An Efficiency Argument for Balanced Transaction Costs
Transaction costs are usually thought to be a major source of inefficiency because they do not allow efficient trades to take place. One might think that lowering transaction costs is always welfare-improving. This paper argues that, in contrast to conventional wisdom, it may be beneficial to increase transaction costs on one side of the market to balance them with the costs on the other side. In the model, transaction costs imposed on applicants serve as a screening device that substantially reduces evaluation costs. Even when application costs are totally wasteful, they arise endogenously in the equilibrium and can result in a welfare improvement.
|Date of creation:||Apr 2005|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://economics.emory.edu/home/journals/|
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Guasch, J Luis & Weiss, Andrew, 1981. "Self-Selection in the Labor Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(3), pages 275-84, June.
- Rasmusen Eric Bennett, 2001. "Explaining Incomplete Contracts as the Result of Contract-Reading Costs," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 1-39, October.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:emo:wp2003:0517. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sue Mialon)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.