Spend as You Were Told: Evidence from Labeled COVID-19 Stimulus Payments in South Korea☆

We test the income fungibility assumption from standard economic theory by analyzing spending responses to South Korea's labeled COVID-19 stimulus payments. We exploit unique policy rules for identification: 1) recipients cannot use payments outside their province of residence, and 2) they can only use payments at establishments in pre-specified sectors. Using data on card transactions in Seoul, we find that households do not consider stimulus payments fungible. Compared to Seoul residents' benchmark spending responses to cash income gains by sector, the stimulus payments disproportionately increased Seoul residents' spending in the allowed sector compared to the non-allowed sector. The payments did not increase non-Seoul residents' card spending. Our results imply that labeled stimulus payments with usage restrictions can boost household consumption spending in targeted sectors or locations during economic recessions.

Spend as you were told: Evidence from labeled COVID-19 stimulus payments in South Korea.

We test the income fungibility assumption from standard economic theory by analyzing spending responses to South Korea's labeled COVID-19 stimulus payments. We exploit unique policy rules for identification: (1) recipients cannot use payments outside their province of residence, and (2) they can only use payments at establishments in pre-specified sectors. Using data on card transactions in Seoul, we find that households do not consider stimulus payments fungible. Compared to Seoul residents' benchmark spending responses to cash income gains by sector, the stimulus payments disproportionately increased Seoul residents' spending in the allowed sector compared to the non-allowed sector. The payments did not increase non-Seoul residents' card spending. Our results imply that labeled stimulus payments with usage restrictions can boost household consumption spending in targeted sectors or locations during economic recessions.

Life Satisfaction Changes and Adaptation in the Covid-19 Pandemic: Evidence from Singapore

We provide novel evidence on how COVID-19 affected overall life satisfaction using a monthly longitudinal survey of middle-aged and older Singaporeans. We study how the subjective well-being of individuals evolves over the course of 18 months including the outbreak of the pandemic, the implementation of the lockdown and the spike of cases due to the delta variant in a country where COVID-19 is controlled in a sustained manner. Using an event-study design framework, we find large declines in overall life satisfaction in the lead-up to and following the lockdown. Fifteen months after the outbreak of the pandemic, and 13 months out from the end of lockdown, individuals have nearly, though not fully, adapted to living with the virus. We find greater negative well-being impacts of COVID-19 among individuals who report a drop in household income during the COVID-19 outbreak compared to those who do not report any income loss. However, we find little evidence of heterogeneity in the dynamics of the recovery in well-being by individuals' underlying health status, marital status and education. On personality types, people who are high in neuroticism experience larger dips in well-being during the lockdown, and adapt to living with COVID-19 at a slower rate.

Short-term impact of COVID-19 on consumption spending and its underlying mechanisms: Evidence from Singapore

We examine the short-term impact of COVID-19 on consumption spending and its underlying mechanisms using individual-level monthly panel data from Singapore. Although Singapore's case fatality rate was one of the lowest in the world in the early stage of the pandemic (0.05%), we find that the COVID-19 pandemic reduced household consumption spending by almost one quarter at its peak, with a larger response from households with above-median wealth. We show that the reduction in consumption spending is associated with the nationwide lockdown policy, heightened economic uncertainty and reduced income. In addition, we find a substantial increase in monthly savings among households without income losses, suggesting a substantial rebound in consumption spending after the lifting of the lockdown. The results from June 2020 confirm this conjecture, as we find that consumption spending rebounded by about 10 percentage points in that month.

Economic impact of targeted government responses to COVID-19: Evidence from the large-scale clusters in Seoul.

We estimate the economic impact of South Korea's targeted responses to the large-scale COVID-19 clusters in a highly concentrated business area (Guro) and a highly concentrated entertainment area (Itaewon) in Seoul, respectively. We find that foot traffic and retail sales decreased only within a 300 m radius and recovered to their pre-outbreak level after four weeks in the case of the Guro cluster. The reductions appear to be driven by temporary business closures rather than by citizens' risk avoidance behavior. However, the adverse economic impacts measured by foot traffic and retail sales of another outbreak of the COVID-19 cluster in Itaewon were persistent. Our results imply that the effects of less intense but more targeted COVID-19 interventions, such as pinpointed, temporary closures of businesses, can differ by underlying geographical characteristics.