A growing number of US households hire advisers to assist with major financial decisions, such as planning life events or making portfolio choices for retirement. But some advisers exploit the inherent complexity of these decisions and the lack of sophistication of their clients to benefit themselves.

In a paper in the Journal of Economic Perspectives, Mark Egan, Gregor Matvos, and Amit Seru show that about 7 percent of financial advisers have serious misconduct records, with rates reaching nearly 30 percent in some regions and firms. The authors explain why misconduct clusters in certain firms and geographic areas, particularly those with wealthy but less financially sophisticated populations.

Importantly, the researchers also show that widely publicizing the names of the firms with the highest misconduct rates can lead to a substantial reduction in misconduct.

Egan recently spoke with Tyler Smith about how the complex regulatory landscape of financial advising creates potential confusion for consumers and the best ways to clean up the industry.

In 2017, then-President Trump signed into law the Tax Cut and Jobs Act, which was arguably the largest corporate tax cut in US history. The TCJA significantly lowered the statutory rate that corporations pay in taxes and reshaped numerous tax rules. Proponents said it would boost US competitiveness on the international stage and juice business investment. But its overall effects are still being debated among economists.

In a paper in the Journal of Economic Perspectives, authors Gabriel Chodorow-Reich, Owen Zidar, and Eric Zwick explored the current understanding of the TCJA, discussing its costs and benefits, as well as future policy implications. They argue that, contrary to what some proponents said, the tax cuts significantly reduced tax revenues.

Zwick recently spoke with Tyler Smith about the legislation, who benefited the most from the bill, and whether provisions that are set to expire in the coming years should be retained.

A half a century ago, new high-yield varieties of crops were introduced to India, and it transformed the country's farming. This so-called “Green Revolution” significantly boosted agricultural output, allaying concerns about famine and food security. But it may have had some unanticipated consequences for long-term health outcomes.

In a paper in the American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, authors Sheetal Sekhri and Gauri Kartini Shastry show that the areas where agricultural productivity accelerated the most also saw the highest rates of diabetes among men later in life. The authors argue that substantial changes to the diets of mothers and young children, in the form of higher levels of rice consumption, likely increased the risks of chronic diseases.

The findings suggest that dietary diversification should accompany efforts to promote agricultural production.

Sekhri recently spoke with Tyler Smith about how the Green Revolution changed diets in India and why it led to a rise in diet-related diseases like diabetes.