JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS最新文献

Previous research has documented significant, and often persistent, disparities in credit and payments market participation and outcomes across many socioeconomic and demographic categories. Continuing study of the mechanisms and consequences of such inequality is vital for understanding its sources, persistence, and potential remedies. This Special Issue on Inequality in Consumer Credit and Payments helps to deepen the academic and policy discourse through a multifaceted approach that combines both empirical and theoretical analysis, offering new insights into the structural challenges at play and the potential policy responses that might mitigate them.

Banks impose a variety of account fees, and credit card issuers impose a variety of fees related to card usage. Using detailed data from a 2021 representative diary survey of US consumers, we investigate whether lower-income consumers and Black consumers are more likely to pay bank account or credit card fees, and how payment behavior varies depending on paying such fees. We find that the probability of paying several types of bank account and credit card fees is correlated with consumers’ demographic and income attributes. The percentage of Black consumers who pay overdraft or low-balance fees on their bank accounts or pay late fees or cash-advance fees on their credit cards is higher than the percentage of White consumers who pay those fees. We find that some fees on bank accounts and credit cards are regressive: lower-income consumers are significantly more likely to pay overdraft, bounced check, or late fees. While Black consumers were significantly more likely to pay any bank account fee, the race effect was smaller when controlling for income in the regressions.

Promoting bank account ownership is important because having a bank account is the foundation for households’ financial well-being. Unbanked households differ in their likelihood of opening a bank account, and understanding the factors associated with these differences can help policymakers and industry stakeholders to tailor financial inclusion strategies. This study examines which factors are associated with unbanked households that are more (or less) likely to open a bank account. We use data from the FDIC National Surveys of Unbanked and Underbanked Households and assess the likelihoods of opening a bank account for different groups of unbanked households divided based on their prior banking status and interest in having a bank account. Unbanked households that previously had a bank account and are interested in having a bank account are more likely to open an account. These households tend to be unemployed, more educated, and native born, to have access to digital technologies, to use alternative financial services, and to be unbanked because of unfavorable bank account features. In contrast, households that never had a bank account and are uninterested in a bank account are less likely to open an account. These households tend to be not in the labor force, less educated, of a racial minority, and foreign born, to lack access to digital technologies, and to rely heavily on cash. Moreover, they tend to distrust banks. Advancing financial inclusion for this group will require strategies to increase their trust in the financial services industry.

We use cross-state differences in minimum wage (MW) levels and county-level consumer bankruptcy rates from 1991–2017 to estimate the effect of changes in minimum wages on consumer bankruptcy. We find that Chapter 7 bankruptcy rates are significantly lower in counties belonging to states with higher MW compared to neighboring counties in the lower MW state: a 10% increase in MW decreases the bankruptcy rate by around 4%. Before the 2005 bankruptcy reform, this effect was almost twice as large as for the entire sample. Theoretically, we cannot sign the effect of MW on bankruptcy and credit utilization; we use a stylized consumption/saving model with default to illustrate the dependence on critical aspects of the model (costs of default, minimum wage levels, and disemployment effects) and to provide intuition on how to interpret our results.

This research provides new and updated evidence on the financial capability of military veterans. We leverage data from two waves of the FINRA Investor Education Foundation’s National Financial Capability Study (NFCS) to examine how veterans are faring over time, relative to comparable civilians. Overall, veterans in 2018 fared better than non-veterans in several areas. They reported higher financial satisfaction, less difficulty covering expenses, and a higher likelihood of having an emergency fund and non-retirement investment account. However, veterans were more likely to report having experienced a large drop in income, problematic credit card behaviors and late mortgage payments. Notably, though several indicators of overall financial well-being and saving behaviors improved from 2015 to 2018 and spending and credit outcomes worsened, these relative changes did not differ between veterans and non-veterans.

We examine the effects of the Universal Credit expansion and mortgage forbearance on the financial well-being of United Kingdom (UK) residents during the pandemic. Using anonymized individual-level consumer financial data on 2 million UK consumers, each with one or more defaulted accounts accrued before the pandemic, we found that average nonmortgage debt increased by 17% from October 2019 (£5497) to December 2021 (£6456). Using a difference-in-difference approach, we found mixed policy impacts on the debt people carried. Although the expansion of Universal Credit was intended to help financially vulnerable families, consumers who were more likely to benefit from the Universal Credit expansion took on 1% more total nonmortgage debt after the policy expansion. By contrast, during the period of mortgage forbearance, mortgage holders accumulated 1% less total nonmortgage debt compared to nonmortgage holders. These results suggest that policies implemented in the UK to protect financially vulnerable families were insufficient to prevent beneficiaries from accumulating additional debt during the pandemic.

The number of people in financial distress was expected to increase in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, with the most vulnerable populations likely suffering the most. To protect the most disadvantaged, states implemented emergency measures such as utility shutoff moratoria, which prevented utility companies from disconnecting families’ energy and water services due to non-payment. Using credit bureau data on five million consumers, we investigate how a utility shutoff moratorium impacted consumers’ credit delinquencies. We find that adults living in states that implemented such protections were less likely to be late in the payment of their credit cards and auto & retail loan bills during the pandemic. We also find that a state utility shutoff moratorium reduced the likelihood of consumers’ unpaid debt being sent to collections during the pandemic. Residents of majority-Black communities benefited the most from a utility shutoff moratorium. These results suggest that families in states with a utility shutoff moratorium used this economic relief to pay their financial obligations in time.