<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" xmlns:cb="http://www.cbwiki.net/wiki/index.php/Specification_1.1" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns# rdf.xsd">
<channel rdf:about="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/feeds.xml">
  <title>FRB Finance and Economics Discussion Series Working Papers</title>
  <link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/feeds.xml</link>
  <description>Staff working papers in the Finance and Economics Discussion Series (FEDS) are preliminary materials circulated to stimulate discussion and critical comment. The analysis and conclusions set forth are those of the authors and do not indicate concurrence by other members of the research staff or the Board of Governors. References in publications to the Finance and Economics Discussion Series (other than acknowledgment) should be cleared with the author(s) to protect the tentative character of these papers.</description>
  <items>
    <rdf:Seq>
      <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2012/201204/201204abs.html" />
      <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2012/201203/201203abs.html" />
      <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2012/201202/201202abs.html" />
      <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2012/201201/201201abs.html" />
      <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201160/201160abs.html" />
      <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201159/201159abs.html" />
      <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201158/201158abs.html" />
      <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201157/201157abs.html" />
      <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201156/201156abs.html" />
      <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201155/201155abs.html" />
      <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201154/201154abs.html" />
      <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201153/201153abs.html" />
      <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201152/201152abs.html" />
      <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201151/201151abs.html" />
      <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201150/201150abs.html" />
    </rdf:Seq>
  </items>
  <dc:date>2011-12-08T11:27:38-05:00</dc:date>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <dc:publisher>Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System</dc:publisher>
</channel>

<item rdf:about="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2012/201204/201204abs.html">
  <title>2012-04: Computing DSGE Models with Recursive Preferences and Stochastic Volatility</title>
  <link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2012/201204/201204abs.html</link>
  <description>Dario Caldara, Jesus Fernandez-Villaverde, Juan Rubio-Ramirez, and Yao Wen. This paper compares different solution methods for computing the equilibrium of dynamic stochastic general equilibrium (DSGE) models with recursive preferences such as those in Epstein and Zin (1989 and 1991) and stochastic volatility. Models with these two features have recently become popular, but we know little about the best ways to implement them numerically. To fill this gap, we solve the stochastic neoclassical growth model with recursive preferences and stochastic volatility using four different approaches: second- and third-order perturbation, Chebyshev polynomials, and value function iteration. We document the performance of the methods in terms of computing time, implementation complexity, and accuracy. Our main finding is that perturbations are competitive in terms of accuracy with Chebyshev polynomials and value function iteration while being several orders of magnitude faster to run. Therefore, we conclude that perturbation methods are an attractive approach for computing this class of problems.
</description>
  <dc:date>2012-01-26T14:34:51-05:00</dc:date>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <cb:paper>
    <cb:simpleTitle>Computing DSGE Models with Recursive Preferences and Stochastic Volatility</cb:simpleTitle>
    <cb:occurrenceDate>2012-01-26T14:34:51-05:00</cb:occurrenceDate>
    <cb:keyword>DSGE models</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>recursive preferences</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>perturbation</cb:keyword>
    <cb:resource>
      <cb:title>2012-04: Computing DSGE Models with Recursive Preferences and Stochastic Volatility</cb:title>
      <cb:link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2012/201204/201204pap.pdf</cb:link>
      <cb:description>PDF version</cb:description>
    </cb:resource>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>Dario</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>Caldara</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>Dario Caldara</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>Jesus</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>Fernandez-Villaverde</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>Jesus Fernandez-Villaverde</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>University of Pennsylvania, NBER, CEPR, and FEDEA</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>Juan</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>Rubio-Ramirez</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>Juan Rubio-Ramirez</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>Duke University, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, and FEDEA</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>Yao</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>Wen</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>Yao Wen</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>University of Pennsylvania</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:byline>Dario Caldara, Jesus Fernandez-Villaverde, Juan Rubio-Ramirez, and Yao Wen</cb:byline>
    <cb:publicationDate>2012-01-26T14:34:51-05:00</cb:publicationDate>

