Cap-based regulations are widely used to address distributional disparities in matching markets, but their efficiency relative to alternative instruments such as subsidies remains poorly understood. This paper develops a framework for evaluating policy interventions by incorporating regional constraints into a transferable utility matching model. We show that a policymaker with aggregate-level match data can implement a taxation policy that maximizes social welfare and outperforms any cap-based policy. Using newly collected data from the Japan Residency Matching Program, we estimate participant preferences and simulate counterfactual match outcomes under both cap-based and subsidy-based policies. The results reveal that the status quo cap-based regulation generates substantial efficiency losses, whereas small, targeted subsidies can achieve similar distributional goals with significantly higher social welfare.
翻译:暂无翻译