Adverse Selection – Kojima Niigata Fri, 09 Apr 2021 10:21:19 +0000 en-US hourly 1 Adverse Selection – Kojima Niigata 32 32 International Pharmacovigilance and Drug Security Software program Business to 2025 – Key Drivers, Challenges and Developments – Fri, 09 Apr 2021 09:05:00 +0000 DUBLIN – (BUSINESS WIRE)–The “International Pharmacovigilance and Drug Security Software program Market 2021-2025” the report was added to from supply. The writer is monitoring the pharmacovigilance and drug security software program market and it’s poised to develop by $ 66.51 million throughout 2021-2025, with a CAGR of seven% through the forecast interval . Pharmacovigilance […]]]>

DUBLIN – (BUSINESS WIRE)–The “International Pharmacovigilance and Drug Security Software program Market 2021-2025” the report was added to from supply.

The writer is monitoring the pharmacovigilance and drug security software program market and it’s poised to develop by $ 66.51 million throughout 2021-2025, with a CAGR of seven% through the forecast interval .

Pharmacovigilance and Drug Security Software program Market report supplies holistic evaluation, market measurement and forecast, developments, development drivers and challenges in addition to vendor evaluation protecting round 25 distributors.

The report gives up-to-date evaluation concerning the present world market state of affairs, the most recent developments and drivers, in addition to the final market setting. The market is pushed by growing approvals of recent molecules and biosimilars and by favorable authorities rules and insurance policies.

Pharmacovigilance and drug security software program market evaluation consists of end-user phase and geographic landscapes. This examine identifies the growing incidence charges of drug-related opposed occasions as one of many main causes for the expansion of the Pharmacovigilance and Drug Security Software program market within the coming years.

Firms talked about

  • AB Dice

  • ArisGlobal LLC

  • Ennov


  • Indegene Pvt. Ltd.

  • On-line Enterprise Utility Inc.

  • Oracle Corp.

  • Sarjen Programs Pvt. Ltd.

  • Sparta Programs Inc.

  • United BioSource LLC

The Pharmacovigilance and Drug Security Software program Market report covers the next areas:

  • Sizing of the pharmacovigilance and drug security software program market

  • Pharmacovigilance and Drug Security Software program Market Forecast

  • Business evaluation of Pharmacovigilance and Drug Security Software program Market

The examine was carried out utilizing an goal mixture of major and secondary data, together with contributions from key trade contributors. The report accommodates a complete market and vendor panorama along with an evaluation of the main distributors.

The writer presents an in depth image of the market by learning, synthesizing and summing up information from a number of sources by analyzing key parameters reminiscent of revenue, pricing, competitors, and promotions. It presents numerous sides of the market by figuring out the primary influencers within the trade. The information offered is full, dependable and is the results of intensive analysis – each major and secondary. Market analysis reviews present a complete aggressive panorama and in-depth vendor choice methodology and evaluation utilizing qualitative and quantitative analysis to forecast exact market development.

Essential matters coated:

1. Abstract

2. Market panorama

  • Market ecosystem

  • Market traits

  • Worth chain evaluation

3. Market sizing

  • Market definition

  • Market phase evaluation

  • Market measurement 2020

  • Market Outlook: Forecast for 2020-2025

4. Evaluation of the 5 forces

  • Abstract of the 5 forces

  • The bargaining energy of consumers

  • Bargaining energy of suppliers

  • The specter of new contributors

  • The specter of substitutes

  • Risk of rivalry

  • State of the market

5. Market segmentation by finish consumer

  • Market segments

  • Comparability by finish consumer

  • Prescription drugs and Biotech Firms – Market Measurement and Forecast 2020-2025

  • Contract Analysis Group – Market Measurement and Forecast 2020-2025

  • Enterprise Course of Outsourcing – Market Measurement and Forecast 2020-2025

  • Market alternative by finish consumer

6. Buyer panorama

7. Geographical panorama

  • Geographic segmentation

  • Geographic comparability

  • North America Market Measurement and Forecast 2020-2025

  • Europe – Market Measurement and Forecast 2020-2025

  • Asia Market Measurement and Forecast 2020-2025

  • ROW – Market Measurement and Forecast 2020-2025

  • Essential main international locations

  • Market alternative by geography

  • Market components

  • Market challenges

  • Market developments

8. Provider panorama

  • Vendor Panorama

  • Panorama disturbance

  • Aggressive state of affairs

9. Provider evaluation

  • Lined suppliers

  • Positioning of suppliers in the marketplace

  • AB Dice

  • ArisGlobal LLC

  • Ennov


  • Indegene Pvt. Ltd.

  • On-line Enterprise Utility Inc.

  • Oracle Corp.

  • Sarjen Programs Pvt. Ltd.

  • Sparta Programs Inc.

  • United BioSource LLC

10. Annex

  • Scope of the report

  • Foreign money conversion charges for the US greenback

  • Analysis methodology

  • Abreviations checklist

For extra data on this report, go to

Supply hyperlink

Economic lessons for COVID‐19 pandemic policies – Viscusi – – Southern Economic Journal Fri, 05 Mar 2021 11:36:47 +0000 1 INTRODUCTION W. Kip Viscusi Professor of Law, Economics, and Management, Vanderbilt Law School, Nashville TN COVID‐19 is a novel coronavirus. Nevertheless, the policy issues raised by this pandemic are not entirely novel but are well situated in economists’ domain. The fundamental policy task is to think about this pandemic in a sensible way. How […]]]>


W. Kip Viscusi Professor of Law, Economics, and Management, Vanderbilt Law School, Nashville TN

COVID‐19 is a novel coronavirus. Nevertheless, the policy issues raised by this pandemic are not entirely novel but are well situated in economists’ domain. The fundamental policy task is to think about this pandemic in a sensible way. How should we deal with the health risks posed by the pandemic? Is it feasible to monetize the health consequences of these risks? The economic and societal ramifications of dealing with these risks are not costless and have generated starkly divergent viewpoints. Should health concerns always be paramount and be the sole driver of policy decisions? Or should health consequences be disregarded, treating the pandemic as a hoax or, at most, as being comparable to routine flu illnesses? More rationally, how can we seek to achieve a meaningful, efficient balance between the health risks and the costs to reduce them? This article provides guidance for addressing COVID‐19 as well as lessons that are applicable to future pandemics. The advent of a major novel health crisis need not paralyze analysis or lead us to abandon the guiding principle of fostering economically efficient control of risks.

Government agencies have routinely confronted sensitive issues involving life and health for decades, particularly with respect to the design and structure of health, safety, and environmental regulations. Economic analyses in these domains are sometimes challenging and necessarily involve treading on controversial terrain. Yet, the presence of such challenges has not led policymakers to abandon the pursuit of efforts to strike a meaningful balance between risk and costs. My book, Pricing Lives: Guideposts for a Safer Society, presents economic prescriptions for analyzing these risk situations, some of which I will draw upon and extend for my analysis here.

Although the application of existing economic frameworks to COVID‐19 is instructive, this pandemic has some distinctive aspects that may require more than off‐the‐shelf analyses. Section 2 considers the mortality and morbidity consequences of the pandemic. The magnitude of the threats to health is greater than that posed in the typical regulatory context, with U.S. mortality costs in 2020 of almost $4 trillion. The impacts also are global, necessitating the valuation of health risks for countries for which quite different benefit measures are pertinent. Morbidity costs incurred by those who do not die also are substantial. Within‐country heterogeneity of the value of reducing mortality risks has emerged as a prominent concern. Treating all lives within a country as having the same value is a useful starting point, but the incidence of COVID‐19 impacts is highly skewed, with the greatest losses being experienced at the upper end of the age distribution. Section 3 explores these age‐related issues both with respect to monetization of mortality risk reductions and the rationing of scarce medical treatments, which involves ethical challenges far greater than in the usual regulatory contexts where the changes in risk probabilities are small. Because many COVID‐19 policies rely on decentralized personal decisions, it is essential to be able to effectively communicate the risks and the pertinent precautions. Section 4 outlines some key economic guidelines for effective risk communication, which is an area where U.S. policy efforts have fallen particularly short. Appropriate protective measures by the public require that they make tradeoffs involving some sacrifice of personal freedoms. Many may view personal freedoms as absolute rights that should never be compromised. An opposing point of view is that individual lives are sacred and should never be put at greater risk. Confronting the inevitable tradeoff between freedom and health in a meaningful way is the focus of Section 5. Throughout the discussion, the recurring theme is that while this pandemic poses enormous challenges, a more rational policy response requires that we apply and, in some cases, extend existing economic frameworks. Section 6 concludes, offering an estimate that the U.S. mortality cost will reach $5.5 trillion once the death toll is 500,000 by March 2021.


2.1 The mortality costs in the United States

The mortality costs of COVID‐19 have increased since the onset of the pandemic, have not begun to stabilize, and remain a moving target. For purposes of my presentation at the Southern Economic Association conference, I used the mortality totals as of September 26, 2020, for my analysis. At that time, there had been 209,177 U.S. deaths. By January 1, 2021, this total had risen by 70% to 355,631 deaths. Here I will use the mortality figures on January 1, 2021, for my analysis, thus focusing on the health loss in 2020.1

To calculate the value of the mortality costs, I apply my labor market estimates of the value of a statistical life (VSL). The VSL is the local rate of the tradeoff between money and small risks of death. Empirical estimates of the VSL using labor market data correspond to the estimated wage‐risk tradeoff rate. After appropriate updates for inflation, the focal VSL estimate that I report in Viscusi (2018) is $11 million. This value is the estimate based on labor market studies in which workers are matched to measures of job risks using the most reliable and refined fatality rate data, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries. The $11 million figure also incorporates adjustments for potential publication selection effects that may influence which estimates are submitted for publication and are published in the literature. If there is no adjustment for publication selection effects, the VSL would be about $2 million higher. Although government agencies have long had a history of undervaluing risks to life, policy analysis practices are now better aligned with estimates in the economics literature. In recent years, U.S. government agencies have used VSL estimates in the $9 million to $11 million range. Multiplying the number of deaths by a VSL figure of $11 million yields a mortality cost estimate through September 26, 2020, of $2.3 trillion. By the end of the year, the mortality cost had risen to $3.9 trillion.2

While the application of a uniform VSL to all mortality risks is consistent with prevailing government practices, it is also feasible to incorporate potential sources of heterogeneity. The VSL is not a natural constant but reflects individual preferences with respect to bearing risk. The possible refinements in the applicable VSL include adjustments for age, income, the size of the risk change, and the direction of the risk change. The subsequent discussion focuses on the principal modifications for age and income.