    <cb:issue>2012-04</cb:issue>
    <cb:JELCode>C63</cb:JELCode>
    <cb:JELCode>C68</cb:JELCode>
    <cb:JELCode>E32</cb:JELCode>
  </cb:paper>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2012/201203/201203abs.html">
  <title>2012-03: The Effect of Endogenous Human Capital Accumulation on Optimal Taxation</title>
  <link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2012/201203/201203abs.html</link>
  <description>William B. Peterman. This paper considers the impact of endogenous human capital accumulation on optimal tax policy in a life cycle model. Including endogenous human capital accumulation, either through learning-by-doing or learning-or-doing, is analytically shown to create a motive for the government to use age-dependent labor income taxes. If the government cannot condition taxes on age, then it is optimal to use a tax on capital in order to mimic such taxes. Quantitatively, introducing learning-by-doing or learning-or-doing increases the optimal tax on capital by forty or four percent, respectively. Overall, the optimal tax on capital is thirty five percent higher in the model with learning-by-doing compared to the model with learning-or-doing implying that how human capital accumulates is of significant importance when determining the optimal tax policy.
</description>
  <dc:date>2012-01-19T13:45:33-05:00</dc:date>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <cb:paper>
    <cb:simpleTitle>The Effect of Endogenous Human Capital Accumulation on Optimal Taxation</cb:simpleTitle>
    <cb:occurrenceDate>2012-01-19T13:45:33-05:00</cb:occurrenceDate>
    <cb:keyword>Optimal taxation</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>capital taxation</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>human capital</cb:keyword>
    <cb:resource>
      <cb:title>2012-03: The Effect of Endogenous Human Capital Accumulation on Optimal Taxation</cb:title>
      <cb:link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2012/201203/201203pap.pdf</cb:link>
      <cb:description>PDF version</cb:description>
    </cb:resource>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>William</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>Peterman</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>William Peterman</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:byline>William B. Peterman</cb:byline>
    <cb:publicationDate>2012-01-19T13:45:33-05:00</cb:publicationDate>

    <cb:issue>2012-03</cb:issue>
    <cb:JELCode>E24</cb:JELCode>
    <cb:JELCode>E62</cb:JELCode>
    <cb:JELCode>H21</cb:JELCode>
  </cb:paper>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2012/201202/201202abs.html">
  <title>2012-02: Using Policy Intervention to Identify Financial Stress</title>
  <link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2012/201202/201202abs.html</link>
  <description>Mark A. Carlson, Kurt F. Lewis, and William R. Nelson. This paper describes the construction of a financial stress index.  This stress index differs from other indexes in that it incorporates the co-movement and volatility of financial series as well as the  levels of the series.  Our index also uses past experience more than others to guide the assessment about which characteristics of the data suggest financial stress exists.  In addition to describing the construction of our financial stress index, we spend some time discussing issues relevant to the general construction of stress indexes.
</description>
  <dc:date>2012-01-16T09:51:01-05:00</dc:date>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <cb:paper>
    <cb:simpleTitle>Using Policy Intervention to Identify Financial Stress</cb:simpleTitle>
    <cb:occurrenceDate>2012-01-16T09:51:01-05:00</cb:occurrenceDate>
    <cb:keyword>Financial stress</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>financial markets</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>financial institutions</cb:keyword>
    <cb:resource>
      <cb:title>2012-02: Using Policy Intervention to Identify Financial Stress</cb:title>
      <cb:link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2012/201202/201202pap.pdf</cb:link>
      <cb:description>PDF version</cb:description>
    </cb:resource>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>Mark</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>Carlson</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>Mark Carlson</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>Kurt</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>Lewis</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>Kurt Lewis</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>William</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>Nelson</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>William Nelson</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:byline>Mark A. Carlson, Kurt F. Lewis, and William R. Nelson</cb:byline>
    <cb:publicationDate>2012-01-16T09:51:01-05:00</cb:publicationDate>

    <cb:issue>2012-02</cb:issue>
    <cb:JELCode>E59</cb:JELCode>
    <cb:JELCode>G01</cb:JELCode>
  </cb:paper>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2012/201201/201201abs.html">
  <title>2012-01: Supply Constraints and Housing Market Dynamics</title>
  <link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2012/201201/201201abs.html</link>
  <description>Andrew D. Paciorek. Although the volatility of house prices is often ascribed to demand-side factors, constraints on housing supply have important and little-studied implications for housing dynamics. I illustrate the strong relationship in city-level data between the volatility of house prices and the regulation of new housing supply. I then employ a dynamic structural model of housing investment to estimate the effect of supply constraints on both the level of new construction and the responsiveness of investment to house prices. I find that supply constraints increase volatility through two channels: First, regulation lowers the elasticity of new housing supply by increasing lags in the permit process and adding to the cost of supplying new houses on the margin. Second, geographic limitations on the area available for building houses, such as steep slopes and water bodies, lead to less investment on average relative to the size of the existing housing stock, leaving less scope for the supply response to attenuate the effects of a demand shock. My estimates and simulations confirm that regulation and geographic constraints play critical and complementary roles in decreasing the responsiveness of investment to demand shocks, which in turn amplifies house price volatility.
</description>
  <dc:date>2012-01-09T14:34:26-05:00</dc:date>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <cb:paper>
    <cb:simpleTitle>Supply Constraints and Housing Market Dynamics</cb:simpleTitle>
    <cb:occurrenceDate>2012-01-09T14:34:26-05:00</cb:occurrenceDate>
    <cb:keyword>house prices</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>volatility</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>housing supply</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>regulation</cb:keyword>
    <cb:resource>
      <cb:title>2012-01: Supply Constraints and Housing Market Dynamics</cb:title>
      <cb:link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2012/201201/201201pap.pdf</cb:link>
      <cb:description>PDF version</cb:description>
    </cb:resource>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>Andrew</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>Paciorek</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>Andrew Paciorek</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:byline>Andrew D. Paciorek</cb:byline>
    <cb:publicationDate>2012-01-09T14:34:26-05:00</cb:publicationDate>

