintensiven Produkten aus Niedriglohnländern reagieren einheimische Unternehmen nicht mit einer Erhöhung ihrer Produktivität; vielmehr reduzieren sie Output und Beschäftigung. Dagegen steigt die Produktivität einheimischer Unternehmen als Reaktion auf Wettbewerbsdruck durch Importe von kapital- und technologieintensiven Gütern aus Industrieländern – jedoch nicht aufgrund höherer FuE-Ausgaben; ein Rückgang von Output und Beschäftigung ist in diesem Fall nicht beobachtbar.
Read article
Changing Business Dynamism and Productivity: Shocks versus Responsiveness
Ryan A. Decker, John Haltiwanger, Ron S. Jarmin, Javier Miranda
American Economic Review,
No. 12,
2020
Abstract
The pace of job reallocation has declined in the United States in recent decades. We draw insight from canonical models of business dynamics in which reallocation can decline due to (i) lower dispersion of idiosyncratic shocks faced by businesses, or (ii) weaker marginal responsiveness of businesses to shocks. We show that shock dispersion has actually risen, while the responsiveness of business-level employment to productivity has weakened. Moreover, declining responsiveness can account for a significant fraction of the decline in the pace of job reallocation, and we find suggestive evidence this has been a drag on aggregate productivity.
Read article
Growing Income Inequality in the United States and Other Advanced Economies
Florian Hoffmann, David S. Lee, Thomas Lemieux
Journal of Economic Perspectives,
No. 4,
2020
Abstract
This paper studies the contribution of both labor and non-labor income in the growth in income inequality in the United States and large European economies. The paper first shows that the capital to labor income ratio disproportionately increased among high-earnings individuals, further contributing to the growth in overall income inequality. That said, the magnitude of this effect is modest, and the predominant driver of the growth in income inequality in recent decades is the growth in labor earnings inequality. Far more important than the distinction between total income and labor income, is the way in which educational factors account for the growth in US labor and capital income inequality. Growing income gaps among different education groups as well as composition effects linked to a growing fraction of highly educated workers have been driving these effects, with a noticeable role of occupational and locational factors for women. Findings for large European economies indicate that inequality has been growing fast in Germany, Italy, and the United Kingdom, though not in France. Capital income and education don't play as much as a role in these countries as in the United States.
Read article
The East-West German Gap in Revenue Productivity: Just a Tale of Output Prices?
Matthias Mertens, Steffen Müller
Abstract
East German manufacturers’ revenue productivity (value-added per worker) is some 8 (25) percent below West German levels, even three decades after German unification. Using firm-product-level data containing information on product quantities and prices, we analyse the role of product specialisation and reject the prominent ‚extended work bench hypothesis‘, stating a specialisation of Eastern firms in the intermediate input production as explanation for these sustained productivity differences. We decompose the East’s revenue productivity disadvantage into Eastern firms selling at lower prices and producing more physical output for given amounts of inputs within ten-digit product industries. This suggests that Eastern firms specialise vertically in simpler product varieties generating less consumer value but being manufactured with less or cheaper inputs. Vertical specialisation, however, does not explain the productivity gap as Eastern firms are physically less productive for given product prices, implying a genuine physical productivity disadvantage of Eastern compared to Western firms
Read article
The East-West German Gap in Revenue Productivity: Just a Tale of Output Prices?
Matthias Mertens, Steffen Müller
Abstract
East German manufacturers’ revenue productivity (value-added per worker) is some 8 (25) percent below West German levels, even three decades after German unification. Using firm-product-level data containing information on product quantities and prices, we analyse the role of product specialisation and reject the prominent ‚extended work bench hypothesis‘, stating a specialisation of Eastern firms in the intermediate input production as explanation for these sustained productivity differences. We decompose the East’s revenue productivity disadvantage into Eastern firms selling at lower prices and producing more physical output for given amounts of inputs within ten-digit product industries. This suggests that Eastern firms specialise vertically in simpler product varieties generating less consumer value but being manufactured with less or cheaper inputs. Vertical specialisation, however, does not explain the productivity gap as Eastern firms are physically less productive for given product prices, implying a genuine physical productivity disadvantage of Eastern compared to Western firms.
