The Future in Today’s Prices: Evidence from a Survey of U.S. Firms
Journal of Monetary Economics · 2026 · Philippe Andrade、Alexander M. Dietrich、John Leer、Raphael Schoenle、Jenny Tang、Egon Zakrajšek
中文摘要
企业是根据已实现的成本、预期成本,还是两者兼顾来调整价格?我们利用一项针对美国企业的新调查回答这一问题,该调查分别度量自上次价格调整以来已实现的成本变动与随后一年的预期成本变动,其中包括可归因于2025年贸易政策的部分。我们以感知的关税敞口作为工具变量,识别已实现成本与预期成本对价格的因果效应。重置价格纳入了近70%的当期成本,以及未来一年预期成本的近45%。这些渠道的重要性在不同企业之间差异显著:频繁调价的企业主要对当期成本作出反应,而价格粘性企业则赋予预期更大权重;商品生产企业进行同期调整,而服务企业更具前瞻性,劳动份额较高或面临较高贸易不确定性的企业同样如此。相较于标准的时间依赖模型,这一证据更支持以下两类模型:一类是内生定价框架,其中不确定性重塑不同期限上的重置价格核;另一类是不完全信息模型,其中不确定性放大了预期的作用。
Abstract
Do firms adjust prices to realized costs, expected costs, or both?We address this question using a new survey of U.S. businesses that separately measures realized cost changes since the last price adjustment and expected cost changes over the subsequent year, including portions attributable to 2025 trade policies.Using perceived tariff exposure as an instrument, we identify the causal effects of realized and expected costs on prices.Reset prices incorporate almost 70 percent of current costs and nearly 45 percent of expected costs over the next year.The importance of these channels varies significantly across firms.Frequent price adjusters respond mainly to current costs, while sticky-price firms weight expectations more heavily.Goods producers adjust contemporaneously, whereas service firms are more forward looking, as are firms with a high labor share or facing high trade uncertainty.This evidence favors endogenous pricing frameworks in which uncertainty reshapes the reset-price kernel across horizons or imperfect-information models in which uncertainty amplifies the role of expectations over standard timedependent models.