    <cb:issue>2012-01</cb:issue>
  </cb:paper>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201160/201160abs.html">
  <title>2011-60: Rising Inequality: Transitory or Permanent? New Evidence from a U.S. Panel of Household Income 1987-2006</title>
  <link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201160/201160abs.html</link>
  <description>Jason DeBacker, Bradley Heim, Vasia Panousi, and Ivan Vidangos. We use a new and large panel dataset of household income
to shed light on the permanent versus transitory nature of rising
inequality in individual male labor earnings and in total
household income, both before and after taxes, in the United
States over the period 1987-2006. Due to the quality and the
significant size of our dataset, we are able to conduct our
analysis using rich and precisely estimated error-components
models of income dynamics. Our main specification finds evidence
for a quadratic heterogeneous income profiles component and a
random walk component in permanent earnings, and for a
moving-average component in autoregressive transitory earnings. We
find that the increase in inequality over our sample period was
entirely permanent for male earnings, and predominantly permanent
for household income. We also show that the tax system, though
reducing inequality, nonetheless did not materially affect its
increasing trend. Furthermore, we compare our model-based findings
against those of simpler, non-model based inequality decomposition
methods. We show that the results for the trends in the evolution
of the permanent and transitory variances are remarkably similar
across methods, whereas the results for the shares of those
variances in cross-sectional inequality differ widely. Further
investigation into the sources of these differences suggests that
simpler methods produce erroneous decompositions because they
cannot flexibly capture the relative degree of persistence of the
transitory component of income.
</description>
  <dc:date>2011-12-23T12:41:43-05:00</dc:date>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <cb:paper>
    <cb:simpleTitle>Rising Inequality: Transitory or Permanent? New Evidence from a U.S. Panel of Household Income 1987-2006</cb:simpleTitle>
    <cb:occurrenceDate>2011-12-23T12:41:43-05:00</cb:occurrenceDate>
    <cb:keyword>Income inequality</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>variance decomposition</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>error-components models</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>transitory vs. permanent</cb:keyword>
    <cb:resource>
      <cb:title>2011-60: Rising Inequality: Transitory or Permanent? New Evidence from a U.S. Panel of Household Income 1987-2006</cb:title>
      <cb:link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201160/201160pap.pdf</cb:link>
      <cb:description>PDF version</cb:description>
    </cb:resource>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>Jason</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>DeBacker</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>Jason DeBacker</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>Treasury Department</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>Bradley</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>Heim</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>Bradley Heim</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>Indiana University</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>Vasia</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>Panousi</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>Vasia Panousi</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>Federal Reserve Board</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>Ivan</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>Vidangos</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>Ivan Vidangos</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>Federal Reserve Board</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:byline>Jason DeBacker, Bradley Heim, Vasia Panousi, and Ivan Vidangos</cb:byline>
    <cb:publicationDate>2011-12-23T12:41:43-05:00</cb:publicationDate>