This article sets aside adjustments based on the magnitude of the risk changes involved. Policies that involve large risk changes have a lower associated willingness‐to‐pay value for risk reductions, such as those associated with the advent of a vaccine. Similarly, there is a higher willingness‐to‐accept value for increases in risk, as would occur if all protective restrictions are lifted. For small changes in risk, the direction of the risk change does not alter the VSL. While COVID‐19 mortality risks are substantial, the magnitude of the risk is similar to that of many high‐risk occupations that are used to generate the VSL estimates. Most important is to consider the size of the risk change for any particular policy intervention. Except for interventions such as the COVID‐19 vaccines, which was not first approved until December 2020, all policy actions have been fairly limited in scope. Restricting restaurant dining, urging use of face masks, and promoting social distancing do not lead to risk changes that are so great that the usual VSL figure is inappropriate. If larger risk changes are contemplated, modest adjustments to the VSL level based on the structure of utility functions are feasible (Hammitt, 2020; Viscusi, 2010, 2020).

Although my focus is on the monetization of the health risks generated by COVID‐19, the downturn in the economy and the accompanying reduction in income have health ramifications as well. Comprehensive assessments of the mortality cost also should include the mortality costs that are associated with a loss in income. Based on the conceptual approach in Viscusi (1994) coupled with recent empirical estimates in Broughel and Viscusi (2021), a loss in income of just over $100 million will lead to one expected death based on a VSL of $10 million. This relationship highlights the important link between the performance of the economy and individual health. Shutting down economic activity to limit the pandemic has adverse health consequences in addition to the favorable reduction in risk due to decreased social contacts. Income transfers such as unemployment compensation consequently serve a health‐related function in dampening these losses.

2.2 Global mortality costs

The COVID‐19 pandemic has caused over one million deaths worldwide. As of September 26, 2020, there had been 996,879 deaths based on reports for 163 countries. By the end of the year, the number of global deaths had reached 1,829,126 based on Worldometer (2021) data.

It is feasible to monetize these risks using the VSL, but the VSL that should be used for these calculations should reflect the risk preferences of the residents in the particular country. To generate estimates consistent with those for the United States, I use the U.S. VSL as the baseline and make appropriate adjustments given the differences in income as compared with the United States. While there may be other international differences in risk preferences, income adjustments are the most feasible. The international income elasticity of the VSL is 1.0 based on evidence in meta‐analyses of revealed preference studies (Viscusi and Masterman 2017) and stated preference studies (Masterman and Viscusi, 2018). Coupling this elasticity estimate with the GNI per capita yields the VSL estimates by the country that appear in Column (2) of Appendix Table A1. For example, the pertinent VSL is $7.8 million in the U.K., $2.9 million in Brazil, $7.1 million in Italy, and $8.0 million in France. Multiplying the number of deaths in each country by the country‐specific VSL yields the mortality cost figures in column 3 of that table. Countries appear in Table A1 in order of their total mortality cost. Through September 26, the global mortality cost was $5.4 trillion, but by the end of the year it had climbed to $10.1 trillion.

These health costs represent the monetized value of the adverse health impacts that have been incurred despite efforts to reduce the risk. From the standpoint of policy decisions, what is pertinent are the marginal risk reduction benefits and marginal costs of individual policy actions. The overall health cost figure for the mortality losses incurred to date is, however, demonstrative of the enormous scale of the damage that results in the absence of vigorous precautionary actions.

Although some countries such as the United States have been particularly hard hit, there have been some outstanding performers as well. Because of its highly responsible policies to control the virus, New Zealand has had an especially laudatory record in that it had only 25 deaths based on the data that I used at the time of my conference presentation, which covered the period through September 26, 2020. Remarkably, New Zealand still only had 25 deaths by the end of the year. Total COVID‐19 mortality has completely abated in New Zealand, while the United States experienced an additional 146,454 deaths during this three‐month period. Based on New Zealand’s VSL of $6.9 million, that country’s mortality cost is $173 million through 2020. Although some observers may attribute New Zealand’s excellent performance not to its vigorous precautionary efforts but to its advantage of being relatively isolated and comprised of islands, other islands have not fared as well. Hawaii has a population of 1.4 million, or less than one‐third of the New Zealand population of 4.7 million. Yet Hawaii has had over 10 times as many COVID‐19 deaths—289 deaths by the start of 2021.

2.3 Assessing the U.S. mortality rate performance

The United States share of the global mortality costs is out of line with its population share. As shown in Figure 1, by the end of 2020 the United States had 19% of the global deaths. Given the high VSL figure in the United States, the U.S. share of the global mortality costs is 39%. The international spread of COVID‐19 by the end of 2020 has made the U.S. performance a bit less appalling than it was based on data at the end of September when the United States had 21% of the deaths and 42% of the mortality costs. Figure 2 lists the top five countries in terms of global mortality costs. The United States is followed by the United Kingdom, Brazil, Italy, and France.

The U.S. share of COVID‐19 deaths and mortality costs [Color figure can be viewed at]
The top five countries by total COVID‐19 mortality cost [Color figure can be viewed at]

A question raised by the high level of pandemic‐related mortality in the United States is whether the U.S. performance is an outlier. High VSL countries should place a greater value on the promotion of health and have lower risks if they face the same marginal cost curves as other nations. To get a sense of the relative performance of the United States, I ran some simple regressions that might be viewed as the econometric equivalent of a back‐of‐the‐envelope calculation. The dependent variable is the country’s COVID‐19 mortality rate per 100,000 population. The worldwide average mortality rate is 241.9 per million, and the U.S. mortality rate is 1109 per million. The explanatory variables included the country’s VSL, a 0–1 indicator for the United States, the percentage of the population age 65 and older, the urban population share, the population density, the GDP change in quarter 1 and in quarter 2, the index of economic freedom (coded using indicators for 3 of the 4 quartiles on this ranking), and a World Health Organization quality of health care index (coded using indicators for 3 of the 4 quartiles on this ranking). Appendix Table A2 lists the data sources and variable definitions.

The regression results in Table 1 indicate a simple positive correlation of the VSL with the COVID‐19 mortality rate in the first column. The second column of Table 1 adds the U.S. indicator variable, and subsequent regressions in Table 1 include a more comprehensive set of variables. As expected, countries with a higher population share that is 65 and older have higher mortality rates. Given the contagious nature of the disease, COVID‐19 mortality rates are positively correlated with the urban population share variable. The final column includes the percentage change in GDP in the first two quarters, which are likely to be endogenous. The indicator variable for the United States reflects a strong positive effect irrespective of the controls. While the VSL variable is no longer statistically significant once a comprehensive set of other variables is included, the U.S. indicator continues to reflect a strong impact across all the regressions in Table 1. The magnitude of the coefficient is 57% of the total U.S. mortality rate after including all these controls. By almost any measure, the performance of the United States has fallen short of what should be expected for an affluent country in which the high VSL should foster greater protection of individual health.

Regressions of COVID‐19 mortality rate per million population
COVID deaths per million
Variables (1) (2) (3) (4)
Value of a Statistical Life 21.28*** (6.62) 19.71*** (6.64) −10.32 (6.69) −0.32 (8.87)
United States Indicator 654.28* (366.65) 540.57* (295.22) 631.16** (267.19)
Percent Age 65+ 29.06*** (3.70) 26.97*** (5.21)
Urban share 4.42*** (1.31) 3.34*** (1.28)
Pop. density (person/km sq.) −0.01 (0.02)
Q2 GDP % change −38.07*** (7.81)
Q1 GDP% change −34.53* (19.83)
Econ. freedom index percentile 75–100 −20.33 (81.79)
Econ. freedom index percentile 50–75 147.62** (67.00)
Econ. freedom index percentile 25–50 −43.52 (58.93)
Health rank percentile 75–100 −121.24 (97.13)
Health rank percentile 50–75 −44.64 (71.06)
Health rank percentile 25–50 100.77 (63.49)
Constant 197.93*** (36.71) 200.14*** (36.51) −206.20*** (68.01) −526.14*** (154.82)
R2 .05 .07 .41 .56
  • Note: N = 180. Regressions also include indicator variables for any missing GDP data. Standard errors in parentheses.

  • ***

    p < .01,

  • **

    p < .05,

  • *

    p < .10.

2.4 Morbidity effects

The primary focus of health risk statistics is on mortality effects. Deaths are well‐defined events, although the cause of the death is not always apparent. Countries throughout the world have reported regularly on the number of deaths from COVID‐19. There are also reports of the number of positive cases by country, but these tallies depend in part on the testing rate. The focus here is on the morbidity effects for the United States, for which there is information on the distribution of the morbidity consequences.

Even if you do not die from coronavirus, for many of the victims of the disease the adverse health impacts are substantial. Based on the distribution for those who had positive tests through May 30, 2020, 14% were hospitalized and 2.3% were in the ICU (Stokes et al., 2020). The COVID‐19 symptoms are quite extensive, including: fever, cough, shortness of breath, muscle aches, headaches, loss of the sense of taste and smell, brain fog, and cardiovascular ailments. Some of these symptoms are temporary, while others, such as cardiovascular problems, may have a longer‐term impact on health.

The appropriate benefit measure is the analog of the VSL, which is based on the willingness‐to‐pay to reduce the risk of these morbidity effects. In the absence of available studies to monetize these morbidity risks, it is instructive to adopt the benefit transfer approach that government agencies use in assessing the benefits of risk and environmental regulations. Benefit transfer assessment techniques assign a unit benefit value to different health outcomes using estimates of the unit benefit values for health impacts of comparable severity. Typically, this procedure involves matching situations involving similar types of health impacts on the individual.

In constructing the calculation of morbidity costs, I break the morbidity effects into two groups—nonhospitalized cases, which tend to be less severe, and hospitalized cases. For the nonhospitalized cases, I use the unit benefit value of $3,000 for asthma risks, which is based on the estimates for asthma by O’Conor and Blomquist (1997) and Blomquist et al. (2011), after updating for inflation. Both of these studies are stated preference analyses in which the willingness‐to‐pay values were elicited for asthma risks. Despite the much greater prevalence of nonhospitalized cases, the fairly low unit benefit amount of $3,000 per case makes these impacts a relatively modest contributor to the monetized value of the COVID‐19 morbidity costs.

