IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/eti/dpaper/19107.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Linkage of Markups through Transaction

Author

Listed:
  • NAKAMURA Tsuyoshi
  • OHASHI Hiroshi

Abstract

This paper analyzes how a firm's markup correlates to its suppliers' markups. Our research targeted more than 40,000 Japanese firms during 2001-16. The dataset is based on the Basic Survey of Japanese Business Structure and Activities, provided by METI, and supplemented by data from financial reports. Transactional relationships between firms are provided by the Firm Relation File, 2006, 2007, 2011, 2012, 2014, TSR. Markup values are estimated by the so-called ‘production approach’ proposed by De Loecker and Warzynski (2012) and De Loecker, Eeckhout, and Unger (2018). Controlling for firm characteristics such as productivity and age, and year- and industry-specific factors, a firm's markup has a significantly negative correlation with its suppliers' markups. For the entire sample, a firm whose suppliers observe 10% point higher markups has 2% point lower markup on average. This negative correlation is more remarkable for non-manufacturing firms than manufacturing ones. We discuss the factors for variation within Japanese firms' markups that produce these results.

Suggested Citation

  • NAKAMURA Tsuyoshi & OHASHI Hiroshi, 2019. "Linkage of Markups through Transaction," Discussion papers 19107, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    • Handle: RePEc:eti:dpaper:19107
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.rieti.go.jp/jp/publications/dp/19e107.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chad Syverson, 2019. "Macroeconomics and Market Power: Context, Implications, and Open Questions," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 33(3), pages 23-43, Summer.
    2. Gabriele Rovigatti & Vincenzo Mollisi, 2018. "Theory and practice of total-factor productivity estimation: The control function approach using Stata," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 18(3), pages 618-662, September.
    3. Cabral, Luis M. B., 2000. "Introduction to Industrial Organization," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262032864, December.
    4. NISHIOKA Shuichiro & TANAKA Mari, 2019. "Measuring Markups from Revenue and Total Cost: An Application to Japanese Plant-Product Matched Data," Discussion papers 19018, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    5. James Levinsohn & Amil Petrin, 2003. "Estimating Production Functions Using Inputs to Control for Unobservables," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 70(2), pages 317-341.
    6. Vincenzo Mollisi & Gabriele Rovigatti, 2017. "Theory and Practice of TFP Estimation: the Control Function Approach Using Stata," CEIS Research Paper 399, Tor Vergata University, CEIS, revised 14 Feb 2017.
    7. Susanto Basu, 2019. "Are Price-Cost Markups Rising in the United States? A Discussion of the Evidence," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 33(3), pages 3-22, Summer.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kozo Kiyota, 2023. "Spatially uneven pace of deindustrialisation within a country," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(7), pages 2187-2230, July.
    2. Kosuke Aoki & Yoshihiko Hogen & Kosuke Takatomi, 2023. "Price Markups and Wage Setting Behavior of Japanese Firms," Bank of Japan Working Paper Series 23-E-5, Bank of Japan.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ensar Yılmaz & Zeynep Kaplan, 2022. "Heterogeneity of market power: firm-level evidence," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 55(2), pages 1207-1228, May.
    2. Thomas Hasenzagl & Luis Perez, 2023. "The Micro-Aggregated Profit Share," Papers 2309.12945, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2023.
    3. Philipp Meinen & Ana Cristina Soares, 2022. "Markups and Financial Shocks," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 132(647), pages 2471-2499.
    4. Yuko Akune & Nobuhiro Hosoe, 2021. "Microdata analysis of Japanese farmers’ productivity: Estimating farm heterogeneity and elasticity of substitution among varieties," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 52(4), pages 633-644, July.
    5. Maarten De Ridder & Basile Grassi & Giovanni Morzenti, 2021. "The Hitchhiker’s Guide to Markup Estimation," Working Papers 677, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
    6. Matilde Bombardini & C. Keith Head & Maria D. Tito & Ruoying Wang, 2021. "How the breadth and depth of import relationships affect the performance of Canadian manufacturers," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(4), pages 1525-1561, November.
    7. Díez, Federico J. & Fan, Jiayue & Villegas-Sánchez, Carolina, 2021. "Global declining competition?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    8. Maximilian Koppenberg & Stefan Hirsch, 2022. "Markup estimation: A comparison of contemporary methods at the example of European food retailers," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(1), pages 108-133, January.
    9. Jose Garcia-Louzao & Linas Tarasonis, 2023. "Productivity-enhancing reallocation during the Great Recession: evidence from Lithuania," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 75(3), pages 729-749.
    10. Harald Dale-Olsen, 2021. "Do unions contribute to creative destruction?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(12), pages 1-23, December.
    11. Jaan Masso & Amaresh K Tiwari, 2021. "Productivity Implications Of R&D, Innovation And Capital Accumulation For Incumbents And Entrants: The Case Of Estonia," University of Tartu - Faculty of Economics and Business Administration Working Paper Series 130, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, University of Tartu (Estonia).
    12. Nuno Gonçalves & Carlos Carreira, 2023. "Intangible Capital and Productivity of Portuguese Firms in the Last Decade (2010-2019)," Notas Económicas, Faculty of Economics, University of Coimbra, issue 56, pages 110-132, July.
    13. Carlos Carreira & Paulino Teixeira & Ernesto Nieto-Carrillo, 2022. "Recovery and exit of zombie firms in Portugal," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 59(2), pages 491-519, August.
    14. Gibbon, Alexandra J. & Schain, Jan Philip, 2020. "Rising markups, common ownership, and technological capacities," DICE Discussion Papers 340, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    15. Simon Pröll & Giannis Karagiannis & Klaus Salhofer, 2019. "Advertising and Markups: The Case of the German Brewing Industry," Working Papers 732019, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Department of Economics and Social Sciences, Institute for Sustainable Economic Development.
    16. Maarten de Ridder, 2022. "Market power and innovation in the intangible economy," POID Working Papers 064, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    17. Anders Akerman, 2024. "Market concentration and the relative demand for college‐educated labour," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 91(361), pages 292-319, January.
    18. David Staines, 2023. "Stochastic Equilibrium the Lucas Critique and Keynesian Economics," Papers 2312.16214, arXiv.org.
    19. Zhiqiang Zhou & Wenyan Liu & Pengfei Cheng & Zhenjin Li, 2022. "The Impact of the Digital Economy on Enterprise Sustainable Development and Its Spatial-Temporal Evolution: An Empirical Analysis Based on Urban Panel Data in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-23, September.
    20. Shubhdeep Deb & Jan Eeckhout & Aseem Patel & Lawrence Warren, 2022. "What Drives Wage Stagnation: Monopsony or Monopoly?," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 20(6), pages 2181-2225.

    More about this item

    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:eti:dpaper:19107. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: TANIMOTO, Toko (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rietijp.html .

    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.