Read article
Profit Shifting and Tax‐rate Uncertainty
Manthos D. Delis, Iftekhar Hasan, Panagiotis I. Karavitis
Journal of Business Finance and Accounting,
5-6
2020
Abstract
Using firm‐level data for 1,084 parent firms in 24 countries and for 9,497 subsidiaries in 54 countries, we show that tax‐motivated profit shifting is larger among subsidiaries in countries that have stable corporate tax rates over time. Our findings further suggest that firms move away from transfer pricing and toward intragroup debt shifting that has lower adjustment costs. Our results are robust to several identification methods and respecifications, and they highlight the important role of tax‐rate uncertainty in the profit‐shifting decision while pointing to an adjustment away from more costly transfer pricing and toward debt shifting.
Read article
Intangible Capital and Productivity. Firm-level Evidence from German Manufacturing
Wolfhard Kaus, Viktor Slavtchev, Markus Zimmermann
IWH Discussion Papers,
No. 1,
2020
Abstract
We study the importance of intangible capital (R&D, software, patents) for the measurement of productivity using firm-level panel data from German manufacturing. We first document a number of facts on the evolution of intangible investment over time, and its distribution across firms. Aggregate intangible investment increased over time. However, the distribution of intangible investment, even more so than that of physical investment, is heavily right-skewed, with many firms investing nothing or little, and a few firms having very large intensities. Intangible investment is also lumpy. Firms that invest more intensively in intangibles (per capita or as sales share) also tend to be more productive. In a second step, we estimate production functions with and without intangible capital using recent control function approaches to account for the simultaneity of input choice and unobserved productivity shocks. We find a positive output elasticity for research and development (R&D) and, to a lesser extent, software and patent investment. Moreover, the production function estimates show substantial heterogeneity in the output elasticities across industries and firms. While intangible capital has small effects for firms with low intangible intensity, there are strong positive effects for high-intensity firms. Finally, including intangibles in a gross output production function reduces productivity dispersion (measured by the 90-10 decile range) on average by 3%, in some industries as much as nearly 9%.
Read article
Labor Market Power and the Distorting Effects of International Trade
Matthias Mertens
International Journal of Industrial Organization,
January
2020
Abstract
This article examines how final product trade with China shapes and interacts with labor market imperfections that create market power in labor markets and prevent an efficient market outcome. I develop a framework for measuring such labor market power distortions in monetary terms and document large degrees of these distortions in Germany's manufacturing sector. Import competition only exerts labor market disciplining effects if firms, rather than employees, possess labor market power. Otherwise, increasing export demand and import competition both fortify existing distortions, which decreases labor market efficiency. This widens the gap between potential and realized output and thus diminishes classical gains from trade.
Read article
Ostdeutscher Produktivitätsrückstand und Betriebsgröße
Steffen Müller, Georg Neuschäffer
Wirtschaft im Wandel,
No. 3,
2019
Abstract
Auch 30 Jahre nach dem Mauerfall ist die Produktivität der ostdeutschen Wirtschaft um 20% geringer als die der westdeutschen. Vielfach wird dies dadurch erklärt, dass westdeutsche Betriebe größer sind – denn größere Betriebe sind meist produktiver. Berechnungen auf Basis einzelbetrieblicher Daten bringen jedoch zum Vorschein, dass die Produktivitätslücke sich selbst dann nicht schließt, wenn Betriebe ähnlicher Größe verglichen werden, die zudem noch der gleichen Branche angehören und Ähnlichkeiten in weiteren für die Produktivität relevanten Merkmalen wie der Kapitalintensität, der Exporttätigkeit und dem Anteil qualifizierten Personals aufweisen.
Read article
Private Debt, Public Debt, and Capital Misallocation
Behzod Alimov
IWH-CompNet Discussion Papers,
No. 7,
2019
Abstract
Does finance facilitate efficient allocation of resources? Our aim in this paper is to find out whether increases in private and public indebtedness affect capital misallocation, which is measured as the dispersion in the return to capital across firms in different industries. For this, we use a novel dataset containing industrylevel data for 18 European countries and control for different macroeconomic indicators as potential determinants of capital misallocation. We exploit the within-country variation across industries in such indicators as external finance dependence, technological intensity, credit constraints and competitive structure, and find that private debt accumulation disproportionately increases capital misallocation in industries with higher financial dependence, higher R&D intensity, a larger share of credit-constrained firms and a lower level of competition. On the other hand, we fail to find any significant and robust effect of public debt on capital misallocation within our country-sector pairs. We believe the distortionary effects of private debt found in our analysis needs a deeper theoretical investigation.
Read article