The more consequential component is that of hospitalized cases, which can be monetized in two different ways. The first approach is based on the estimates for the risk of chronic bronchitis developed by Viscusi et al. (1991), in which the study participants undertook a risk‐risk tradeoff involving chronic bronchitis and risks of death. The results from this study have been used in many regulatory impact analyses by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to value the risks of respiratory illnesses from air pollution exposures. Based on the estimated risk‐risk tradeoff coupled with the VSL, the monetized value for the risk of hospitalization for COVID‐19 is $3.4 million. Following the procedure described in Viscusi (2020), using this figure in calculating the upper bound value of morbidity costs, the morbidity cost for the hospitalized cases is 50% of the value of the mortality costs.

An alternative approach for monetizing these COVID‐19 morbidity effects involves the application of the morbidity component of the VSL. Gentry and Viscusi (2016) distinguish the valuation of the two different components of occupational fatality risks—the loss of one’s life and morbidity effects before death that are associated with fatal injuries. The mean value of the morbidity loss using current estimates of the VSL is $2.75 million per expected case. I use this figure below in calculating the lower bound value of morbidity costs of the hospitalized cases. Based on this value, the morbidity cost of the hospitalized cases is 40% of the mortality costs.

The combined morbidity effect values based on the distribution of nonhospitalized cases and hospitalized cases consequently equals 40% of the mortality costs of COVID‐19 based on the VSL morbidity cost component and 50% using the chronic bronchitis values.3 Most of these costs are attributable to the hospitalized cases. Although under one‐fifth of all people with positive tests are hospitalized, the benefit values applied to each hospitalized case are almost 1,000 times as great as for the nonhospitalized cases. If the 40%–50% morbidity cost‐share remains applicable to the mix of morbidity symptoms during the year, the total morbidity cost in the United States through the end of 2020 is $1.6–2.0 trillion, and the combined mortality and morbidity costs is $5.5–5.9 trillion.

Although these estimates of the morbidity effects are substantial, some estimates may be greater. Kniesner and Sullivan (2020) present estimates of the morbidity costs using U.S. Department of Transportation benefit values for transportation accidents in their benefit transfer approach. They estimated morbidity costs ranging from $1.5 trillion to $9.6 trillion. A major consideration leading to the broad range of estimates in their analysis is that the extent of the morbidity effects may be much higher than is reflected in the positive case statistics if there is a substantial number of people who have the illness, experience morbidity effects, and are never tested.


3.1 The age distribution of COVID‐19 mortality

The fatalities resulting from COVID‐19 are not uniformly distributed throughout the population. In the initial months of the pandemic, residents in nursing homes were particularly hard hit. Through September 30, 2020, there was enormous skewness in the age distribution of these deaths.4 At that time, 31% of the deaths were to those age 85 and over, and 79% of the deaths were to those age 55 and over.

The age distribution is potentially relevant to the applicable VSL since there is substantial heterogeneity in the VSL by age. Figure 3 shows an illustrative trajectory of the VSL by age based on labor market estimates of the VSL. Other estimates based on labor market data similarly show that the life‐cycle trajectory of the VSL displays an inverted‐U shape similar to that of the life‐cycle income trajectory. The VSL rises with age, reaching a peak in the mid‐40s, after which it exhibits a decline. The decline in the VSL with age is not, however, stark, as the VSL for workers age 62 exceeds that of workers at age 20.


The VSL‐age trajectory

Labor market estimates of the VSL are generally restricted to those below the usual retirement age. One can construct the VSL beyond usual retirement ages using a value of a statistical life year (VSLY). For purposes of these calculations, based on my past studies reviewed in Viscusi (2020), I adopt a VSLY of $500,000. Using a discount rate of 3%, the procedure below will use the discounted value of this stream of VSLY amounts to construct the VSL for workers beyond age 55. For comparison, the undiscounted results are also presented.

Embarking on any age variation in the VSL is a controversial undertaking. In its analysis of the Clear Skies Initiative, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) adopted a downward age adjustment for those age 65 and older, reducing their applicable VSL by 37%. The result was a political firestorm against the “senior discount,” leading to headlines in critical articles such as “Seniors on Sale, 37% off” and “What’s a Granny Worth?” EPA abandoned this approach given the public outcry.

Notwithstanding the potential controversy that arises from even considering the prospect of downward adjustments in the VSL for older people, what would the effect of adopting an age‐adjusted VSL be on the estimates of the mortality costs of COVID‐19? Instead of a VSL of $11 million for those aged 85, their VSL declines to $3 million. The average age‐adjusted VSL for the COVID‐19 age distribution is $6.3 million if there is no discounting of the VSLY stream and $5.2 million if a discount rate of 3% is applied to the stream of VSLY values.

The total effect of accounting for age adjustments to the VSL is to cut the mortality cost estimate roughly in half. For the calculations in which there is no discounting of the VSLY streams, there is a 45% reduction in mortality costs, while if there is discounting the reduction is 53%. If these estimates are incorporated into the calculations, the total mortality cost figure is $2.1 trillion in the no discounting case and $1.8 trillion if there is discounting of the VSLY effects. Based on the estimates including discounting, the overall health cost of COVID‐19 including both mortality and morbidity costs consequently is $3.4–3.8 trillion in 2020, which is still a huge cost figure.

3.2 Principles for recognizing heterogeneity in the VSL

Should policy analyses of COVID‐19 incorporate such age adjustments, notwithstanding the controversies that might arise? From the standpoint of economic efficiency, recognition of the heterogeneity simply recognizes the heterogeneity in attitudes toward risk that have been revealed in market decisions. Willingness‐to‐pay values for risk reduction do vary with age and other personal characteristics.

However, efficiency considerations are not the only drivers of assessments of the merits of considering age adjustments. Discussions of VSL heterogeneity also raise equity concerns that have arisen in the broader literature on risk equity. Some economists and ethicists have proposed notions of risk equity such as equalizing the life expectancy of all population groups, equalizing the absolute risk level, or ensuring that all people have an annual mortality risk that does not exceed a certain level. In a discussion of equity concepts in Viscusi (2018), the risk equity concept that I have found to be attractive in many contexts is what I term “equitable risk tradeoffs.” Thus, rather than equalizing an objective measure of risk or life expectancy levels, the task is to adjust policies to set the risk‐money tradeoff equal to a common population‐wide VSL. Others might advocate different approaches to achieving equitable risk tradeoffs such as equalizing the VSLY across the population, which will then be used in conjunction with the person’s life expectancy. Equalizing the VSL is more protective of older age groups than is equalizing the loss based on a common VSLY. The current practice of U.S. government policies is consistent with the equitable risk tradeoffs approach based on the VSL, as agencies use a uniform VSL in regulatory impact analyses for health, safety, and environmental regulations.

Should we choose to incorporate the heterogeneity of the VSL, analysts should not cherry‐pick particular personal attributes. The general principle I advocate for when there is the personalization of the values to those affected by the policy is that the procedure should be comprehensive and not restricted to a single attribute. The attributes that have received the most scrutiny in the literature are age and income. There are strong income‐related dependencies of the VSL. Many estimates of the income elasticity of the U.S. VSL are in the range of 0.6, and some available estimates are in excess of 1.0. Proper application of these income‐related variations in the VSL would reduce the VSL applied to the poor. Many of those most affected by COVID‐19 have below‐average income levels, including essential workers in grocery stores and other retail establishments, as well as those engaged in the production and delivery of food. Similarly, people whose jobs do not permit them to work at home and who must rely on public transit for their commute also are subject to considerable COVID‐19 risks. Policies that protect their lives would be less highly valued if there were income adjustments. Given the strong societal interest in maintaining the efforts of such individuals, it is unlikely that there would be support for applying a lower value to their lives, which in turn would lead to less policy emphasis on protecting their well‐being.

3.3 COVID‐19 ventilator rationing

Age has played a central role in discussions of optimal rationing of constrained medical resources during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Ventilators have been the chief example of medical treatments in short supply, but ICU beds and hospital facilities also have been severely constrained. If medical resources are to be rationed, who should receive them? The stakes involved are higher than in many risk regulation contexts since withholding medical treatment may lead to certain death. The provision of appropriate care may have a substantial impact on the probability of survival. Such changes in the probability of survival dwarf those encountered in most risk policy contexts by several orders of magnitude.

Medical rationing questions and advocacy of policies that disadvantage older age groups are not mere philosophical musings. During the COVID‐19 pandemic, a hospital in Italy restricted ventilators to patients under the age of 60, presumably based on their shorter remaining life expectancy.5 The economic merits of interventions may, of course, have some relationship to age. However, if the VSL is equal for all age groups, the critical factor is how effective a particular intervention is in reducing the probability of death, not the person’s age. The reduction in the probability of death achieved by the intervention may depend on a variety of personal characteristics, including age, but age alone is not a sufficient determinant of the incremental change in the mortality risk provided by the use of ventilators.

The COVID‐19 pandemic has highlighted that medical resource allocations pose daunting challenges that must be resolved in a wide variety of situations. There has been a flurry of recent pronouncements by bioethicists affiliated with major medical centers on how to best allocate medical resources. Unencumbered by any economic analysis, these bioethicists often make sweeping recommendations that are inconsistent with efficient economic principles for reducing risk. The principal focus has been on triage or lifeboat scenarios in which, in their view, older people should fare badly. Weill Cornell Medical College medical ethicist Franklin G. Miller (2020) advocates a strict age criterion for rationing: “I would suggest that an initial age criterion for rationing ventilators when the demand outstrips the supply is a cut‐off of 80. Eighty is just above the average life expectancy in the United States, which is 79 years.” While he claims that older people have already had the “opportunity to live a complete life,” his age cap will shorten the lives of those affected. An average life expectancy of 79 does not mean that you die at that age. The remaining life expectancy conditional on being age 80 is 8.4 years for men and 9.8 years for women. If ventilators are in very tight supply, his age cutoff gets more stringent, as he recommends an age 70 cutoff. The remaining life expectancy at age 70 is 14.5 years for men and 16.7 years for women. Each of these groups has a substantial VSL even on an age‐adjusted basis.

