IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cambje/v48y2024i4pe3-e45..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An empirical analysis of Minsky regimes in the US economy

Author

Listed:
  • Leila E Davis
  • Joao Paulo A de Souza
  • Gonzalo Hernandez

Abstract

In this paper, we analyse Minskian dynamics in the US economy via an empirical application of Minsky’s financing regime classifications to a panel of nonfinancial corporations. First, we map Minsky’s definitions of hedge, speculative and Ponzi finance onto firm-level data to describe the evolution of Minskian regimes. We highlight striking growth in the share of Ponzi firms in the post-1970 US, concentrated among small corporations. This secular growth in the incidence of Ponzi firms is consistent with the possibility of a long wave of increasingly fragile finance in the US economy. Second, we explore the possibility of short-run Minskian dynamics at a business cycle frequency. Using linear probability models relating firms’ probability of being Ponzi to the aggregate output gap, which captures short-term macroeconomic fluctuations exogenous to individual firms, we find that the relationship between aggregate downturns and the probability of being Ponzi is statistically significant, but very small (almost zero). This result is corroborated by quantile regressions using a continuous measure of financial fragility, the interest coverage ratio, which identify almost zero effects of short-term fluctuations on financial fragility across the interest coverage distribution. Together, these results speak to an important question in the theoretical literature on financial fragility regarding the duration of Minskian cycles, and lend support, in particular, to the contention that Minskian dynamics may take the form of long waves, but do not operate at business cycle frequencies.

Suggested Citation

  • Leila E Davis & Joao Paulo A de Souza & Gonzalo Hernandez, 2024. "An empirical analysis of Minsky regimes in the US economy," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 48(4), pages 3-45.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:48:y:2024:i:4:p:e3-e45.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/cje/bey061
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:oup:cambje:v:48:y:2024:i:4:p:e3-e45.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/cje .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.