2005
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2004.05.016
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sweep programs and optimal monetary aggregation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
43
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 52 publications
(44 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
1
43
0
Order By: Relevance
“…small time deposits for the US and CDs for Germany and Japan, led to rejections of weak separability. Similarly, Jones, Dutkowsky and Elger (2005) test for weak separability of M2, which contains small time deposits, and M2M and MZM, which are zeromaturity aggregates that do not. Their findings are relatively favourable for MZM.…”
Section: Does Divisia Money Enter the Is Curve For The Euro Area?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…small time deposits for the US and CDs for Germany and Japan, led to rejections of weak separability. Similarly, Jones, Dutkowsky and Elger (2005) test for weak separability of M2, which contains small time deposits, and M2M and MZM, which are zeromaturity aggregates that do not. Their findings are relatively favourable for MZM.…”
Section: Does Divisia Money Enter the Is Curve For The Euro Area?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since commercial sweeps are more than just accounting devices, customers share in the earnings from those sweeps. Jones et al (2005) provide a method for adjusting the narrow monetary aggregates to account for commercial sweeps by moving amounts out of institutional money-market funds and back into demand deposits and other checkable deposits. However, this adjustment would not account for those commercial sweeps in unlinked investment accounts.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…"Sweeps" programs allow routine transfers, at the banks' initiative, between M1 deposits and non-M1 deposits. An embryonic version of this arrangement developed during the 1970s in the form of automatic transfer services (ATS) (see Hafer, 1980), but extensive adoption of retail sweep deposit programs on the part of banks did not take effect until January 1994 (Anderson, 2003 Jones, Dutkosky, andElger, 2005, and has attempted to correct the U.S. One argument that has been advanced to explain the stability of M2 velocity is that the sweeps program itself tends to produce variations in M1 that cancel within M2. Beyond this more or less mechanical basis for favoring M2, it is also possible that M2 might be a preferable definition even from the perspective of standard theories of money demand.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%