A Vanderbilt University medical ethicist Larry R. Churchill similarly advocates the institution of age cutoffs. In what he designates as a “fair innings approach,” older people have already had their “turn at bat.”6 This rationale parallels that of Miller in which having past enjoyment of life years is the driving force guiding allocation decisions rather than the prospective future benefits of the intervention. A University of Pennsylvania medical ethicist and colleagues (Schmidt et al., 2020) also emphasize previous personal histories and advocate allocation of the first COVID‐19 vaccines to the poor and members of minority races since they have a lower life expectancy and have been subject to much greater disadvantages in their lives. Once again it is not the prospective benefits of interventions that is the pivotal concern in this approach but a claim that their previous welfare history has not been as advantageous. In the ethicists’ view, giving them priority would create greater life expectancy parity and overcome other disadvantaged aspects of their lives, such as their lower provision of adequate retirement savings.7 The rationale for this approach is based on social justice considerations independent of any efficiency‐related rationales. The phenomenon embodied in this retrospective approach and that of the previous enjoyment‐of‐life rationales is very reminiscent of the erroneous concern with sunk costs, which should not be pertinent when making prospective economic decisions.

A final variant on the effort to diminish the protection for older people is that a Duke University social choice theorist advocates taxing older people because they benefit disproportionately from social distancing efforts given their greater vulnerability to COVID‐19. Adler’s (2020) recommendation departs from the usual social justice recommendations through his advocacy of income redistribution from the old to the young, irrespective of the more conventional equity concerns based on income status. The more standard focus of equity‐based advocates is not to penalize senior citizens but to recommend that society transfer income to older people since their labor market opportunities are more limited.

The overriding theme of the various ethical pronouncements is that the high COVID‐19 mortality rate has made it open season on older people. In addition to being more severely affected by COVID‐19, older people will also receive less medical treatment in the ethicists’ ideal world, and will be penalized in other ways. Remarkably, there is no attempt to ground these ethical recommendations in analyses that address the economic merits of the recommendations based on efficiency criteria for risk reduction.

Those who oppose the mistreatment of people based on age also do not base their views on economic principles. The American Geriatrics Society strongly opposes the use of age as a rationing mechanism: “Age per se should never be used as a means for a categorical exclusion from therapeutic interventions that represent the standard of care. Likewise, specific age‐based cutoffs should not be used in resource allocation strategies.”8 Restrictions on the provision of medical care based on age are also illegal. Discrimination on the basis of age is a violation of § 557 of the Affordable Care Act, which explicitly prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, age, or disability for healthcare programs receiving federal funds. After the advent of the COVID‐19 pandemic, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (2020) issued a bulletin to emphasize that age and disability status cannot be used to ration health care during this pandemic. Notwithstanding these directives, there are feasible, legal ways for medical providers to sidestep the legal hurdles by relying on remaining life expectancy rather than age as the criterion for allocation. Senior citizen groups oppose all such variants in principle but do not present economic rationales in defense of older people.

Returning to first principles, it is useful to recall the economic criteria for proper assessment of the benefits of risk reduction. The value of the mortality risk reduction consists of the reduced probability of death multiplied by the VSL. Younger people have a lower probability of death than older people, but what is relevant for assessing the benefits of interventions is not the absolute probability of death but the reduction in the probability of death that can be achieved through the provision of medical care. While the absolute probability of survival is a component of this calculation, it is not sufficient to allocate treatment based on the chance of survival alone even though sometimes this is the exclusive focus.9 Even if the change in the probability of survival is the basis for allocations, there may be differences in the efficacy of treatments in which older patients may still fare badly, but at least the allocation decision will be governed appropriately by the marginal benefits associated with the care. The second component of the calculation is the VSL. If one adopts an equitable tradeoffs approach and uses the same VSL for all, then the allocation will be driven by the reduced probability of death. If one instead chooses to personalize the VSL estimate, there may be differences across patients that will vary based on age and income. However, it may be difficult to ascertain the individual willingness‐to‐pay value for the risk reduction, which is the counterpart of what the economic calculation above is intended to construct.

A recurring theme that arises in treatments of the potential triage scenarios is that it is clearly quite difficult to make such rationing decisions when medical interventions such as ventilators have an extremely high payoff, but resources are severely constrained. Unfortunately, the triage scenarios deal only with the terminal aspect of our multi‐period resource allocation problem. Given the tremendous benefits that could be derived by having more adequate medical resources, it is preferable from a benefit‐cost standpoint to make provisions before health crises arise so that severe rationing is not required for the next pandemic. In anticipation of future pandemics, it is feasible to acquire high‐quality ventilators at a cost from $25,000 to $50,000. Adding in the cost of medical support personnel would raise the annual cost to about $100,000. A reserve supply of ventilators could be a component of an anticipatory pandemic policy. Preparing for future pandemics remains a cost‐effective strategy even for annual probabilities of a pandemic on the order of 1/100. However, survey evidence by Pike et al. (2020) suggests that support for protective efforts of this type is unlikely to emerge, as there is a lack of public concern with long‐term pandemic risks. As a result, there is likely to be a continued shortfall in preparations for prospective risks, leading to future repetitions of the difficult rationing decisions posed by COVID‐19.

Similar kinds of concerns arise with respect to more modest treatment allocations, such as the priority list for receiving COVID‐19 vaccines. One could, for example, auction off priority slots for COVID‐19 vaccinations. Doing so might be an effective way of incorporating the private valuation of the risk reduction into the allocation system. Setting aside equity and feasibility concerns, the auction approach is deficient because the vaccine is not a private good. Vaccinations provide external benefits to those who will not be exposed to an infected person. Considerations of efficiency consequently also involve assessing the protective benefits that others receive. There is no reason to believe that the private values will reflect these ramifications. As a result, allocation strategies should take into account the overall risk reduction benefits, not just the benefits to the person vaccinated. The frontline workers and medical personnel would be among the groups for which the external benefits may be substantial. It should also be noted that many of these essential worker groups are minorities or lower‐income workers so that an emphasis on efficient risk reduction also promotes the well‐being of less advantaged members of society.


The protective responses to the COVID‐19 pandemic require actions that the public must take on a decentralized basis. Chief among these is social distancing and all of its ramifications, including limitations on frequenting restaurants, bars, concert venues, parties, and family gatherings. Personal protective behaviors include wearing masks, washing and sanitizing your hands, avoiding unnecessary travel, and limiting public contacts. These protective activities have a risk reduction benefit for the individual as well as an external risk reduction benefit to others. Monitoring of personal behaviors is limited, and enforcement is similarly weak, though not entirely nonexistent. Airlines, for example, have refused to allow passengers who do not wear masks to travel, and some stores and restaurants enforce mask wearing except when the customer is eating or drinking.

To achieve risk reductions through these decentralized individual behaviors, the government or other institutions often must rely on establishing a social norm in lieu of regulations or mandates that can be legally enforced. The analysis of social norms has received less attention from economists than have command‐and‐control regulations. However, conceptualization of what is likely to be effective in establishing a norm often will depend on underlying economic principles. Either because of their own self‐interest in risk reduction or because of the external benefits and costs that are generated through the behavior of others, finding the protective behavior to be expected‐utility maximizing will enhance the likelihood that the person undertakes the particular precaution. Providing information to enable people to make appropriate judgments of this type is often essential.

Since the pre‐pandemic behavior did not incorporate precautions such as mask wearing, there must be some personal recognition that the pandemic poses a new level of risks meriting changes in behavior. This recognition must include both an understanding of the level of the risk and the efficacy of precautions in reducing the risk. Because COVID‐19 is a novel coronavirus, public health officials needed to develop their knowledge of which routes of exposure posed the greatest risk and the efficacy of different protective measures. That knowledge in turn suggests the most fruitful approaches for protective actions. The magnitude of the risk, the mechanisms of transmission, and the efficacy of different measures may not have been understood at the onset of the pandemic. In this situation of evolving information, maintaining the credibility of public information sources is particularly challenging since changes in the official guidance already will impede efforts to communicate credibly.

Consider a representative Bayesian citizen. The person assesses a prior risk p of illness from the pandemic. The risk that public health officials are communicating is q, which I will assume exceeds p. For both value of p and q, there is an associated informational content, which is the weight that the person places on the prior and on the new information. The informational content of p can be viewed as the number of balls that the person has drawn from a Bernoulli urn in forming prior beliefs, a fraction p of which indicates an adverse illness outcome. Similarly, the informational content of q reflects the number of balls that the person has drawn from a Bernoulli urn pertaining to the new information, where a fraction q indicates an adverse illness outcome. If the person finds the communicated risk highly credible, that will be equivalent to q being associated with a larger number of draws from the urn, so that it will receive a greater relative weight. The total amount of information is the sum of the number of balls reflected in the beliefs pertaining to p and q. It is feasible to express the Bayesian updating in terms of the fraction of the information associated with p and q.10 The posterior risk assessment s is given by

s = (fraction of information content of prior) x p + (fraction of information content of new information) x q.

The efficacy of the risk communication effort in influencing risk beliefs hinges on both the value of q and the fraction of the informational content associated with the risk information. In a series of studies of individual processing of hazard warnings and other types of risk communication, I have estimated the risk q implied by these efforts and the relative informational content of the new information. I have found that the driving force of the efficacy of risk communication efforts is usually not the value of q but whether the provided information is viewed as being highly credible, giving people an incentive to adjust their risk beliefs. In terms of lessons for the current pandemic, the persistent undermining of the credibility of information sources has been particularly destructive to risk communication efforts.

The credibility of the information depends on what risk information is being communicated as well as on the credibility of the information source. If the focus of the information is on worst case scenarios, then people may not trust the veracity of the information. In the case of some government agencies, the reported risk levels are upper bound estimates of the risk rather than mean estimates. Fortunately, in the case of COVID‐19 the emphasis seems to have been on reasonable risk assessments rather than exaggerated values intended to motivate precautions. The other aspect of credibility is the credibility of the information source. During the course of the pandemic, there was continued high level of public respect for infectious disease experts such as Dr. Anthony Fauci, the Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Matters became more muddled when statements by immunologists are in apparent conflict with pronouncements by prominent political figures. The principal failure of the U.S. risk communication effort has been the undercutting of scientific experts by high‐ranking government officials instead of fostering trust. Even with ideal governmental behavior, the task of having credible risk communication is challenging. The knowledge of the pandemic risks and the efficacy of steps to reduce these risks is evolving, as is the level of the outbreak in different regions and social contexts. The fluidity of the situation necessitates some changes in recommended behaviors and tailoring of these recommendations to different circumstances. Given the inherent difficulties of communicating risks effectively in this dynamic situation, communication efforts should strive to provide a coherent, scientifically accurate message.


