Cited by 34Housing Market and EconomicsHousing, Finance, and NeoliberalismFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis

Refinancing cross-subsidies in the mortgage market

Open access
Fisher, Jack, Gavazza, Alessandro, Liu, Lu, Ramadorai, Tarun, Tripathy, Jagdish·2024·Journal of Financial Economics

Abstract

In household finance markets, inactive households can implicitly cross-subsidize active households who promptly respond to financial incentives. We assess the magnitude and distribution of cross-subsidies in the mortgage market. To do so, we build a structural model of household mortgage refinancing and estimate it on rich administrative data covering the stock of outstanding mortgages in the UK. We estimate sizeable cross-subsidies that flow from relatively poorer households and those located in less-wealthy areas towards richer households and those located in wealthier areas. Our work highlights how the design of household finance markets can contribute to wealth inequality.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jfineco.2024.103876

Cites

64 of 64 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The kink point is at a level of around 1.8 p.p.

    “The kink point is at a level of around 1.8 p.p.”

    From Mortgage Lock‐In, Mobility, and Labor Reallocation (2024) · cites this paper as Fisher et al. (2024)

    The cited paper’s Section 4.4 discusses mortgage interest rates and refinancing costs, but does not identify a kink point at around 1.8 percentage points. Searches for “kink point,” “1.8 p.p.,” and equivalent threshold wording found no passage addressing that claim. (LLM, conf=0.73)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 66 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Abel, A. B., J. C. Eberly, and S. Panageas (2013): 'Optimal inattention to the stock market with information costs and transactions costs,' Econometrica, 81(4), 1455-1481.
  2. Brunnermeier, M. K., and S. Nagel (2008): 'Do wealth fluctuations generate timevarying risk aversion? Micro-evidence on individuals,' American Economic Review, 98(3), 713-36.
  3. Gomes, F., M. Haliassos, and T. Ramadorai (2021): 'Household Finance,' Journal of Economic Literature.
  4. Matˇ ejka, F., and A. McKay (2015): 'Rational inattention to discrete choices: A new foundation for the multinomial logit model,' American Economic Review, 105(1), 272-98.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fisher, J., Gavazza, A., Liu, L., Ramadorai, T., & Tripathy, J.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Centre for Economic Policy Research (GB)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • Bank of England (GB)
Venue
Journal of Financial Economics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2024-08
Volume
158
Pages
103876
ISSN
0304-405X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4399452930
Cited by
34
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1
FWCI
4.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Financial Economics (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • London School of Economics and Political Science Theses Online (London School of Economics and Political Science) (submittedVersion)
  • London School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science) (submittedVersion)
Funders
European Research Council (771004)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Housing Market and Economics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Finance › Housing, Finance, and Neoliberalism
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Accounting › Financial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis
Keywords
cross-subsidization, mortgage refinancing, household finance, wealth inequality, structural model, mortgage market, household wealth, financial incentives

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review