Kenji Miyazaki | Search arXiv

arXiv2026

When Do Type-Specific Wages Buffer Distributional Incidence in TANK?

When do relative wages buffer the unequal incidence of aggregate shocks? I derive a consumption-gap decomposition and a present-value condition for partial offset in a TANK model. An extension separates wage-setting demand elasticity from substitution between labor segments and allows each segment to contain both financial types. With a zero inherited wage gap and a same-sign discounted wedge, substitution above one gives offsetting earnings reallocation; substitution below one gives amplification. The channel disappears when financial types have identical segment exposure. Numerical experiments assess these mechanisms, shock persistence, policy feedback, and aggregate-IRF matching. In the nested perfect-alignment monetary benchmark, the peak consumption gap is about two-fifths smaller under type-specific wages than under the common-wage closure. These are conditional model comparisons, not empirical effect estimates or welfare rankings.

econ.GN↗

arXiv2026

Profit Redistribution in a TANK Model with Price and Wage Rigidities: An Analytical Benchmark and an Own-Lag Comparison

This paper studies profit redistribution in a Two-Agent New Keynesian model with price and wage rigidities, type-specific wages, and type-specific labor supply. An aggregate-lag benchmark yields closed-form distributional allocations and impact and infinite-horizon cumulative monetary-policy multipliers. The local effect of the hand-to-mouth share on impact multipliers requires an additional root condition; its local effect on infinite-horizon cumulative multipliers requires determinacy. The own-lag comparison holds primitive cost coefficients fixed rather than equating economic rigidity across timings. Across a grid of policy feedback, household wage-subsidy financing, household shares, and duration targets, expansionary monetary shocks raise output and inflation and lower profits. The hand-to-mouth share increases 21-quarter cumulative responses under both timings and impact responses under own-lag adjustment, whereas the aggregate-lag impact ordering can reverse slightly. Timing changes inflation and profit persistence. The aggregate-lag benchmark compresses dispersion losses into a higher price-inflation weight; own-lag adjustment leaves inherited relative wages and dynamic dispersion terms.

econ.TH↗