The resistance to scientific evidence is closely entwined with opposition to infringements on personal freedom that will result from protective behaviors such as mask wearing. Perceptions of the COVID‐19 risk and the efficacy of precautions are strongly correlated with political beliefs (de Bruin et al. 2020). For some, individual freedom is an absolute right that can never be compromised. Claims of absolute rights are also made on behalf of safety. In much of my career, I have encountered those who oppose any tradeoffs involving risks to life, much less placing a dollar value on these risks.

The statement on COVID‐19 treatments by New York Governor Andrew Cuomo reflects such a refusal to engage in tradeoffs: “My mother is not expendable. And your mother is not expendable. And our brothers and sisters are not expendable…We’re not going to put a dollar figure on human life.”11 An uncompromising risk reduction approach is not feasible generally. If human life is accorded an appropriate monetized value, the application of VSL and efficient principles for controlling risks will lead to greater levels of protection than will result if medical personnel follow the guidance provided by many prominent medical ethicists.

In the case of COVID‐19 policies, absolutes can conflict with each other. Society confronted similar conflicts after the 9/11 attack (Viscusi and Zeckhauser, 2005). To reduce terrorism risks, we accepted more intrusion on personal liberties, including airport screening and additional surveillance efforts. Parallel conflicts between values that purportedly cannot be compromised occurs with respect to COVID‐19 policies, where the values at stake here are the expected health impacts and personal freedom.

Figure 4 illustrates the nature of the societal decision. The horizontal axis is a measure of personal freedom, and the vertical axis is the expected health losses from the pandemic. Because personal freedom is valued positively, and lower values of health losses are preferable, the direction of preference is in the southeastern direction. For the dashed line indifference cures in the diagram—I1, I2, I3, and I4—the lowest curve I4 reflects the highest expected utility level and I1 reflects the lowest level. Before the pandemic, the opportunity locus was the lower solid curve xx. The optimal combination of freedom and health is at point A, which has health losses at point a and the indicated pre‐pandemic optimal level of personal freedom.


The personal freedom‐health risk tradeoff

After the pandemic, the opportunities locus shifts upward to the curve yy. For any given level of personal freedom, the expected health losses have risen. If there is no restriction on personal freedom, the outcome will be at point C, with expected health losses c. For the curves shown in Figure 4, the new optimum is at point B. Choosing an outcome at point B leads to less personal freedom than before, but there are benefits in terms of lower health costs. Taking precautions reduces the adverse health effects from c to b. Failure to recognize that some sacrifice in personal freedom is desirable leads to a welfare loss. It should be noted that personal freedoms are limited but not eliminated in Figure 4. The practical policy task is to ascertain which restrictions yield benefits sufficient to warrant the costs.


Coronavirus is a novel disease, but we remain on familiar economic turf. The kinds of policy choices that are encountered bear many similarities to those posed by health, safety, and environmental policies. Just as economic frameworks are instrumental in conceptualizing the competing effects and optimal decisions in those contexts, economic insights also provide valuable guidance for pandemic policies with respect to valuing risks, communicating risks effectively, and thinking about tradeoffs in order to promote efficient outcomes.

The risk valuation component is central to all choices as it sets the price for the health risk reductions, which in turn provides the justification for incurring a variety of costs, including economic dislocations. Monetizing mortality costs based on the VSL indicated that COVID‐19 imposed substantial U.S. mortality costs in 2020 of $3.9 trillion, and a total mortality and morbidity cost of $5.5–5.9 trillion. By March 2021, the U.S. death toll will have reached 500,000.12 Extrapolating the results to this mortality level implies an associated mortality cost of $5.5 trillion and a combined mortality and morbidity cost of $7.8–8.3 trillion. The magnitude of these costs makes it clear that vigorous efforts to control the virus are clearly desirable.

The targeting of these efforts can be assisted by proper understanding of economic guidelines for valuing risks. Whether older people should be placed on ventilators and determining who should be provided the vaccine are all matters that can be structured in a sensible manner. In the absence of economic frameworks, there is a tendency to resort to purported ethical principles that sometimes represent arbitrary judgments devoid of any recognition of the economic value of the mortality reduction benefits.

The decentralized nature of precautionary behavior makes it essential that risks be communicated effectively. To do so, the risks that are communicated must be credible. A critical aspect of credibility is that the information source must be trustworthy. A principal deficiency of the risk communication effort for COVID‐19 has been the undercutting of efforts by scientists to communicate the risk, which has created a highly fragmented and often inconsistent informational environment.

The final overriding economic lesson is that it is essential to consider tradeoffs, even for those attributes that some may view as absolute. It is not feasible to live in a risk‐free world or to have complete freedom. Unlimited personal freedoms will lower our well‐being, particularly when confronting crises for which collective, responsible behavior is desirable. Recognition and proper valuation of what is at stake will enable us to strike an appropriate balance between these competing concerns.

Source link

Keates desires Wrexham to choose up the place it left off Fri, 05 Mar 2021 07:07:00 +0000 DEAN KEATES hailed his nascent punch and hopes to have extra gamers out there for choice in opposition to Sutton United tomorrow. Kwame Thomas and Dior Angus have been each heading in the right direction in Saturday’s 4-1 win over Wealdstone, which leaves the Reds fifth within the Nationwide League. Thomas now has eight targets […]]]>

DEAN KEATES hailed his nascent punch and hopes to have extra gamers out there for choice in opposition to Sutton United tomorrow.

Kwame Thomas and Dior Angus have been each heading in the right direction in Saturday’s 4-1 win over Wealdstone, which leaves the Reds fifth within the Nationwide League.

Thomas now has eight targets this season, together with 5 in February, and Angus has struck twice since arriving at Barrow racetrack on switch deadline day.

“There is a good relationship constructing there and we even have Jordan Ponticelli,” Keates stated.

“It has been a little bit of a stop-start for JP, however after they each shoot they’re trying to be nearly as good as any partnership within the division.

“Dior is in his twenties and late twenties, however hasn’t been knowledgeable footballer for a very long time, so he is nonetheless studying.

“He has an awesome angle in the way in which he applies, like Kwame.

“Kwame is getting the targets now which I believe nearly all of the performances have deserved.

“He does lots for the crew, he took the knowledge on board after we spoke to him and confirmed him items the place he must be extra, and he put himself in these locations.

“He scored two attacking targets in opposition to Wealdstone; he ended up on the again publish and acquired in the course of the aim, and he was sad with the header that hit the crossbar.”

“I am delighted for them, however Saturday is gone and all the things goes properly, we are able to replicate that efficiency within the second half at Sutton.”

Keates can be hoping the duo will proceed to shoot second-placed Sutton, who has received their final 5 video games and is only one place behind leaders Torquay United with two video games in hand.

He could possibly be boosted by the return of Reece Corridor-Johnson and Jay Harris from damage.

“Reece and Jay are proper on prime of their little worries they usually could possibly be in competition for the weekend,” Keates stated.

Shaun Pearson has been restricted to simply three appearances this season as a consequence of a foot drawback and the Reds captain is closing in on a comeback.

“Shaun can be like a brand new signing for us,” Keates added.

“He got here again and performed three video games after which there was an issue and he resumed.

“He is beginning to get again into the band, however this time it is extra of a mild strategy.

“Daily we choose it up and in the previous couple of days there was no adversarial response.”

Supply hyperlink

Penske Automotive Declares Settlement to Purchase Kansas Metropolis Freightliner Thu, 04 Mar 2021 21:15:00 +0000 BLOOMFIELD HILLS, Michigan., March 4, 2021 / PRNewswire / – Penske Automotive Group, Inc. (NYSE: PAG), a diversified worldwide transportation companies firm, at present introduced that it has entered into an settlement to amass Kansas Metropolis Freightliner (“KCFL”), a medium-sized retailer and heavy-duty industrial vans. The acquisition of KCFL ought to generate $ 450 million […]]]>

BLOOMFIELD HILLS, Michigan., March 4, 2021 / PRNewswire / – Penske Automotive Group, Inc. (NYSE: PAG), a diversified worldwide transportation companies firm, at present introduced that it has entered into an settlement to amass Kansas Metropolis Freightliner (“KCFL”), a medium-sized retailer and heavy-duty industrial vans. The acquisition of KCFL ought to generate $ 450 million in annualized income, additional strengthening the expansion of the Firm’s wholly owned Premier Truck Group subsidiary.

Premier Truck Group (“PTG”) presently operates twenty-five North American industrial truck dealerships positioned in Texas, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Georgia, Utah, Idaho and Ontario, Canada which generate extra $ 2 billion in annual turnover. KCFL will add 5 full-service sellers, 4 components and repair facilities and two collision facilities positioned in Kansas and Missouri to its current operations. Commenting on the acquisition, the president of PTG Richard shearing mentioned, “We’re delighted to welcome Kansas Metropolis Freightliner to Premier Truck Group. With its space of ​​operation contiguous with current Premier Truck Group markets, KCFL is a pure extension of our current enterprise as we will provide an space prolonged service to our prospects. and current prospects of KCFL. Upon completion of this transaction, our PTG enterprise is predicted to generate practically 20,000 new and used unit gross sales per 12 months and is predicted to generate income annual about $ 2.5 billion. “

The transaction is predicted to shut within the second quarter of 2021 and is topic to customary closing circumstances.

About Penske Automotive

Penske Automotive Group, Inc., (NYSE: PAG) headquartered at Bloomfield Hills, Michigan, is a global transportation companies firm that operates automotive and industrial truck dealerships primarily United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Western Europe and distributes utility automobiles, diesel engines, gasoline engines, gasoline techniques and associated components and companies primarily in Australia and New Zealand. PAG is a member of the Fortune 500 and Russell 1000 and 3000 indices and is ranked among the many world’s most admired firms by Fortune journal. For extra data, go to the corporate’s web site at

About Premier Truck Group

Premier Truck Group, positioned at Dallas, Texas, affords prospects a premium collection of new Freightliner and Western Star utility automobiles. As well as, Premier Truck Group additionally has a big selection of used vans and affords full service components and conveniently open service operations for lengthy hours, a few of that are open 24 hours a day.

