Kathrin Schlafmann


Welcome to my home page!

I'm an Assistant Professor at the Copenhagen Business School (Department of Finance), a Researcher at the Institute for International Economic Studies (IIES) in Stockholm, a Research Affiliate of the Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR) and a Research Fellow of the Danish Finance Institute (DFI). I work in the area of Household Finance and Macroeconomics.


Contact Details

Copenhagen Business School

Department of Finance

Solbjerg Plads 3

2000 Frederiksberg

Denmark

ksc.fi@cbs.dk

Research Interests

Household Finance, Macroeconomics, Real Estate, Behavioral Economics

Working Papers

Overpersistence Bias in Individual Income Expectations and its Aggregate Implications (with Filip Rozsypal, new version September 2020)

conditionally accepted at American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, CEPR Discussion Paper 12028

Using micro level data, we document systematic forecast errors in household income expectations that are related to the level of income. We show that these errors can be formalized by a modest deviation from rational expectations, where agents overestimate the persistence of their income process. We then investigate the implications of these distortions on consumption and savings behavior and find two effects. First, these distortions allow an otherwise fully optimization-based quantitative model to match the joint distribution of liquid assets and income. Second, the bias alters the distribution of marginal propensities to consume which makes government stimulus policies less effective.


Information and Wealth Heterogeneity in the Macroeconomy (with Tobias Broer, Alexandre Kohlhas, and Kurt Mitman), CEPR Discussion Paper 15934

We document systematic differences in macroeconomic expectations across U.S. households and rationalize our findings with a theory of information choice. We embed this theory into an incomplete-markets model with aggregate risk. Our model is quantitatively consistent with the pattern of expectation heterogeneity in the data. Relative to a full-information counterpart, our model implies substantially increased macroeconomic volatility and inequality. We show through the example of a wealth tax that neglecting the information channel leads to erroneous conclusions about the effects of policies. While in the model without information choice a wealth tax reduces wealth inequality, in our framework it reduces information acquired in the economy, leading to increased volatility and higher wealth inequality in equilibrium.

Work in Progress

Optimal Defined Contribution Pension Plans: One-Size Does Not Fit All (with Ofer Setty and Roine Vestman)

Lumpy Durable Purchases and Marginal Propensities to Consume (with Filip Rozsypal)

I’m not worried if you are: Aggregate Shocks, Heterogeneity, and Information Choice in General Equilibrium (with Tobias Broer, Alexandre Kohlhas, and Kurt Mitman)

Publications

Housing, Mortgages, and Self-Control, Review of Financial Studies, 34(5), May 2021, pp.2648–2687.

Using a quantitative theoretical framework this paper analyzes how problems of self-control influence housing and mortgage decisions. The results show that people with stronger problems of self-control are less likely to become homeowners, even though houses serve as commitment for saving. The paper then investigates the welfare effects of regulating mortgage products if people differ in their degree of self-control. Holding house prices fixed, higher down payment requirements and restrictions on refinancing turn out to be beneficial to people with sufficiently strong problems of self-control, even though these policies restrict access to the commitment device.


Rules of Thumb in Life-Cycle Saving Decisions (with Joachim Winter and Ralf Rodepeter), Economic Journal, 122, May 2012, pp.479–501 (Matlab code)

We analyse life-cycle saving decisions when households use simple heuristics, or rules of thumb, rather than solve the underlying intertemporal optimisation problem. We simulate life-cycle saving decisions using three simple rules and compute utility losses relative to the solution of the optimisation problem. Our simulations suggest that utility losses induced by following simple decision rules are relatively low. Moreover, the two main saving motives reflected by the canonical life-cycle model – long-run consumption smoothing and short-run insurance against income shocks – can be addressed quite well by saving rules that do not require computationally demanding tasks, such as backwards induction.

last updated: 21 May 2021