Direct Versus Indirect Federal Bond Subsidies: New Evidence on Cost of Capital

Martin J. Luby, Peter Orr and Richard Ryffel

Public Budgeting & Finance, 2021, vol. 41, issue 1, 76-120

Abstract: The longstanding debate surrounding the most effective way for the U.S. federal government to subsidize state and local government capital‐raising received renewed attention in recent years due to the passage and subsequent expiration of the taxable Build America Bond (BAB) program. Recent academic studies, as well as reports from the U.S. Treasury Department, claim that the direct subsidy approach as evidenced by the BAB program provides greater bond borrowing cost benefits to state and local governments compared to traditional tax‐exempt bonds. This research investigates the extent to which such borrowing cost benefits may be overstated since it appears previous studies did not adequately account for the early call optionality of tax‐exempt bonds.

Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/pbaf.12278

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:pbudge:v:41:y:2021:i:1:p:76-120

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=0275-1100

Access Statistics for this article

Public Budgeting & Finance is currently edited by Philip Joyce and William Simonsen

More articles in Public Budgeting & Finance from Wiley Blackwell
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().