From 1960From -2009, the U.S. current account balance has tended to decline during expansions and improve in recessions. We argue that trend shocks to productivity can help explain the countercyclical U.S. current account. Our framework is a two-country, two-good real business cycle (RBC) model in which cross-border asset trade is limited to an international bond. We identify trend and transitory shocks to U.S. productivity using generalized method of moments (GMM) estimation. The specification that best matches the data assigns a large role to trend shocks. The estimated model generates a countercyclical current account without excessive consumption volatility.JEL Classification: E21, E32, F32, F41

No abstract

From 1960From -2009, the U.S. current account balance has tended to decline during expansions and improve in recessions. We argue that trend shocks to productivity can help explain the countercyclical U.S. current account. Our framework is a two-country, two-good real business cycle (RBC) model in which cross-border asset trade is limited to an international bond. We identify trend and transitory shocks to U.S. productivity using generalized method of moments (GMM) estimation. The specification that best matches the data assigns a large role to trend shocks. The estimated model generates a countercyclical current account without excessive consumption volatility.JEL Classification: E21, E32, F32, F41

Purpose This study takes a dyadic approach to explaining merger and acquisition (M&A) deal outcomes. Acknowledging the socio-cognitive (e.g. intangible and macro-environmental) idiosyncrasies, the authors theorize that some acquirer–target dyads have a superior ability to complete complex relational transactions in an M&A deal. Specifically, deals are successful when an acquirer and a target: are similar considering their sectoral characteristics, have contextually-informed deal-making competencies, and are familiar with one another given their sectoral and institutional features. Design/methodology/approach This study uses logistic regression analysis to examine how sectoral and institutional characteristics in the acquiring and target company dyads relate to the likelihood of merger and acquisition deal completion. Findings Analyzing a sample of 37,560 M&A deals, the authors find empirical evidence in support of the dyadic to deal completion. The authors find that sectoral similarity and institutional familiarity in an M&A dyad can predict the likelihood of deal completion. Specifically, service multinational acquirers are more competent than their manufacturing counterparts in general, and in same-sector and same-country deals in particular. In contrast, service sector acquirers also are at a relative disadvantage vis-à-vis their manufacturing counterparts in cross-national deals. Research limitations/implications Considering the theoretical and managerial implications, the authors identify new avenues for future research on service and manufacturing M&A dyads that can deepen the knowledge of inter-firm transaction processes. Originality/value First, the authors draw on the socio-cognitive, behavioral, and relational models to explain M&A deal process in both domestic and cross-border settings. Drawing on service vis-à-vis manufacturing sector business models, the authors predict deal completion. Second, the authors propose that familiarity between the acquiring and target companies in the form of sectoral and cross-national factors becomes pivotal to the inter-firm processes. Finally, the authors empirically demonstrate how inter-firm dynamics in a dyad can pose complex deal-making challenges, which make some acquirers especially susceptible to contextual shocks.