Warning Concerning Ahead-Trying Statements

Statements on this press launch could contain forward-looking statements, together with forward-looking statements concerning the expansion plans of Penske Automotive Group, Inc. and the completion of the Acquisition. Precise outcomes could range considerably attributable to dangers and uncertainties which can be troublesome to foretell. These dangers and uncertainties embody, amongst others: satisfaction of ordinary closing circumstances, length, severity and determination of the COVID-19 pandemic, restrictions imposed by the federal government on our actions in gentle of COVID-19 or different , normal financial circumstances, circumstances in credit score markets, modifications in rates of interest and international forex trade charges, modifications in tariff charges, new guidelines in place after the current Brexit settlement between the European Union and UK would possibly decelerate components from UK or Europe for distribution to our sellers, hostile circumstances affecting a selected producer, together with the detrimental affect on the automobile and components provide chain because of the restricted availability of automobiles because of the COVID-19 pandemic, automotive semiconductor chip scarcity, pure disasters, recall or different disruptions that interrupt the provision of automobiles or components equipped to us, modifications within the availability of client credit score, the end result of questions authorized and administrative and different elements over which administration has restricted management. These forward-looking statements must be evaluated along with further details about the enterprise, markets, circumstances and different uncertainties of Penske Automotive Group, which might have an effect on the long run efficiency of Penske Automotive Group. These dangers and uncertainties are addressed in Penske Automotive Group Kind 10-Okay for the 12 months ended. December 31, 2020, and its different paperwork filed with the Securities and Change Fee (“SEC”). This press launch is barely legitimate as of its date and Penske Automotive Group disclaims any obligation to replace the data contained on this doc.

Inquiries ought to contact:

JD Carlson

Anthony R. Pordon

Govt Vice President and

Govt Vice President of Investor Relations

Monetary director

and enterprise growth

Penske Automotive Group, Inc.

Penske Automotive Group, Inc.



[email protected]

[email protected]

SOURCE Penske Automotive Group, Inc .; Premier Truck Group

Associated hyperlinks

Supply hyperlink

Fluorescent marker pafolacianin sodium is below precedence overview for detection of ovarian most cancers throughout surgical procedure Thu, 04 Mar 2021 17:04:57 +0000 The FDA has accepted and granted precedence overview to a New Drug Utility (NDA) for the injection of pafolacianin sodium (OTL38) for use to determine ovarian most cancers throughout surgical procedures, the developer mentioned. agent On Goal Laboratories, Inc.1 Pafolacianin sodium is a fluorescent label composed of a close to infrared dye and a ligand […]]]>

The FDA has accepted and granted precedence overview to a New Drug Utility (NDA) for the injection of pafolacianin sodium (OTL38) for use to determine ovarian most cancers throughout surgical procedures, the developer mentioned. agent On Goal Laboratories, Inc.1

Pafolacianin sodium is a fluorescent label composed of a close to infrared dye and a ligand that enables it to bind to receptors overexpressed in ovarian most cancers cells. When injected, the agent binds to folate receptors and illuminates when used below close to infrared mild. This distinctive mechanism of motion permits better certainty that surgical procedure has resulted in full resection.

“Our NDA is supported by our constructive Part 2 and Part 3 scientific trials,” mentioned Christopher Barys, President and CEO of On Goal Laboratories, in a press launch. “As we transfer nearer to FDA approval for ovarian most cancers, we obtain our mission of visualizing extra most cancers intraoperatively and increasing the advantages of full resection to feminine sufferers.”

Methods for figuring out cancerous tissue from non-cancerous tissue throughout ovarian most cancers surgical procedure are at present restricted. Precedence overview will overview this request over a 6 month interval in comparison with the usual 10 months.

The injection of pafolacianin sodium has beforehand obtained each accelerated and orphan drug designation and was thought of below the particular protocol analysis, which “signifies that the FDA agrees with the adequacy and the ‘Acceptability of particular crucial components of the general protocol design (eg factors and deliberate evaluation) for examine to help a future advertising and marketing software. “2

The outcomes of a section 2 trial utilizing pafolacianin sodium as an intraoperative adjuvant have been beforehand revealed in Gynecological oncology in 2019.3 The possible trial evaluated the protection and efficacy of the agent for intraoperative imaging throughout epithelial ovarian most cancers surgical procedure.

The protection inhabitants consisted of 44 sufferers and 225 lesions in 29 sufferers have been evaluated for efficacy. The sensitivity was estimated to be 85.93% (95% CI decrease restrict, 81.19%); The constructive predictive worth (PPV) was decided to be 88.14% (95% CI decrease restrict, 83.59%). Sensitivity and PPV have been estimated to be 97.97% (95% CI of decrease restrict, 87.75%) and PPV to 94.93% (95% CI of decrease restrict, 86.13 %) when checking the precise correlation of detection between a number of lesions in a single affected person. Notably, nearly half (48.3%; 95% CI, 0.29-0.67) of sufferers had at the very least 1 extra lesion detected by way of pafolacianin sodium alone.

All sufferers handled within the examine had at the very least 1 treatment-occurring hostile occasion (ATIA), the commonest being procedural ache inside 1 to 2 days after surgical procedure in 40 of 44 sufferers (90.9%) . Nonetheless, none of those have been thought of to be associated to the examine drug.

Examine drug-related TEAEs have been reported in 8 sufferers (18.2%), the commonest being gastrointestinal disturbances in 5 sufferers (11.4%), significantly nausea (9.1% ), vomiting (6.8%) and belly ache (2.3%). Infusion-related reactions occurred in 5 (11.4%) and sneezing / elevated tearing occurred in 1 affected person (2.3%).

Pafolacianin sodium injection is given as a single dose intravenous infusion earlier than surgical procedure. The agent can be being studied within the section 3 ELUCIDATE trial (NCT04241315) for sufferers with lung most cancers in the US.

The references:

1. On Goal Laboratories Broadcasts US FDA Acceptance and Precedence Evaluate of New Drug Utility for Injection of Pafolacianin Sodium for Identification of Ovarian Most cancers Throughout Surgical procedure. Press launch. On Goal Laboratories, Inc. March 3, 2021. Accessed March 4, 2021. for-identification-of-ovarian-cancer-during-surgery-301239430.html

2. Analysis of the particular protocol, information for trade. FDA. April 2018. Accessed March 4, 2021.

3. Randall LM, Wenham RM, Low PS, Dowdy SC, Tanyi JL. A section II, multicenter, open-label injection of OTL38 for intraoperative imaging of alpha-folate receptor constructive ovarian most cancers. Gynecol Oncol. 2019; 155 (1): 63-68. doi: 10.1016 / j.ygyno.2019.07.010

Supply hyperlink

New Staffing Council appoints extra members Thu, 04 Mar 2021 16:06:14 +0000 Khadijia Tribié Reid and Edelmira Segovia will be a part of the board of administrators of New Hanover Neighborhood Endowment, which expanded to 13 members after the state lawyer normal’s contribution to increase the membership of the brand new group. Board Chairman Spence Broadhurst introduced Thursday that Tribie Reid and Segovia have been chosen from […]]]>

Khadijia Tribié Reid and Edelmira Segovia will be a part of the board of administrators of New Hanover Neighborhood Endowment, which expanded to 13 members after the state lawyer normal’s contribution to increase the membership of the brand new group.

Board Chairman Spence Broadhurst introduced Thursday that Tribie Reid and Segovia have been chosen from amongst 34 candidates who utilized for the 2 seats when the method opened in February.

“Reid and Segovia will be a part of 11 different devoted neighborhood members on the Endowment Council efficient March 11 and strengthen the council’s efforts in racial justice and fairness, public well being and repair to underserved communities.” , learn Thursday’s press launch.

Doctor Tribié Reid is the Pediatric Medical Director of MedNorth Neighborhood Well being Middle and Vice President of Pediatrics at New Hanover Regional Medical Middle. An advocate for early childhood training, she can also be appointed by the governor to the board of administrators of the NC Partnership for Kids. She usually speaks about points associated to well being fairness, built-in care and antagonistic childhood experiences, based on her bio.

“As a neighborhood member, mum or dad and pediatrician of a whole lot of youngsters on this neighborhood, I’m personally concerned in New Hanover County,” Tribie Reid stated within the assertion. “My honest dedication to creating this neighborhood a terrific place for all of its residents is pushed by this private sense of obligation and funding, and I stay up for serving on the endowment board to assist create a neighborhood the place everybody has the flexibility to be wholesome. . “

Segovia is Director of Centro Hispano within the Workplace of Institutional Range and Inclusion on the College of North Carolina at Wilmington. Segovia, who has 22 years of expertise in public training, is co-chair of the UNCW Latino Alliance of Southeastern North Carolina. In response to her biography, Segovia just lately joined the founding crew of the Latin American Enterprise Council, a program of the Wilmington Chamber of Commerce.

“My private {and professional} mission is to assist people overcome challenges and open doorways to progress, particularly for underserved communities,” Segovia stated. “And I consider the endowment is poised to assist New Hanover County change into a mannequin neighborhood, by way of lasting enhancements for all of its populations.”

The brand new endowment board is chargeable for managing roughly $ 1.25 billion from the proceeds from the sale of the New Hanover Regional Medical Middle to Novant Well being. The sale of the county-owned hospital closed on February 1.

After county commissioners signed the settlement final fall, they appointed their 5 members to the muse board. In December, the brand new regional native council created to supervise the NHRMC beneath Novant’s possession appointed its six endowment members.

The neighborhood endowment is anticipated to fund training, well being and social fairness, neighborhood improvement and neighborhood security initiatives in New Hanover County utilizing curiosity earnings from the proceeds of the sale.

As a part of his total evaluate of the sale, North Carolina Legal professional Normal Josh Stein known as for some adjustments to the deal between NHRMC and Novant Well being, a Winston-Salem-based nonprofit. A kind of negotiated phrases was so as to add no less than two extra staffing board members “with expertise engaged on points that staffing will help – corresponding to public well being, supporting underserved populations, and advocacy. ‘racial fairness and justice,’ based on Stein’s workplace. .

Michele Holbrook, chair of the endowment board nominating committee, stated Segovia and Tribié Reid have been chosen from a pool of proficient candidates.

“They may convey a powerful perspective and dedication to range to our board, and we stay up for working alongside them,” Holbrook stated within the launch. “By specializing in candidate experiences and their affect, supporting underserved populations, selling racial fairness, and bettering public well being, we have been capable of goal our choice discussions to these candidates who finest match our wants.”

