IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/lan/wpaper/267027285.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Auction Mechanisms and Treasury Revenue

Author

Listed:
  • Klenio Barbosa
  • Dakshina De Silva
  • Liyu Yang
  • Hisayuki Yoshimoto

Abstract

This paper exploits a large-size auction experiment conducted by two Chinese Government Treasury security issuers -the Chinese Development Bank and the Export-Import Bank- to investigate whether Treasury securities should be sold through uniform or discriminatory auction mechanisms. Based on the outcomes of more than 300 Treasury securities issued through an alternating auction-rule market experiment, we find that auction outcome yield rates of the two auction formats are not statistically different, suggesting revenue equivalence. This equivalence is robust across different revenue measurements and participation behavior.

Suggested Citation

  • Klenio Barbosa & Dakshina De Silva & Liyu Yang & Hisayuki Yoshimoto, 2019. "Auction Mechanisms and Treasury Revenue," Working Papers 267027285, Lancaster University Management School, Economics Department.
    • Handle: RePEc:lan:wpaper:267027285
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.lancaster.ac.uk/media/lancaster-university/content-assets/documents/lums/economics/working-papers/LancasterWP2019_012.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ali Hortacsu & Jakub Kastl, "undated". "Testing for Common Values in Canadian Treasury Bill Auctions," Discussion Papers 07-053, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    2. Skrzypacz, Andrzej & Hopenhayn, Hugo, 2004. "Corrigendum to "Tacit collusion in repeated auctions" [J. Econ. Theory 114 (2004) 153-169]," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 114(2), pages 370-371, February.
    3. Lawrence M. Ausubel & Peter Cramton & Marek Pycia & Marzena Rostek & Marek Weretka, 2014. "Demand Reduction and Inefficiency in Multi-Unit Auctions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 81(4), pages 1366-1400.
    4. Simon, David P, 1994. "The Treasury's Experiment with Single-Price Auctions in the Mid-1970s: Winner's or Taxpayer's Curse?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 76(4), pages 754-760, November.
    5. Park, Sang Yong & Reinganum, Marc R., 1986. "The puzzling price behavior of treasury bills that mature at the turn of calendar months," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 267-283, June.
    6. Santos Silva, J.M.C. & Tenreyro, Silvana, 2010. "On the existence of the maximum likelihood estimates in Poisson regression," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 107(2), pages 310-312, May.
    7. Erwann SbaÏ & Olivier Armantier, 2006. "Estimation and comparison of treasury auction formats when bidders are asymmetric," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(6), pages 745-779.
    8. Miriam Bruhn & David McKenzie, 2009. "In Pursuit of Balance: Randomization in Practice in Development Field Experiments," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 1(4), pages 200-232, October.
    9. Brenner, Menachem & Galai, Dan & Sade, Orly, 2009. "Sovereign debt auctions: Uniform or discriminatory?," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 267-274, March.
    10. Ogden, Joseph P., 1987. "The End of the Month as a Preferred Habitat: A Test of Operational Efficiency in the Money Market," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(3), pages 329-343, September.
    11. Tong Li & Xiaoyong Zheng, 2009. "Entry and Competition Effects in First-Price Auctions: Theory and Evidence from Procurement Auctions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 76(4), pages 1397-1429.
    12. Tenorio, Rafael, 1993. "Revenue Equivalence and Bidding Behavior in a Multi-unit Auction Market: An Empirical Analysis," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 75(2), pages 302-314, May.
    13. Loretta J. Mester, 1995. "There's more than one way to sell a security: the Treasury's auction experiment," Business Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, issue Jul, pages 3-17.
    14. Umlauf, Steven R., 1993. "An empirical study of the Mexican Treasury bill auction," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 313-340, June.
    15. Skrzypacz, Andrzej & Hopenhayn, Hugo, 2004. "Tacit collusion in repeated auctions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 114(1), pages 153-169, January.
    16. Wooldridge, Jeffrey M., 1999. "Distribution-free estimation of some nonlinear panel data models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 90(1), pages 77-97, May.
    17. Ali Hortaçsu & Jakub Kastl & Allen Zhang, 2018. "Bid Shading and Bidder Surplus in the US Treasury Auction System," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(1), pages 147-169, January.
    18. Jaime F. Zender & James J.D. Wang, 2002. "Auctioning divisible goods," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 19(4), pages 673-705.
    19. Goldreich, David, 2007. "Underpricing in Discriminatory and Uniform-Price Treasury Auctions," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 42(2), pages 443-466, June.
    20. Michael B. Gordy, 1999. "Hedging Winner'S Curse With Multiple Bids: Evidence From The Portuguese Treasury Bill Auction," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 81(3), pages 448-465, August.
    21. Pietro Bonaldi & Ali Hortacsu & Zhaogang Song, 2015. "An Empirical Test of Auction Efficiency: Evidence from MBS Auctions of the Federal Reserve," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2015-82, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    22. J. M. C. Santos Silva & Silvana Tenreyro, 2006. "The Log of Gravity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 88(4), pages 641-658, November.
    23. Ali Hortaçsu & David McAdams, 2010. "Mechanism Choice and Strategic Bidding in Divisible Good Auctions: An Empirical Analysis of the Turkish Treasury Auction Market," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 118(5), pages 833-865.
    24. Boo‐Sung Kang & Steven L. Puller, 2008. "The Effect Of Auction Format On Efficiency And Revenue In Divisible Goods Auctions: A Test Using Korean Treasury Auctions," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(2), pages 290-332, June.
    25. Nyborg, Kjell G. & Sundaresan, Suresh, 1996. "Discriminatory versus uniform Treasury auctions: Evidence from when-issued transactions," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 63-104, September.
    26. Back, Kerry & Zender, Jaime F, 1993. "Auctions of Divisible Goods: On the Rationale for the Treasury Experiment," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 6(4), pages 733-764.
    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. Takahiro Hattori & Shogo Takahashi, 2021. "Discriminatory versus uniform auctions:Evidence from JGB market," Discussion papers ron344, Policy Research Institute, Ministry of Finance Japan.
    2. Klenio Barbosa & Dakshina De Silva & Liyu Yang & Hisayuki Yoshimoto, 2020. "Bond Losses and Systemic Risk," Working Papers 288072615, Lancaster University Management School, Economics Department.