    <cb:issue>2011-60</cb:issue>
    <cb:JELCode>C33</cb:JELCode>
    <cb:JELCode>D31</cb:JELCode>
    <cb:JELCode>J31</cb:JELCode>
  </cb:paper>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201159/201159abs.html">
  <title>2011-59: A Review of Allan Meltzer's "A History of the Federal Reserve, Volume 2"</title>
  <link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201159/201159abs.html</link>
  <description>Edward Nelson. This paper reviews Allan H. Meltzer's "A History of the Federal Reserve, Volume 2." This two-book volume covers Federal Reserve policies from 1951 to 1986. The book represents an enormous achievement in synthesizing a great amount of archival information into a historical account grounded on economic analysis. At the same time, Meltzer's interpretation of specific eras is open to question. He does not appear to acknowledge adequately the degree to which 1950s monetary policy decisions had a solid analytical foundation. Furthermore, Meltzer's account of the shift from the 1970s inflation to the 1980s disinflation implausibly stresses a shift in policymakers' objective function. The crucial change over this period, both in the United States and other countries, is more likely to have been policymakers' improved grasp of the connections between monetary policy and inflation. The review also takes issue with Meltzer's account, in his book's epilogue, of the financial crisis from 2007 to 2009. In this epilogue, Meltzer understates the degree to which the Federal Reserve's reaction to the financial crisis was in line with the historical practice of the Federal Reserve and other central banks.
</description>
  <dc:date>2012-01-03T14:22:23-05:00</dc:date>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <cb:paper>
    <cb:simpleTitle>A Review of Allan Meltzer's "A History of the Federal Reserve, Volume 2"</cb:simpleTitle>
    <cb:occurrenceDate>2012-01-03T14:22:23-05:00</cb:occurrenceDate>
    <cb:keyword>Federal Reserve history</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>financial crisis</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>Allan Meltzer</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>Great Inflation</cb:keyword>
    <cb:resource>
      <cb:title>2011-59: A Review of Allan Meltzer's "A History of the Federal Reserve, Volume 2"</cb:title>
      <cb:link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201159/201159pap.pdf</cb:link>
      <cb:description>PDF version</cb:description>
    </cb:resource>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>Edward</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>Nelson</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>Edward Nelson</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:byline>Edward Nelson</cb:byline>
    <cb:publicationDate>2012-01-03T14:22:23-05:00</cb:publicationDate>

    <cb:issue>2011-59</cb:issue>
    <cb:JELCode>E52</cb:JELCode>
    <cb:JELCode>E58</cb:JELCode>
  </cb:paper>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201158/201158abs.html">
  <title>2011-58: The Information Content of the Embedded Deflation Option in TIPS</title>
  <link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201158/201158abs.html</link>
  <description>Olesya V. Grishchenko, Joel M. Vanden, and Jianing Zhang. In this paper we estimate the value of the embedded option in U.S. Treasury Inflation Protected Securities (TIPS). The option value exhibits significant time variation that is correlated with periods of deflationary expectations. We use our estimated option values to construct an embedded option price index and an embedded option return index. We then use our embedded option indices as independent variables and examine their statistical and economic significance for explaining the future inflation rate. In most of our regressions, our embedded option return index is significant even in the presence of traditional inflation variables, such as the yield spread between nominal Treasuries and TIPS, the return on gold bullion, the VIX index return, and the lagged inflation rate. We conduct several robustness tests, including alternative weighting schemes, alternative variable specifications, and alternative data samples. We conclude that the embedded option in TIPS contains useful information for future inflation, both in-sample and out-of-sample. Our results should be valuable to practitioners, monetary authorities, and policymakers alike.
</description>
  <dc:date>2012-01-04T09:45:49-05:00</dc:date>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <cb:paper>
    <cb:simpleTitle>The Information Content of the Embedded Deflation Option in TIPS</cb:simpleTitle>
    <cb:occurrenceDate>2012-01-04T09:45:49-05:00</cb:occurrenceDate>
    <cb:keyword>TIPS</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>embedded option</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>inflation</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>deflation</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>term structure</cb:keyword>
    <cb:resource>
      <cb:title>2011-58: The Information Content of the Embedded Deflation Option in TIPS</cb:title>
      <cb:link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201158/201158pap.pdf</cb:link>
      <cb:description>PDF version</cb:description>
    </cb:resource>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>Olesya</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>Grishchenko</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>Olesya Grishchenko</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>Joel</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>Vanden</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>Joel Vanden</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>Smeal College of Business, Penn State University</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>Jianing</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>Zhang</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>Jianing Zhang</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>Smeal College of Business, Penn State University</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:byline>Olesya V. Grishchenko, Joel M. Vanden, and Jianing Zhang</cb:byline>
    <cb:publicationDate>2012-01-04T09:45:49-05:00</cb:publicationDate>

