Introduction to Heterogeneity Series III: Credit Market Outcomes -Liberty Street Economics
Liberty Street Economics

« A New Reserves Regime? COVID-19 and the Federal Reserve Balance Sheet | Main | Inequality in U.S. Homeownership Rates by Race and Ethnicity »

July 07, 2020

Introduction to Heterogeneity Series III: Credit Market Outcomes



Introduction to Heterogeneity Series III: Credit Market Outcomes

Average economic outcomes serve as important indicators of the overall state of the economy. However, they mask a lot of underlying variability in how people experience the economy across geography, or by race, income, age, or other attributes. Following our series on heterogeneity broadly in October 2019 and in labor market outcomes in March 2020, we now turn our focus to further documenting heterogeneity in the credit market. While we have written about credit market heterogeneity before, this series integrates insights on disparities in outcomes in various parts of the credit market. The analysis includes a look at differing homeownership rates across populations, varying exposure to foreclosures and evictions, and uneven student loan burdens and repayment behaviors. It also covers heterogeneous effects of policies by comparing financial health outcomes for those with access to public tuition subsidies and Medicare versus those not eligible. The findings underscore that a measure of the average, particularly relating to policy impact, is far from complete. Rather, a sharper picture of the diverse effects is essential to understanding the efficacy of policy.

Here is a brief look at each post in the series:

Inequality in U.S. Homeownership Rates by Race and Ethnicity1. Inequality in U.S. Homeownership Rates by Race and Ethnicity
Andrew Haughwout, Donghoon Lee, Joelle Scally, and Wilbert van der Klaauw investigate racial gaps in homeownership rates and, importantly, explore the reasons behind these differences. They find:

  • The Black-white and Black-Hispanic homeownership gaps widened after the Great Recession, markedly more so after 2015.
  • The foreclosure crisis disproportionately affected areas with majority Black or Hispanic populations.
  • Explanations for the homeownership gap may include differential effects of tightening underwriting standards across areas with a majority Black or Hispanic population versus those with a majority white population, differences in labor market outcomes across these areas during and following the Great Recession, and larger incidence of student debt in these areas.

Who Has Been Evicted and Why?2. Who Has Been Evicted and Why?
Andrew Haughwout, Haoyang Liu, and Xiaohan Zhang explore the reasons behind evictions, who is more likely to be evicted, and the possibility of owning a home and gaining access to credit following evictions. Their findings reveal:

  • Large shares of low-income households have been evicted.
  • Income or job loss and change in building ownership are important reasons behind evictions.
  • Renters with a past eviction history are less likely to have access to credit cards and auto loans.

Measuring Racial Disparities in Higher Education and Student Debt Outcomes3. Measuring Racial Disparities in Higher Education and Student Debt Outcomes
Rajashri Chakrabarti, William Nober, and Wilbert van der Klaauw investigate whether (and how) differences in college attendance rates and types of college attended may lead to student debt borrowing and default. The key takeaways include:

  • There are noticeable disparities in college attendance and graduation rates between majority white, majority Black, and majority Hispanic neighborhoods, with graduation rates the lowest in majority Black neighborhoods.
  • Students from majority Black neighborhoods are more likely to hold student debt and in larger amounts.
  • Borrowers from majority Black neighborhoods are more likely to default, and this pattern is more prominent for borrowers from two-year colleges than those from four-year colleges.

Do College Tuition Subsidies Boost Spending and Reduce Debt? Impacts by Income and Race4. Do College Tuition Subsidies Boost Spending and Reduce Debt? Impacts by Income and Race
Rajashri Chakrabarti, William Nober, and Wilbert van der Klaauw investigate the effect of tuition subsidies, specifically merit-based aid, on other debt and consumption outcomes. The main findings include:

  • Cohorts eligible for these tuition subsidies have higher credit card balances and higher delinquencies in their early-to-mid-twenties. These patterns are more evident for borrowers from low-income and predominantly Black neighborhoods.
  • Eligible cohorts are more likely to own cars (as captured by auto debt originations) in their early-to-mid-twenties. This pattern is more prominent for borrowers from low-income and predominantly Black neighborhoods.
  • The patterns indicate substitution away from student debt (as net tuition declines) to other forms of consumer debt for eligible cohorts in college-going ages, a pattern more prominent for borrowers from low-income and Black neighborhoods.