    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. Monostori, Zoltán, 2013. "Diszkriminatív áras és egyenáras aukciók [Discriminatory and uniform-price auctions]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(10), pages 1048-1074.
    2. Mariño, Eduardo Anthony G. & Marszalec, Daniel, 2023. "Strategic supply management and mechanism choice in government debt auctions: An empirical analysis from the Philippines," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    3. Manzano, Carolina & Vives, Xavier, 2021. "Market power and welfare in asymmetric divisible good auctions," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 16(3), July.
    4. Ranaldo, Angelo & Rossi, Enzo, 2016. "Uniform-price Auctions for Swiss Government Bonds: Origin and Evolution," Working Papers on Finance 1609, University of St. Gallen, School of Finance.
    5. Song, Zhaogang & Zhu, Haoxiang, 2018. "Quantitative easing auctions of Treasury bonds," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(1), pages 103-124.
    6. Pycia, Marek & Woodward, Kyle, 2021. "Auctions of Homogeneous Goods: A Case for Pay-as-Bid," CEPR Discussion Papers 15656, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    7. Erwann SbaÏ & Olivier Armantier, 2006. "Estimation and comparison of treasury auction formats when bidders are asymmetric," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(6), pages 745-779.
    8. Olivier Armantier & Nourredine Lafhel, 2009. "Comparison of Auction Formats in Canadian Government Auctions," Staff Working Papers 09-5, Bank of Canada.
    9. Takahiro Hattori & Shogo Takahashi, 2021. "Discriminatory versus uniform auctions:Evidence from JGB market," Discussion papers ron344, Policy Research Institute, Ministry of Finance Japan.
    10. Burkett, Justin & Woodward, Kyle, 2020. "Uniform price auctions with a last accepted bid pricing rule," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    11. Peyman Khezr & Anne Cumpston, 2022. "A review of multiunit auctions with homogeneous goods," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(4), pages 1225-1247, September.
    12. Raphaële Préget, 2004. "Adjudications des valeurs du Trésor," Revue Française d'Économie, Programme National Persée, vol. 18(4), pages 63-110.
    13. Shenghao Gao & Peyman Khezr & Armin Pourkhanali, 2024. "Uniform price auctions with pre-announced revenue targets: Evidence from China's SEOs," Papers 2410.00063, arXiv.org.
    14. Zhaogang Song & Haoxiang Zhu, 2014. "QE Auctions of Treasury Bonds," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2014-48, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    15. Abbink, Klaus & Brandts, Jordi & Pezanis-Christou, Paul, 2006. "Auctions for government securities: A laboratory comparison of uniform, discriminatory and Spanish designs," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 284-303, October.
    16. Marszalec, Daniel, 2017. "The impact of auction choice on revenue in treasury bill auctions – An empirical evaluation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 215-239.
    17. Goldreich, David, 2003. "Underpricing in Discriminatory and Uniform-Price Treasury Auctions," CEPR Discussion Papers 4105, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    18. Preget, Raphaele & Waelbroeck, Patrick, 2005. "Treasury bill auction procedures: Empirical perspectives from French market bid functions," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 24(7), pages 1054-1072, November.
    19. Francisco Alvarez & Cristina Mazón, 2016. "Price volatility in the secondary market and bidders’ heterogeneous behavior in Spanish Treasury auctions," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 50(4), pages 1435-1466, June.
    20. Elskamp, Rebecca, 2015. "Empirical Documentation of Bid Shading in the Discriminatory Auction," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205093, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Treasury Security Auctions; Discriminatory Auctions; Uniform Auctions; Revenue Equivalence;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C57 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Econometrics of Games and Auctions
    • C58 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Financial Econometrics
    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:lan:wpaper:267027285. 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: Giorgio Motta (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/delanuk.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.