    <cb:issue>2011-58</cb:issue>
    <cb:JELCode>E31</cb:JELCode>
    <cb:JELCode>G12</cb:JELCode>
    <cb:JELCode>E43</cb:JELCode>
    <cb:JELCode>E44</cb:JELCode>
  </cb:paper>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201157/201157abs.html">
  <title>2011-57: Commodity Index Trading and Hedging Costs</title>
  <link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201157/201157abs.html</link>
  <description>Celso Brunetti and David Reiffen. Trading by commodity index traders (CITs) has become an important aspect of financial markets over the past 10 years. We develop an equilibrium model of trader behavior that relates uninformed CIT trading to futures prices. The model predicts that CIT trading reduces the cost of hedging. We test the model using a unique non-public dataset which precisely identifies trader positions. We find evidence, consistent with the model, that index traders have become an important supply of price risk insurance.
</description>
  <dc:date>2012-01-24T09:01:40-05:00</dc:date>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <cb:paper>
    <cb:simpleTitle>Commodity Index Trading and Hedging Costs</cb:simpleTitle>
    <cb:occurrenceDate>2012-01-24T09:01:40-05:00</cb:occurrenceDate>
    <cb:keyword>Commodity index traders</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>hedging costs</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>volatility</cb:keyword>
    <cb:resource>
      <cb:title>2011-57: Commodity Index Trading and Hedging Costs</cb:title>
      <cb:link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201157/201157pap.pdf</cb:link>
      <cb:description>PDF version</cb:description>
    </cb:resource>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>Celso</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>Brunetti</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>Celso Brunetti</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>David</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>Reiffen</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>David Reiffen</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>CFTC</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:byline>Celso Brunetti and David Reiffen</cb:byline>
    <cb:publicationDate>2012-01-24T09:01:40-05:00</cb:publicationDate>

    <cb:issue>2011-57</cb:issue>
    <cb:JELCode>G13</cb:JELCode>
    <cb:JELCode>C32</cb:JELCode>
  </cb:paper>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201156/201156abs.html">
  <title>2011-56: The Usefulness of Core PCE Inflation Measures</title>
  <link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201156/201156abs.html</link>
  <description>Alan K. Detmeister. This paper examines a number of alternative PCE price inflation measures including overall PCE inflation, PCE inflation excluding food and energy, trimmed mean PCE inflation, component-smoothed inflation, variance-weighted inflation, inflation with weights based on disaggregated regressions, and survey measures of inflation expectations.  When averaging across a handful of specifications based on the primary uses of a core inflation measure three conclusions arise: 1. Inflation rates for nearly all the measures best track ex-post trend inflation or predict future overall inflation when they are averaged over a considerable number of months.  Overall PCE price inflation should be averaged over 18 months or longer.  A shorter averaging period is appropriate for core measures, often on the order of 12 months.  2. Even after appropriately averaging each index, core inflation indexes generally perform better than overall inflation. 3. Exclusion indexes, such as PCE excluding food and energy, perform slightly worse than many other possible core inflation measures; trimmed mean PCE, or a variance-weighted index, may be better choice for a summary inflation measure.
</description>
  <dc:date>2012-01-24T08:32:04-05:00</dc:date>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <cb:paper>
    <cb:simpleTitle>The Usefulness of Core PCE Inflation Measures</cb:simpleTitle>
    <cb:occurrenceDate>2012-01-24T08:32:04-05:00</cb:occurrenceDate>
    <cb:keyword>Inflation</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>core prices</cb:keyword>
    <cb:resource>
      <cb:title>2011-56: The Usefulness of Core PCE Inflation Measures</cb:title>
      <cb:link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201156/201156pap.pdf</cb:link>
      <cb:description>PDF version</cb:description>
    </cb:resource>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>Alan</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>Detmeister</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>Alan Detmeister</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:byline>Alan K. Detmeister</cb:byline>
    <cb:publicationDate>2012-01-24T08:32:04-05:00</cb:publicationDate>

