Houses as Durable Goods, Land Market Division and the Missing Money Puzzle
LIU Jianjian, WANG Chan, ZHAO Fuyang, GONG Liutang
School of Finance, Shandong University of Finance and Economics; School of Finance/School of Economics, Central University of Finance and Economics; School of International Economics and Management, Beijing Technology and Business University; LMEQF Peking University
Summary:
The 2008 financial crisis caused a drastic decline in China's exports and slowed its economic growth. In response, China adopted stimulus plan to stimulate the economy. However, the resulting increase in money supply (M2) did not cause an increase in inflation, which is called the missing money puzzle. This puzzle was caused by the boom in the real estate sector and a sharp increase in housing prices. There were variations in land prices as well, as the prices of commercial and residential land rose sharply while the prices of industrial land remained relatively stable. This study explains the above phenomena in a unified framework. We build a two-sector dynamic stochastic general equilibrium model comprising the real estate and non-real estate sectors to explain the missing money puzzle. Both sectors use labor, capital and land as material inputs of production. The entrepreneurs of both sectors face financial frictions, that is, they use land and capital as collateral to borrow from households. Land is provided by the local government. There is a land market division: an entrepreneur in the housing sector uses commercial and residential land to produce housing, while an entrepreneur in the non-housing sector uses industrial land to produce goods for consumption. The demand for housing, as a durable good, is more sensitive to changes in interest rates because of its near-constant shadow value and almost infinite elasticity of substitution. Therefore, when the interest rate declines, the demand for housing increases more than that of non-housing goods, and housing prices rise sharply. Furthermore, the increase in housing demand encourages real estate entrepreneurs to increase production and the material inputs of production, including land. As land of different types or in different markets cannot be transformed, commercial land prices rise significantly because of the fixed land supply. High land prices increase the collateral value of land and relax the borrowing constraints of real estate entrepreneurs, enabling them to gain more capital to increase production, which leads to a further expansion in the real estate sector. However, non-housing goods are less sensitive to changes in interest rates, so the demand for non-housing goods and the price of industrial land increase slowly, thereby limiting the borrowing capacity of entrepreneurs in the non-real estate sector. This leads to a modest rise in the non-real estate sector output and the Consumer Price Index. We also compute the optimal Ramsey policy and compare it with the benchmark model. The monetary policy should be stable and limit the increase in the housing sector to achieve optimal social welfare and balanced development in the housing and non-housing sectors. Based on the study findings, we make the following policy recommendations. Monetary policy tools should play the dual functions of aggregation and structure as houses are assets for living in, not for speculation. The monetary policy should maintain stability, and structural monetary policy instruments should be improved. It is also necessary to increase construction for residential purposes and affordable housing and develop the long-term rental market. Moreover, a prudent management system for real estate should be implemented to achieve balanced development of the housing and non-housing sectors.
刘建建, 王忏, 赵扶扬, 龚六堂. 住房耐用品、土地市场分割与货币失踪之谜[J]. 金融研究, 2022, 509(11): 21-39.
LIU Jianjian, WANG Chan, ZHAO Fuyang, GONG Liutang. Houses as Durable Goods, Land Market Division and the Missing Money Puzzle. Journal of Financial Research, 2022, 509(11): 21-39.
Barsky, R., L. H. Christopher, and M. Kimball, 2007, “Sticky Price Models and Durable Goods.” American Economic Review,97(3): 984～998.
[14]
Chang, C., Z. Liu, and M. Spiegel, 2015, “Capital Controls and Optimal Chinese Monetary Policy.” Journal of Monetary Economics,74: 1～15.
[15]
Chen, B., and S. Liao, 2014, “Capital, Credit Constraints and The Comovement Between Consumer Durables and Nondurables”. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 39: 127～139.
[16]
Chen, T., L. Liu, W. Xiong, and L. Zhou, 2017, “Real Estate Boom and Corporate Misallocation of Capital in China.” Working Paper.
[17]
Chen, K., J. Ren, and T. Zha, 2018, “The Nexus of Monetary Policy and Shadow Banking in China.”. American Economic Review, 108 (12): 3891～3936.
[18]
Chen, K. and Y, Wen, 2017, “The Great Housing Boom of China.” American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, 9(2): 73～114.
[19]
Christopher, E., and L. Andrew, 2006, “Optimal Monetary Policy with Durable Consumption Goods.” Journal of Monetary Economics, 53: 1341～1359.
[20]
Fang, H., Q. Gu, W. Xiong, and L. Zhou, 2016, “Demystifying The Chinese Housing Boom.” NBER Macroeconomics Annual, 30: 105～166.
[21]
Iacoviello, M., 2005, “House Prices, Borrowing Constraints, and Monetary Policy in the Business Cycle.” American Economic Review, 95 (3):739～764.
[22]
Hsieh, C., and E. Moeretti, 2019, “Housing Constraints and Spatial Misallocation”. American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, 11: 1～39.
[23]
Lambertini, L., M. Caterina, and T. Maria, 2013, “Leaning Against Boom-bust Cycles in Credit and Housing Prices.” Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 37: 1500～1522.
[24]
Liu, Z., P. Wang, and T. Zha, 2013, “Land-price Dynamics and Macroeconomic Fluctuations.” Econometrica, 81 (3): 1147～1184.
[25]
Mankiw, N., J. Rotemberg, and L. Summers, 1985, “Intertemporal Substitution in Macroeconomics.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 100(1): 225～251.
[26]
Notarpietro, A. and S. Siviero, 2015, “Optimal Monetary Policy Rules and House Prices: The Role of Financial Frictions.” Journal of Money Credit＆ Banking,47( S1): 383～410.