New members of the Hanover Neighborhood Endowment Board of Administrators

• Virginia Adams, former dean of the UNCW College of Nursing
Chris Boney, Senior Director and Relationship Supervisor of LS3P Associates Ltd.
• Spence Broadhurst (chair), President of the Jap North Carolina Area for the First Nationwide Financial institution and former Mayor of Wilmington
Invoice Cameron, co-founder and president of Cameron Administration Inc.
Cedric Dickerson, vice-chairman of the political motion committee of brokers and staff of the state farm
• Hannah Gage (vice-president), member of the Partnership Advisory Group and former Chairman of the UNC Board of Governors
Michele holbrook, World Provide Chain Venture Supervisor at Corning Inc.
Pat Maguire, Doctor, Medical Director and Managing Companion at Coastal Carolina Radiation Oncology
Edelmira Segovia, Director of Centro Hispano on the Workplace of Institutional Range and Inclusion of UNCW
David Sprunt, proprietor / supervisor of Harriss Administration LLC
• Stedman Stevens, CEO of VU Programs
Khadijia Tribié Reid, doctor and pediatric medical director of MedNorth Neighborhood Well being Middle
• Shannon Winslow, strategic account supervisor for RxBenefits Inc.

Supply hyperlink

Digital occasions | 360 | Thu, 04 Mar 2021 13:00:00 +0000 Digital and on-line occasions have change into a key a part of the cultural and leisure panorama in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Please ship occasion particulars, web sites and entry directions to not Lincoln Theater presents the Swedish Movie Pageant, an annual compilation of home made recreations of fan favorites. Tickets can be […]]]>

Digital and on-line occasions have change into a key a part of the cultural and leisure panorama in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Please ship occasion particulars, web sites and entry directions to

not Lincoln Theater presents the Swedish Movie Pageant, an annual compilation of home made recreations of fan favorites. Tickets can be found at The pageant ends at the moment, March 4th. Additionally at Lincoln:

Native rock duo The Dolts will carry out just about at 7 p.m. on Saturday, March 13. The live performance shall be broadcast on Youtube because of a donation.

Skagit Valley rock band Fantasy Band will carry out just about at 7:30 p.m. on Saturday, March 20. The live performance shall be broadcast on the theater’s Youtube web page because of a donation.

A digital screening of the movie “Stray”, the story of three stray canine roaming the streets of Istanbul, by means of their eyes, looking for meals and shelter, will happen from March 5 to 25. $ 12

The Northwest Concord duo will carry out just about at 7 p.m. on Saturday, March 27. The live performance shall be broadcast on the theater’s Youtube web page because of a donation.

not Soroptomist Worldwide of Burlington is holding its Carol Kirkby and Cheryl Bishop Memorial Scholarship public sale till Saturday, March 6. The public sale helps fund the group’s applications and scholarships.

not Island hospital will host a free digital session with an knowledgeable from Hospice of the Northwest on getting ready end-of-life paperwork at 10 a.m. at the moment, March 4. Additionally on the hospital:

A web based dialogue on grief and loss will start at 10 a.m. on Thursday, March 11. RSVP:

A group assembly relating to the hospital’s transition to the administration of the Orcas Island clinic shall be held on-line at 5 p.m. on Thursday, March 18.

A free webinar on being pregnant vitamin, taught by a neighborhood dietitian, will start at 6 p.m. on Wednesday, March 31.

not Rotary La Conner will host its just about smelt race on Saturday March 6. The enjoyable 5K run will be executed anyplace, as social distancing measures are in place. Registration is $ 10, with choices for a $ 10 medal and $ 15 shirt. Earnings assist fund membership initiatives. Register on Bundle pickup is at 521 Morris Road, La Conner, from 3 p.m. to 7 p.m. Friday, March 5 and eight a.m. to 10 a.m. on Saturday, March 6.

not Christianson Nursery will host a free on-line lumberyard class at 11 a.m. on Saturday, March 6. Subscribe to Additionally on the nursery:

John Christianson will speak about rose choice, placement and flower historical past throughout a free webinar at 11 a.m. on Saturday, March 13. Subscribe to

“Rising Large Pumpkins,” a free Zoom course on ideas for rising big greens for brand spanking new hobbyists, will begin at 11 am on Saturday, March 27.

not The Penn Cove Musselfest in Coupeville shall be held on Saturday and Sunday March 6 and seven, with festivities, meals, boat journeys and music. Updates will be discovered on his Fb web page.

not La Conner Kiwanis and La Conner United will host a Daffodil Pageant Bazaar beginning at 11 a.m. on Saturday, March 6. Kiwanis shall be promoting recent reduce daffodils and smoked salmon at 606 Morris Road in La Conner.

not The Island County Grasp Gardener Basis will host a gardening workshop on Saturday and Sunday March 6 to 7. The occasion will mix over 25 on-line workshops with in-person discipline journeys.

n Bassoonist Sara Schoenbeck will arrange a free digital workshop by means of Western Washington College on classical improvisation strategies and principle, at 11 a.m. on Saturday, March 6.

not The North Cascades Institute will host “Blue Legacy: The Latest Historical past of Glaciers within the North Cascades” at 4 pm on Wednesday March tenth. Geologist Jon Riedel will focus on the significance of the area’s glaciers and the glacier monitoring program. $ 30; subscribe to Additionally on the institute:

A newbie’s watercolor lesson on alpine scenes will start at 11 a.m. on Saturday, March 13. $ 45; subscribe to

Mukul Soman will current “The Moral Photographer: A Wildlife Photographer’s Perspective” at 5.30pm on March twenty fifth. $ 15; subscribe to

not Basic united will host a free digital coaching course on coping with antagonistic childhood experiences for these working with youngsters at 9 a.m. on Wednesday, March 10. Additionally at United:

A free suicide prevention coaching will happen on-line at 3 p.m. on Wednesday, March 10.

A free seven-week digital course for caregivers and youth ages 10 to 14 on strengthening households by means of communication, connection and stress administration will start at 5:30 p.m. on Monday, March 22.

not Whatcom Museum will host Anna Booker, professor of historical past at Whatcom Group School, who will current her grant-funded analysis undertaking entitled “Being within the Salish Sea”, at 7:30 pm on Thursday, March 11.

not Mount Baker Theater will host the American and Celtic band We Banjo 3, broadcast dwell from Eire at 2 p.m. on Saturday, March 13, in honor of Saint Patrick’s Day. $ 25.

not North West Sons in Bellingham will host a web-based course in knit material restore at 2 p.m. on Sunday, March 14.

And the Skagit County Historic Museum shall be internet hosting a Tip-Toes By Treasure sale at Skagit Metropolis Faculty on Fir Island from April Sep 11. Purchases are made by reservation solely and the system will go dwell on Monday March 15. skagitcounty.web/museum or 350-466-3365.

n The Koma Kulshan chapter of the Washington Native Plant Society will host a digital stroll by means of the Sonoran Desert at 7 p.m. on March 17, introduced by a retired wetland ecologist. Register on

not Northwestern Hospice shall be holding a five-week Zoom help group, “Discovering Solace,” beginning at 3 pm Thursday, March 18. Name 360-814-5550 to register.

not Mates of the seashores of Skagit will host an info session on the Asian Large Hornet as a part of its winter lecture collection. WSDA’s Cassie Cichorz will speak in regards to the risk they pose and easy methods to stop their growth. The digital convention will start at 7 p.m. on Friday March 19 at

n To rejoice Washington State Parks ” 108th anniversary, all state parks shall be free to go to on Friday, March 19.

And the Pageant of birds over the wings, to be held within the Blaine space, will happen March 19-21. Register on

And the Whatcom Humane Society will maintain a digital birdhouse public sale from March 21 to 31. Go to

not Plumeria Breezes Vacationer points of interest de Sedro-Wooley will host a digital presentation on touring with Sea Dream Yachts at 6 p.m. on Wednesday 24 March. The Zoom hyperlink is offered at

Supply hyperlink

Ladies Enterprise Correspondents: Brokers of Change in India’s Monetary Inclusion Thu, 04 Mar 2021 10:13:45 +0000 In a distant village in Uttar Pradesh, Roshni, a farmer, eagerly awaits a weekly go to to her Financial institution didi (phrase for “older sister” in India). She holds ₹ 50 in financial savings in her hand and proudly says, “Didi inspired me to save lots of even when it is solely ₹ 10; at […]]]>

In a distant village in Uttar Pradesh, Roshni, a farmer, eagerly awaits a weekly go to to her Financial institution didi (phrase for “older sister” in India). She holds ₹ 50 in financial savings in her hand and proudly says, “Didi inspired me to save lots of even when it is solely ₹ 10; at first even that was so tough. She was so affected person and would clarify the advantages. Even now she solutions all my questions, nonetheless small. She tells me about new tasks which might be good for me. It’s only due to her that I now have my “personal” cash. On this small village, Financial institution “didi” has grow to be a “monetary advisor” and “relationship supervisor” for a lot of of those Roshnis and helps them on their journey to true monetary inclusion.

It’s widely known that enterprise correspondents (BCs) are the primary drivers of monetary inclusion in India.Within the BC mannequin, supported by the Reserve Financial institution of India (RBI), Indian banks rent third-party brokers / retail since 2006. to encourage higher monetary participation of the low-income inhabitants. By enabling the supply of monetary companies on the final mile within the absence of bodily banking companies, CBs have succeeded in speaking the advantages of monetary choices, facilitating transactions, and functioning primarily because the face of the financial institution by being themselves. even a mini-branch. However when you think about the power of CBs to have a optimistic impression on monetary inclusion of 23.09 crore Jan Dhan account holders (55% of the entire base), the ‘gender’ of the agent turns into an element. necessary.

To this finish, in 2015-2016, the Nationwide Rural Livelihoods Mission tailored a gender variant of the standard British Columbia mannequin referred to as the “ Financial institution Sakhi ” mannequin, which has been examined in seven states in low revenue India. As of February 2020, 6,094 Financial institution Sakhis in 12 states had collectively accomplished 748,454 transactions price 26,635 lakh (roughly $ 40 million). This mirrored the truth that whereas the Financial institution Sakhi mannequin was an modern technique for reaching monetary inclusion, it was ladies financial institution officers who had been poised to deepen final mile monetary service supply, particularly for purchasers in hard-to-reach rural areas. proceed to play a sustainable function in selling the monetary inclusion of girls.

