Capital Ownership Under Market Incompleteness: Does it Matter?

24 Pages Posted: 1 Nov 2007

See all articles by Eva Carceles-Poveda

Eva Carceles-Poveda

SUNY at Stony Brook University - College of Arts and Science - Department of Economics

Daniele Coen-Pirani

Carnegie Mellon University - David A. Tepper School of Business

Date Written: October 2007

Abstract

The implications of a context with household heterogeneity and incomplete financial markets have been mostly studied under the assumption that households own the physical capital and undertake the intertemporal investment decision. Further, firms rent capital and labor from the households to maximize period profits. The present paper provides the conditions under which this assumption is still irrelevant when markets are incomplete. It is shown that, if firms choose the optimal investment to maximize their asset value, in the sense that they discount future cash flows with state price processes that are consistent with security prices, the equilibrium allocations are the same as in the standard setting with static firms. On the other hand, the firm valuation of future cash flows only coincides with the valuation of the unconstrained shareholders. Given this, value maximization might still lead to shareholder disagreement in the presence of effectively binding portfolio restrictions.

JEL Classification: D52, E44, G12, L20

Suggested Citation

Carceles-Poveda, Eva and Coen-Pirani, Daniele, Capital Ownership Under Market Incompleteness: Does it Matter? (October 2007). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1026674 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1026674

Eva Carceles-Poveda (Contact Author)

SUNY at Stony Brook University - College of Arts and Science - Department of Economics ( email )

Stony Brook, NY 11794
United States

Daniele Coen-Pirani

Carnegie Mellon University - David A. Tepper School of Business ( email )

5000 Forbes Avenue
Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890
United States