    <cb:issue>2011-56</cb:issue>
    <cb:JELCode>E31</cb:JELCode>
    <cb:JELCode>E37</cb:JELCode>
  </cb:paper>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201155/201155abs.html">
  <title>2011-55: Determining the Motives for a Positive Optimal Tax on Capital</title>
  <link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201155/201155abs.html</link>
  <description>William B. Peterman. Previous literature demonstrates that in a computational life cycle model the optimal tax on capital is positive and large.  Given the computational complexities of these overlapping generations models it is helpful to determine the relative importance of the economic factors driving this result.  I highlight the impact of changing two common assumptions in a benchmark model that generates a large optimal tax on capital similar to the model in Conesa et al. (2009).  First, the utility function is altered such that it implies an agent's Frisch labor supply elasticity is constant, as opposed to increasing, over his lifetime.  Second, the government is allowed to tax accidental bequests at a separate rate from ordinary capital income.  The main finding of this paper is that these two changes cause the optimal tax on capital to drop by almost half.  Furthermore, I find that the welfare costs of adopting the high optimal tax on capital from the benchmark model in the model with the altered assumptions, which calls for a lower tax on capital, are equivalent to 0.35 percent of total lifetime consumption.  Quantifying the impact of these assumptions in the benchmark model is important because the first has limited empirical evidence and the second, although included for tractability, confounds a motive for taxing capital with a motive for taxing accidental bequests.
</description>
  <dc:date>2012-01-20T15:54:06-05:00</dc:date>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <cb:paper>
    <cb:simpleTitle>Determining the Motives for a Positive Optimal Tax on Capital</cb:simpleTitle>
    <cb:occurrenceDate>2012-01-20T15:54:06-05:00</cb:occurrenceDate>
    <cb:keyword>Opitmal taxation</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>capital taxation</cb:keyword>
    <cb:resource>
      <cb:title>2011-55: Determining the Motives for a Positive Optimal Tax on Capital</cb:title>
      <cb:link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201155/201155pap.pdf</cb:link>
      <cb:description>PDF version</cb:description>
    </cb:resource>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>William</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>Peterman</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>William Peterman</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:byline>William B. Peterman</cb:byline>
    <cb:publicationDate>2012-01-20T15:54:06-05:00</cb:publicationDate>

    <cb:issue>2011-55</cb:issue>
    <cb:JELCode>E62</cb:JELCode>
    <cb:JELCode>H21</cb:JELCode>
  </cb:paper>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201154/201154abs.html">
  <title>2011-54: Investment, Idiosyncratic Risk, and Ownership</title>
  <link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201154/201154abs.html</link>
  <description>Vasia Panousi and Dimitris Papanikolaou. High-powered incentives may induce higher managerial
effort, but they also expose managers to idiosyncratic risk. If
managers are risk averse, they might underinvest when
firm-specific uncertainty increases, leading to suboptimal
investment decisions from the perspective of well-diversified
shareholders. We empirically document  that when idiosyncratic
risk rises, firm investment falls, and more so when managers own a
larger fraction of the firm. This negative effect of managerial
risk aversion on investment is mitigated if executives are
compensated with options rather than with shares or if
institutional investors form a large part of the shareholder base.
</description>
  <dc:date>2012-01-11T10:32:07-05:00</dc:date>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <cb:paper>
    <cb:simpleTitle>Investment, Idiosyncratic Risk, and Ownership</cb:simpleTitle>
    <cb:occurrenceDate>2012-01-11T10:32:07-05:00</cb:occurrenceDate>
    <cb:keyword>Investment</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>idiosyncratic risk</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>managerial onwership</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>risk aversion</cb:keyword>
    <cb:resource>
      <cb:title>2011-54: Investment, Idiosyncratic Risk, and Ownership</cb:title>
      <cb:link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201154/201154pap.pdf</cb:link>
      <cb:description>PDF version</cb:description>
    </cb:resource>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>Vasia</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>Panousi</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>Vasia Panousi</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>Federal Reserve Board</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>Dimitris</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>Papanikolaou</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>Dimitris Papanikolaou</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>Kellogg School of Management</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:byline>Vasia Panousi and Dimitris Papanikolaou</cb:byline>
    <cb:publicationDate>2012-01-11T10:32:07-05:00</cb:publicationDate>