Ladies BC and the banking community

The distinctive strengths of girls in BC positively affect the engagement of low revenue ladies in monetary companies and, due to this fact, place them as a wonderful useful resource for banks to rent as COs. Analysis reveals that girls brokers have distinctive strengths that assist them higher serve their purchasers. Feminine purchasers discover feminine brokers simpler to strategy, reliable, and good at sustaining confidentiality. That is corroborated by one other research the place purchasers interacted extra with feminine brokers and felt extra comfy with them, notably when disclosing monetary info.

In one other latest challenge with a big public sector financial institution, ladies brokers accomplished 19% extra transactions and skilled 45% greater conversions underneath a newly launched small financial savings program than their counterparts. male. Certainly, ladies brokers are capable of go to purchasers extra freely of their houses, to work together intently with them and to cherish their belief. By being deeply rooted locally, additionally they have the potential to behave as function fashions for different ladies and grow to be a catalyst in bridging the gender hole in monetary inclusion. Their comparatively bigger buyer base, bigger transaction volumes, and talent to extend adoption of different merchandise all assist additional strengthen their enterprise case. As well as, it was famous that feminine brokers usually tend to stay brokers for an extended time frame even when the transactions don’t generate as a lot revenue for the agent, which permits continued entry to the group.

Low variety of BCs

In India, whereas ladies account holders represent 55% of the entire PMJDY portfolio, lower than 10% of enterprise correspondents are ladies. “Why such a small quantity? is the subsequent apparent query. Whereas speaking to main corporations in British Columbia, many components emerged together with “there are not any appropriate candidates” (adversarial choice standards), “they want fixed assist” ( totally different ongoing assist wants), “they’ve issue attending to the department day by day” (restricted mobility), “they’ve so many tasks, it’s tough to work lengthy hours at level BC” (decreased capability to work prolonged hours) and most telling of all “it is dearer to rent and aboard ladies BC”.

These tales alluded to the operational and socio-cultural challenges that exist for girls who want to grow to be enterprise correspondents. Ladies who aspire to grow to be brokers in British Columbia face a number of boundaries comparable to lack of household assist, restricted monetary assist, low pc and monetary literacy, restricted mobility and unfavorable recruitment standards. along with the restricted assist from banks and supervisors to develop their enterprise. Subsequently, a design-driven answer is required for the primary obstacles ladies face at totally different phases of their agent journey.

What can banks and monetary service suppliers do to encourage extra ladies CBs within the ecosystem?

Constructive actions from monetary service suppliers are wanted to right the present under-representation of girls in nations of origin. By designing a gender recruitment technique to draw extra ladies to British Columbia, together with setting particular objectives for his or her workers and company CBs, and coaching and inspiring company CBs to determine potential candidates will help overcome structural boundaries ladies face.

The secret is to scale back boundaries to entry by taking favorable measures comparable to offering tools and rental assist (slightly than requiring ladies to speculate upfront), including incentives comparable to than an preliminary allowance for the primary 12 months, fixing mobility points, providing versatile hours of operation and offering safety to BC ladies and their households, on medical insurance traces, and so on., which can encourage extra ladies to affix. Lastly, create a good atmosphere for girls BC by means of coaching, mentoring, ongoing assist (by means of devoted public servants) and constructing communities of feminine brokers, will then assist them thrive in the long run.

It is now!

These efforts, when made in a centered and coordinated method, could have a big impression on constructing a powerful feminine workforce in British Columbia. The outcomes of a big return on funding had been seen in a latest pilot challenge undertaken with a public sector financial institution, the place the portfolio managed by profitable ladies in British Columbia was thrice extra worthwhile than males in British Columbia. Progressive measures such because the Uttar Pradesh State Rural Livelihoods Mission, which added 58,000 ladies to British Columbia and supported them for a 12 months, is a shining instance of results of optimistic authorities coverage, enough assist and curiosity from monetary service suppliers. To make use of an previous quote from Charles Malik, “The quickest method to change monetary inclusion is to interact the BC ladies of the world.”

(Sriraman Jagannathan is EVP Asia and Swati Chowdhary, Supervisor – Community & Improvement, India at Ladies’s World Banking)

Supply hyperlink

Simulator and calculator of missing mortgages Thu, 26 Dec 2019 11:04:59 +0000 What consequences does it have on the mortgage to request a deficiency? After its apparent advantages, the lack is total or partial, has important repercussions on future fees as the monthly fee increases. In partial lack, we will have to amortize the same capital for a smaller period of time; In the total lack in […]]]>

What consequences does it have on the mortgage to request a deficiency?

What consequences does it have on the mortgage to request a deficiency?

After its apparent advantages, the lack is total or partial, has important repercussions on future fees as the monthly fee increases. In partial lack, we will have to amortize the same capital for a smaller period of time; In the total lack in addition to the deferred capital, the interest we do not pay during that time will also be added to the debt.

What is the lack of a mortgage?

Some mortgage and personal loans offer the possibility of paying for a period only the interest generated, without having to amortize capital, this is the partial lack . In some specific cases, the possibility of not paying anything (interest or capital) during a period is offered, which is called the total deficiency .

A period of foreclosure is very useful for those who have just bought a home and who, for a period of time (several months, one year, two years …) after the purchase, cannot pay the entire payments The mortgage fee.

It is also very useful for example for students who want to finance their studies and who, during their completion, cannot pay high monthly fees.

However, it is important to keep in mind that the fact of not paying the entire loan installment for a few months, increases the amount of the installments after the period of lack. What in total increases the total cost of the loan.

With the deficit loan calculator you can compare the total amount you would pay with and without partial deficiency.

What is the lack of capital and the total lack?

It may happen that during this first time in which debt is not amortized, interest is paid periodically as they accrue and with the agreed periodicity: we are referring to loans with partial or capital deficiency .

When during this first period no payment is made, we are facing a total lack . In the latter case, accrued and unmet interest will accrue to the starting capital (interest capitalization).

What is the lack of principal?

It is time during which the loan holder pays only interest, without amortizing capital. This way you can reduce the amount of fees.

Is it worthwhile to apply for a mortgage deficiency?

Requesting a period of lack from the bank allows us to defer payment of the mortgage payments for a certain period of time or, at least, considerably reduce their amount. Keep in mind that in the long run this alternative may cause you to have to pay more interest on your loan.

What is it? The stamp duty on personal loans? Fri, 20 Dec 2019 10:44:42 +0000   Much is the specialized and sectorial terminology of the world of loans; sometimes, in fact, the confusion of the customers is combined with the bad information provided by the financing bodies. Consumer credit, surety bonds and many others are the terms that are commonly included in the language of a loan contract. In order […]]]>


Much is the specialized and sectorial terminology of the world of loans; sometimes, in fact, the confusion of the customers is combined with the bad information provided by the financing bodies.

Consumer credit, surety bonds and many others are the terms that are commonly included in the language of a loan contract. In order to provide a precise and punctual help for all those who approach for the first time the subscription of a loan, or simply want to deepen some peculiar aspects, here below the attention is focused on a typical element, namely the stamp duty on personal loans.



The stamp duty on personal loans consists of a tax levy, applied in the event that documentation is requested, for example, in this specific case, a request for financing; in practice, the stamp duty consists of the payment of a tax levy for the purpose of producing a given documentation.

The stamp duty on personal loans is regulated by Italian law, which also establishes the precise amount that must be applied to the various documents. Stamp duty can be fixed or proportional.

In the event that the loan application is submitted to a financing body, the speech remains the same; in fact, at the moment in which, once all the necessary procedures for the launch of the case have been completed, the effective request for the disbursement of the loan is made, it will be necessary to pay the stamp duty on the loans.



The stamp duty on loans is attributable to the additional costs of the loan, ie those that are not included in the APR.
When you decide to apply for a loan, in fact, in addition to the Annual Global Effective Rate of the entire loan, you will need to consider the tax burdens on the customer requesting the loan.

The amount of the stamp duty on loans currently stands at $ 14.62 for all those contracts which provide for a duration of 18 months.
However, to this figure must be added the payment of an additional stamp duty, equal to $ 1.81, applied to cover all communications made by credit institutions and financial companies to the customer.

While the amount of $ 14.62 is applied to the first installment of the payment, the second, or that amounting to $ 1.81, joins the stamp duty for opening the loan.
For $ 16.43 deriving from the sum of the two stamp duties, another monthly cost (commission cost) is added, which must be multiplied by the number of months of loan duration.
The payment of stamp duty on loans is mandatory even if you decide to withdraw from the loan agreement.


To take an example of the stamp duty calculation, the following identikit is taken as a reference, ie a finalized loan that has the following parameters:

  • 8 months at zero rate;
  • for the purchase of an asset worth $ 400.

According to the above, the initial installment will amount to $ 70, the next six installments will be around $ 55, while the last installment will be $ 58. In this way we will reach a total equal to a sum that goes beyond the initial price of our good, around $ 470.
The stamp duty of $ 14.62 will be applied to the first installment, while on the last installment the costs of sending the statement of account and the stamps of law from $ 1.81 will be charged.



The stamp duty is paid according to the methods indicated in the attached tariff, or:

  • by payment to an intermediary agreement with the Revenue Agency;
  • by paying the tax to the office of the Revenue Agency or to other authorized offices;
  • by paying into a postal current account.

In the first case, the intermediary issues a payment to the payer by electronic means, while in the other cases, payment is made in virtual mode.


The increase in stamp duty on deposit accounts is 50%: here is a new blow for consumers.
The new legislation, in fact, provides that, for all traditional current accounts, which exceed $ 5,000 in average annual deposits, a stamp duty of $ 34.2 will be applied
Among financial products, together with bonds, investments and shares, deposit accounts have also been included since 2012, so another tax was set up as a percentage of the amount deposited, equal to a rate of 0.15%, therefore $ 34.2 will also be paid for financial products.

On the other hand, however, the most convenient proposals for what concerns the current accounts come from the banks operating online: they, in fact, allow to halve the average annual costs compared to traditional branches, allowing the customer to save considerably on the additional taxes.

For example, the two current accounts in Che Banca and in the Orange Current Account, allow the customer to enjoy a series of free services, with zero taxes, with a tax amount on the stamp equal to zero, as well as no monthly fee and no fee for ATMs.