Author
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 falling; 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 method; 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 increase; 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 results? 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 maturity; the result suggests that the return on Treasury notes for one year with resale is not appropriate for discounting earnings losses to present value.
Suggested Citation
Edward Foster, 2015.
"Net Interest Rates: History and Measurement,"
Journal of Forensic Economics, National Association of Forensic Economics, vol. 26(1), pages 99-114, December.
Handle:
RePEc:fek:papers:doi:10.5085/foen-26-01-08.1
DOI: 10.5085/foen-26-01-08.1
Download full text from publisher
More about this item
JEL classification:
- K13 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Tort Law and Product Liability; Forensic Economics
Statistics
Access and download statistics
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fek:papers:doi:10.5085/foen-26-01-08.1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kurt Krueger (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nafeeea.html .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.