    <cb:issue>2011-54</cb:issue>
    <cb:JELCode>G01</cb:JELCode>
    <cb:JELCode>G11</cb:JELCode>
    <cb:JELCode>G32</cb:JELCode>
  </cb:paper>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201153/201153abs.html">
  <title>2011-53: Aging and Strategic Learning: The Impact of Spousal Incentives on Financial Literacy</title>
  <link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201153/201153abs.html</link>
  <description>Joanne W. Hsu. American women tend to be less financially literate than men, which is consistent with a household division of labor in which men manage finances. However, women also tend to outlive their husbands, so they will eventually need to take over this task.  Using a new survey of older couples, I find that women acquire financial literacy as they approach widowhood. At an estimated increase of 0.04 standard deviations per year approaching widowhood, 80 percent of women in the sample would catch up with their husbands prior to the expected onset of widowhood. These findings reflect actual increases by women and are not merely an artifact of cognitive decline among older men.  The results are consistent with a model in which the household division of labor breaks down when a spouse dies: women have incentives both to delay acquiring financial knowledge and also to begin learning before widowhood.  This paper represents the first empirical examination of the financial literacy of both members of couples and provides a life-cycle interpretation of the gender gap in financial literacy.
</description>
  <dc:date>2012-01-18T13:08:32-05:00</dc:date>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <cb:paper>
    <cb:simpleTitle>Aging and Strategic Learning: The Impact of Spousal Incentives on Financial Literacy</cb:simpleTitle>
    <cb:occurrenceDate>2012-01-18T13:08:32-05:00</cb:occurrenceDate>
    <cb:keyword>Financial literacy</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>cognitive abilities</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>human capital</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>surveys</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>aging</cb:keyword>
    <cb:resource>
      <cb:title>2011-53: Aging and Strategic Learning: The Impact of Spousal Incentives on Financial Literacy</cb:title>
      <cb:link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201153/201153pap.pdf</cb:link>
      <cb:description>PDF version</cb:description>
    </cb:resource>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>Joanne</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>Hsu</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>Joanne Hsu</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:byline>Joanne W. Hsu</cb:byline>
    <cb:publicationDate>2012-01-18T13:08:32-05:00</cb:publicationDate>

    <cb:issue>2011-53</cb:issue>
    <cb:JELCode>D14</cb:JELCode>
    <cb:JELCode>J24</cb:JELCode>
    <cb:JELCode>C81</cb:JELCode>
  </cb:paper>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201152/201152abs.html">
  <title>2011-52: Stock Return Predictability and Variance Risk Premia: Statistical Inference and International Evidence</title>
  <link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201152/201152abs.html</link>
  <description>Tim Bollerslev, James Marrone, Lai Xu, and Hao Zhou. Recent empirical evidence suggests that the variance risk premium, or the difference between risk-neutral and statistical expectations of the future return variation, predicts aggregate stock market returns, with the predictability especially strong at the 2-4 month horizons.  We provide extensive Monte Carlo simulation evidence that statistical finite sample biases in the overlapping return regressions underlying these findings can not ``explain" this apparent predictability.  Further corroborating the existing empirical evidence, we show that the patterns in the predictability across different return horizons estimated from country specific regressions for France, Germany, Japan, Switzerland and the U.K. are remarkably similar to the pattern previously documented for the U.S.  Defining a ``global" variance risk premium, we uncover even stronger predictability and almost identical cross-country patterns through the use of panel regressions that effectively restrict the compensation for world-wide variance risk to be the same across countries. Our findings are broadly consistent with the implications from a stylized two-country general equilibrium model explicitly incorporating the effects of world-wide time-varying economic uncertainty.
</description>
  <dc:date>2012-01-10T18:15:34-05:00</dc:date>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <cb:paper>
    <cb:simpleTitle>Stock Return Predictability and Variance Risk Premia: Statistical Inference and International Evidence</cb:simpleTitle>
    <cb:occurrenceDate>2012-01-10T18:15:34-05:00</cb:occurrenceDate>
    <cb:keyword>Variance risk premium</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>return predictability</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>over-lapping return regressions</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>international stock market returns</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>global variance risk</cb:keyword>
    <cb:resource>
      <cb:title>2011-52: Stock Return Predictability and Variance Risk Premia: Statistical Inference and International Evidence</cb:title>
      <cb:link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201152/201152pap.pdf</cb:link>
      <cb:description>PDF version</cb:description>
    </cb:resource>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>Tim</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>Bollerslev</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>Tim Bollerslev</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>Duke University</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>James</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>Marrone</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>James Marrone</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>University of Chicago</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>Lai</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>Xu</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>Lai Xu</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>Duke University</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>Hao</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>Zhou</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>Hao Zhou</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>Federal Reserve Board</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:byline>Tim Bollerslev, James Marrone, Lai Xu, and Hao Zhou</cb:byline>
    <cb:publicationDate>2012-01-10T18:15:34-05:00</cb:publicationDate>