Medicare and Financial Health across the United States5. Medicare and Financial Health across the United States
Paul Goldsmith-Pinkham, Maxim Pinkovskiy, and Jacob Wallace investigate the effect of access to health insurance programs, as captured by Medicare eligibility, on financial health of individuals. They find:

  • Medicare eligibility markedly improves financial health, as captured by declines in debt in collections.
  • Access to Medicare drastically reduces geographic disparities in financial health.
  • The improvements in financial health are most evident in areas with a high share of Black, low-income, and disabled residents and in areas with for-profit hospitals.
As these posts will demonstrate in greater detail tomorrow, the average outcome doesn’t provide a full picture of credit market outcomes. There is considerable heterogeneity in different segments of the credit market both in terms of outcomes, as well as the in the effects of specific policies. Outcomes vary by a range of factors, such as differences in race, income, age, and geography. We will continue to study and write about the importance of heterogeneity in the credit market and other segments of the economy.


Chakrabarti_rajashriRajashri Chakrabarti is a senior economist in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s Research and Statistics Group.


How to cite this post:
Rajashri Chakrabarti, “Introduction to Heterogeneity Series III: Credit Market Outcomes,” Federal Reserve Bank of New York Liberty Street Economics, July 7, 2020, https://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/2020/06/introduction-to-heterogeneity-series-iii-credit-market-outcomes.html.


Related Reading:
Series One
Introduction to Heterogeneity: Understanding Causes and Implications of Various Inequalities
Series Two
Introduction to Heterogeneity: Labor Market Outcomes




Disclaimer
The views expressed in this post are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York or the Federal Reserve System. Any errors or omissions are the responsibility of the author.
Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

About the Blog
Liberty Street Economics features insight and analysis from New York Fed economists working at the intersection of research and policy. Launched in 2011, the blog takes its name from the Bank’s headquarters at 33 Liberty Street in Manhattan’s Financial District.

The editors are Michael Fleming, Andrew Haughwout, Thomas Klitgaard, and Asani Sarkar, all economists in the Bank’s Research Group.

Liberty Street Economics does not publish new posts during the blackout periods surrounding Federal Open Market Committee meetings.

The views expressed are those of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect the position of the New York Fed or the Federal Reserve System.


Economic Research Tracker

Liberty Street Economics is now available on the iPhone® and iPad® and can be customized by economic research topic or economist.


Most Viewed

Last 12 Months
Useful Links
Comment Guidelines
We encourage your comments and queries on our posts and will publish them (below the post) subject to the following guidelines:
Please be brief: Comments are limited to 1500 characters.
Please be quick: Comments submitted after COB on Friday will not be published until Monday morning.
Please be aware: Comments submitted shortly before or during the FOMC blackout may not be published until after the blackout.
Please be on-topic and patient: Comments are moderated and will not appear until they have been reviewed to ensure that they are substantive and clearly related to the topic of the post. We reserve the right not to post any comment, and will not post comments that are abusive, harassing, obscene, or commercial in nature. No notice will be given regarding whether a submission will or will not be posted.‎
Disclosure Policy
The LSE editors ask authors submitting a post to the blog to confirm that they have no conflicts of interest as defined by the American Economic Association in its Disclosure Policy. If an author has sources of financial support or other interests that could be perceived as influencing the research presented in the post, we disclose that fact in a statement prepared by the author and appended to the author information at the end of the post. If the author has no such interests to disclose, no statement is provided. Note, however, that we do indicate in all cases if a data vendor or other party has a right to review a post.
Archives