IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/4290.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Optimal Insurance Contracts When Establishing The Amount of Losses is Costly

Author

Listed:
  • Louis Kaplow

Abstract

The problem of establishing the amount of losses covered by public and private insurance is often characterized by asymmetric information, in which the claimant already knows the extent of a loss but this can be demonstrated to the insurer only at a cost. It is shown that a simple arrangement, which provides greater coverage whenever individuals demonstrate unusually high losses, gives claimants an excessive incentive to establish the amount of their losses. This paper determines what insurance claims process, consistent with the form typically employed in existing insurance arrangements, is optimal.

Suggested Citation

  • Louis Kaplow, 1993. "Optimal Insurance Contracts When Establishing The Amount of Losses is Costly," NBER Working Papers 4290, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:4290
    Note: LE
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w4290.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dilip Mookherjee & Ivan Png, 1989. "Optimal Auditing, Insurance, and Redistribution," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 104(2), pages 399-415.
    2. Myerson, Roger B, 1979. "Incentive Compatibility and the Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(1), pages 61-73, January.
    3. Reinganum, Jennifer F. & Wilde, Louis L., 1985. "Income tax compliance in a principal-agent framework," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 1-18, February.
    4. Townsend, Robert M., 1979. "Optimal contracts and competitive markets with costly state verification," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 265-293, October.
    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. Cohen Alma, 2006. "The Disadvantages of Aggregate Deductibles," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 6(1), pages 1-28, April.
    2. Keith J. Crocker & John Morgan, 1998. "Is Honesty the Best Policy? Curtailing Insurance Fraud through Optimal Incentive Contracts," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(2), pages 355-375, April.
    3. Donatella Porrini, 2002. "Frodi nell'assicurazione RC Auto: analisi economica e possibili rimedi," Rivista di Politica Economica, SIPI Spa, vol. 92(2), pages 109-138, March-Apr.
    4. Hau, Arthur, 2008. "Optimal insurance under costly falsification and costly, inexact verification," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 1680-1700, May.
    5. Kevin X. Li & Yulan Wang & Owen Tang & Jie Min, 2016. "Disclosure in insurance law: a comparative analysis," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 41(2), pages 349-369, April.
    6. Kaplow, Louis & Shavell, Steven, 1996. "Accuracy in the Assessment of Damages," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 39(1), pages 191-210, April.
    7. Georges Dionne, 2012. "The Empirical Measure of Information Problems with Emphasis on Insurance Fraud and Dynamic Data," Cahiers de recherche 1233, CIRPEE.
    8. Qin Lian & Harris Schlesinger, 2012. "Insurance Contract Design When the Insurer Has Private Information on Loss Size," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 79(4), pages 1039-1050, December.
    9. R M Rejesus, 2003. "Ex post Moral Hazard in Crop Insurance: Costly State Verification or Falsification?," Economic Issues Journal Articles, Economic Issues, vol. 8(2), pages 29-46, September.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
    • K41 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Litigation Process

    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:nbr:nberwo:4290. 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: () or (Joanne Lustig). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.