    <cb:issue>2011-52</cb:issue>
    <cb:JELCode>C12</cb:JELCode>
    <cb:JELCode>C22</cb:JELCode>
    <cb:JELCode>G12</cb:JELCode>
    <cb:JELCode>G13</cb:JELCode>
  </cb:paper>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201151/201151abs.html">
  <title>2011-51: Tossed and Turned: Wealth Dynamics of U.S. Households 2007-2009</title>
  <link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201151/201151abs.html</link>
  <description>Arthur B. Kennickell. For many years, the cross-sectional Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF) has shown relatively weak or inconsistent changes in the shape of the distribution of net worth, despite many shifts in income and other economic factors.  In 2009, households that had taken part in the 2007 SCF were re-interviewed to obtain information on the changes in their financial condition over the period of the intervening financial crisis.  Looked at as a second cross section, the 2009 data show a pattern of wealth distribution very similar in shape to what had been seen in the earlier cross sections.  Between the two years, however, there was considerable variation in the relative positions of households within the wealth distribution.  This paper presents data on the changed situation of households and it decomposes the observed wealth changes in terms of underlying portfolio shifts.  It is generally recognized that changes in the value of residential real estate, corporate equities and private businesses were important sources of wealth losses.  Although the data presented here confirm that picture, they also show a great deal of heterogeneity below the aggregate level.  The observed stability of the pseudo-cross-sectional wealth shares in the panel despite the underlying turmoil is largely a consequence of changes in values of businesses and equities among comparatively wealthy households offsetting changes in the value of housing assets among other households.
</description>
  <dc:date>2011-12-13T17:10:56-05:00</dc:date>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <cb:paper>
    <cb:simpleTitle>Tossed and Turned: Wealth Dynamics of U.S. Households 2007-2009</cb:simpleTitle>
    <cb:occurrenceDate>2011-12-13T17:10:56-05:00</cb:occurrenceDate>
    <cb:keyword>Wealth mobility</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>financial crisis</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>Survey of Consumer Finances</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>portfolio choice</cb:keyword>
    <cb:resource>
      <cb:title>2011-51: Tossed and Turned: Wealth Dynamics of U.S. Households 2007-2009</cb:title>
      <cb:link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201151/201151pap.pdf</cb:link>
      <cb:description>PDF version</cb:description>
    </cb:resource>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>Arthur</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>Kennickell</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>Arthur Kennickell</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:byline>Arthur B. Kennickell</cb:byline>
    <cb:publicationDate>2011-12-13T17:10:56-05:00</cb:publicationDate>

    <cb:issue>2011-51</cb:issue>
    <cb:JELCode>D31</cb:JELCode>
    <cb:JELCode>G11</cb:JELCode>
    <cb:JELCode>C81</cb:JELCode>
  </cb:paper>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201150/201150abs.html">
  <title>2011-50: Distributional dynamics under smoothly state-dependent pricing</title>
  <link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201150/201150abs.html</link>
  <description>James Costain and Anton Nakov. Starting from the assumption that firms are more likely to adjust their prices when doing so is more valuable, this paper analyzes monetary policy shocks in a DSGE model with firm-level heterogeneity. The model is calibrated to retail price microdata, and inflation responses are decomposed into "intensive", "extensive", and "selection" margins. Money growth and Taylor rule shocks both have nontrivial real effects, because the low state dependence implied by the data rules out the strong selection effect associated with fixed menu costs. The response to sector-specific shocks is gradual, but inappropriate econometrics might make it appear immediate.
</description>
  <dc:date>2011-12-08T11:27:38-05:00</dc:date>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <cb:paper>
    <cb:simpleTitle>Distributional dynamics under smoothly state-dependent pricing</cb:simpleTitle>
    <cb:occurrenceDate>2011-12-08T11:27:38-05:00</cb:occurrenceDate>
    <cb:keyword>Nominal rigidity</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>state-dependent pricing</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>menu costs</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>heterogeneity</cb:keyword>
    <cb:keyword>Taylor rule</cb:keyword>
    <cb:resource>
      <cb:title>2011-50: Distributional dynamics under smoothly state-dependent pricing</cb:title>
      <cb:link>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201150/201150pap.pdf</cb:link>
      <cb:description>PDF version</cb:description>
    </cb:resource>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>James</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>Costain</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>James Costain</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>Bank of Spain</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:person type="author">
      <cb:givenName>Anton</cb:givenName>
      <cb:surname>Nakov</cb:surname>
      <cb:nameAsWritten>Anton Nakov</cb:nameAsWritten>
      <cb:role>
        <cb:affiliation>Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System</cb:affiliation>
      </cb:role>
    </cb:person>
    <cb:byline>James Costain and Anton Nakov</cb:byline>
    <cb:publicationDate>2011-12-08T11:27:38-05:00</cb:publicationDate>

    <cb:issue>2011-50</cb:issue>
    <cb:JELCode>E31</cb:JELCode>
    <cb:JELCode>E52</cb:JELCode>
    <cb:JELCode>D81</cb:JELCode>
  </cb:paper>
</item>
</rdf:RDF>

