MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7093310605 · doi:10.1016/j.econlet.2025.112691

Large tariff cuts and corporate hedging: Evidence from interest rate swaps

2025· article· en· W7093310605 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueEconomics Letters · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHistory of Computing Technologies
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTariffDebtInterest rateCompetition (biology)IncentiveCashCash flowTrade credit

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• Large U.S. tariff cuts increase domestic firms’ use of interest rate swaps, shifting debt from fixed to floating rates. • The effect operates through intensified product market competition and lower expected borrowing costs, increasing incentives to preserve financial flexibility. • Strongest responses are observed for firms near the industry’s technological core, in highly substitutable markets, and with low cash reserves. • Results establish a novel link between trade policy shocks, corporate risk management, and firms’ debt structure choices. We examine how trade policy shocks affect firms’ interest rate hedging and debt structure. Using plausibly exogenous large U.S. tariff cuts from 1992–2015 as industry-level shocks, we find that exposed firms increase their use of interest rate swaps, converting fixed-rate debt into floating obligations. Drawing on real options and corporate hedging frameworks, we argue that large tariff cuts intensify competition and lower expected borrowing costs through reduced import prices and input costs, raising underinvestment risk while increasing incentives to maintain financial flexibility. Firms dynamically reoptimize their debt composition to capture expected savings and secure funding for time-sensitive projects. Effects are strongest among firms close to their industry’s technological core, in highly substitutable markets, and with low cash buffers. Our findings establish a novel link between international trade policy, corporate risk management, and debt structure.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.447
Threshold uncertainty score0.783

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.187 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEconomics LettersSame topicHistory of Computing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207