Net Interest Rates: History and Measurement

Edward Foster
{"title":"Net Interest Rates: History and Measurement","authors":"Edward Foster","doi":"10.5085/FOEN-26-01-08.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Johnson and Gelles (1996) observed that starting in about 1980 the interest rates on U.S. Treasury securities rose sharply, and argued that because of the increase, forensic economists should not use low interest rates based on earlier experience for calculation of present values. Interest rates did indeed rise sharply. But by 1996 interest rates were already fallings rates have continued to fall so that the status quo ante has been essentially restored. This bit of forensic economic history would be of little interest except that Johnson and Gelles are still cited to help justify net interest rates more appropriate to the 1980s than to 2015. This note updates their work, using their same sources and methods it is intended in part to show that the high interest rates described in their paper are not now relevant. The note continues, to discuss how to measure net interest rates. There are two issues: (1) The net rate for an n-year note should use the n-year rate of wage increases alternatively it should compare the 1-year rate of return on the n-year note (with capital gains from resale) with the 1-year rate of wage increase. (2) Interest rates are measured daily, and wages monthly. Does the use of annual averages change the resultsq Answer: the overall picture given by alternative definitions is not very sensitive to the definition of the net interest rate, except that when 3- or 10-year notes are held for just one year and re-sold to give a total annual return that includes interest and capital gains or losses, volatility of returns is considerably higher than when the securities are held to maturitys the result suggests that the return on Treasury notes for one year with resale is not appropriate for discounting earnings losses to present value.","PeriodicalId":265321,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Forensic Economics","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Forensic Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5085/FOEN-26-01-08.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Johnson and Gelles (1996) observed that starting in about 1980 the interest rates on U.S. Treasury securities rose sharply, and argued that because of the increase, forensic economists should not use low interest rates based on earlier experience for calculation of present values. Interest rates did indeed rise sharply. But by 1996 interest rates were already fallings rates have continued to fall so that the status quo ante has been essentially restored. This bit of forensic economic history would be of little interest except that Johnson and Gelles are still cited to help justify net interest rates more appropriate to the 1980s than to 2015. This note updates their work, using their same sources and methods it is intended in part to show that the high interest rates described in their paper are not now relevant. The note continues, to discuss how to measure net interest rates. There are two issues: (1) The net rate for an n-year note should use the n-year rate of wage increases alternatively it should compare the 1-year rate of return on the n-year note (with capital gains from resale) with the 1-year rate of wage increase. (2) Interest rates are measured daily, and wages monthly. Does the use of annual averages change the resultsq Answer: the overall picture given by alternative definitions is not very sensitive to the definition of the net interest rate, except that when 3- or 10-year notes are held for just one year and re-sold to give a total annual return that includes interest and capital gains or losses, volatility of returns is considerably higher than when the securities are held to maturitys the result suggests that the return on Treasury notes for one year with resale is not appropriate for discounting earnings losses to present value.
净利率:历史和计量
Johnson和Gelles(1996)观察到,大约从1980年开始,美国国债的利率急剧上升,并认为由于这种上升,法律经济学家不应该使用基于早期经验的低利率来计算现值。利率确实大幅上升。但到1996年,利率已经在下降,利率继续下降,因此基本上恢复了原来的状态。除了约翰逊和盖勒斯的理论仍然被用来证明净利率更适合上世纪80年代(而不是2015年)之外,这一点实证经济史没什么意义。本文更新了他们的工作,使用了他们相同的来源和方法,部分目的是为了表明他们论文中描述的高利率现在并不相关。报告继续讨论了如何衡量净利率。这里有两个问题:(1)n年期票据的净利率应该使用n年的工资增长率,或者它应该比较n年期票据的1年回报率(包括转售所得的资本收益)与1年的工资增长率。(2)利率按日计算,工资按月计算。使用年平均值会改变结果吗?其他定义给出的总体情况对净利率的定义不太敏感,除非3年期或10年期债券仅持有一年并重新出售,以获得包括利息和资本收益或损失在内的总年回报。收益的波动性明显高于证券持有至到期时的波动性,结果表明,转售的一年期国库券的收益不适合将收益损失贴现为现值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信