1. Does Wal-Mart Cause an Increase in Anti-Poverty Program Expenditures – EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE by Michael Hicks state level panel data analysis (ignores AK and HI), with controls for time & spatial autocorrelation and local government mix and policy changes Findings: 1.The number of Wal-Marts, and their employment share in the retail sector, have no impact on food stamp expenditures. 2.Using the number of stores in a state to test for the impact of Wal- Marts presence, states with more stores (and increasing the number of stores in a state over time) do not have higher AFDC/TANF expenditures (do not see increases in AFDC/TANF expenditures) 3.Using the retail employment share as a measure of Wal-Marts presence, the impact is negative. In other words, as the share of retail employment going to Wal-Mart increases, welfare expenditures decrease – a 1% increase in Wal-marts share has been found to reduce AFDC/TANF expenditures by 3.3%. 4.Wal-Marts presence increases Medicaid expenditures by $898 per worker, consistent with other studies of the Medicaid costs per low wage worker

2. Wal-Marts Local Impact on Wages and Employment Dynamics in Pennsylvania – EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE by Michael Hicks follows a panel of PA counties that saw entrance of Wal-Marts in 2002 Findings: 1.New stores have no effect on existing employee wages in retail sector. 2.New retail sector hires (overall) experience a $0.50 per hour increase in total compensation in the quarter Wal-Mart enters. 3.Entrance of Wal-Mart draws employees from existing businesses, reducing their job creation and increasing flows. 4.Wal-Marts long term effect on net employment is an increase of approximately 50 jobs in a year. This effect was also found in Hicks and Wilburn (2001) and Basker (2005) 5.Wal-Mart entrance reduces retail job sector turnover by over 40%.

3. Wal-Marts Impact on Retail Trade Sector in West Virginia – EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE by Hicks & Wilburn (2001) follows a panel of 55 WV counties that saw entrance of Wal-Marts and tests impacts in both entering and adjacent counties Controls for endogeneity of entrance decision; applies spatial analysis Findings: 1.Entrance of Wal-Mart results in a net increase in employment (55 jobs) 2.Entrance of Wal-Mart results in a mild increase in the number of firms (five) in the Retail Trade sector (SIC 52).

4. Wal-Marts Impact on Local Fiscal Health in Ohio – EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE by Michael Hicks follows a panel of OH counties between 1985 and 2003 that saw entrance of Wal-Marts and tests for impacts on revenues and transfer payments Controls for endogeneity of entrance decision; applies spatial analysis Findings: 1.Presence of Wal-Mart increases local commercial property tax assessments – resulting in collection increases between $350,000 and $1.3 million. 2.Wal-Mart entry increases local labor force participation rates. 3.Presence of a Wal-Mart dramatically increases per capita earned income tax credit claims – between 18% and 43%. 4.Negligible impact of Wal-Mart on Food stamps expenditures. 5.Wal-Mart has no impact on either TANF or earlier AFDC expenditures. 6.Each Wal-Mart entry increases Medicaid expenditures – equivalent to an additional 16 cases per county.

5. The Effects of Wal-Mart on Local Labor Markets – A National County Level Study – EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE by David Neumark, Junfu Zhang and Stephen Ciccarella Estimates effects of Wal-Mart on county level employment and earnings Controls for endogeneity of entrance decision; applies spatial analysis OLS and IV results dramatically different Findings: 1.In retail sector, Wal-Mart stores reduce overall retail employment between 2% and 4%. 2.Statistically non-robust finding that retail payrolls decline by 3.5%. 3.Statistically non-robust finding that Wal-Mart increases TOTAL employment by 2%. 4.Statistically non-robust finding that TOTAL payrolls per person decline by nearly 5%

6. The Economic Impact of Wal-Mart Supercenters on Existing Businesses in Mississippi – EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE by Kenneth Stone, Georgeanne Artz and Albert Myles Estimates impact of Wal-Mart supercenters on sales of existing businesses Uses data from sales tax reports to analyze changes in sales of food stores, general merchandise stores, furniture stores, building materials stores, miscellaneous retail stores and total county sales Findings: 1.Annual general merchandise sales increase dramatically - by 41% in host counties and decreased slowly in non-host counties. 2.Existing food store sales declined between 10% and 20% over five year period in host-counties. Non-host county grocery sales unaffected. 3.Furniture stores in host counties experience sales increases. Furniture stores in non-host counties experience sales decreases. 4.Wal-Mart supercenters capture between 2% and 12% of miscellaneous retail sales from host counties. Sales in non-host counties unaffected. 5.Total sales in host counties increase by 3% to 5% per year. Non-host counties lose a small amount of total sales.

7. Consumer Benefits from Increased Competition in Shopping Outlets – EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE by Jerry Hausman and Ephraim Leibtag Estimates consumer benefits from entry into markets for food. Applies standard discrete choice utility model Uses household panel data to follow shopping patterns over time and control for fixed effect of their shopping behavior. Findings: 1.Substantial consumer benefits from the presence of supercenters. Estimates direct effects - average overall food price differences between supercenters and traditional stores for over 20 specific foods and finds that supercenters lower prices between 5% and 48% for these items. Estimates indirect effects – how increased competition results in lower prices at existing outlets – and find that food prices fall by 0.75% per year as a result of this competition. Estimates direct impacts of consumer welfare using a virtual price approach and finds that the compensating variation for food expenditures averages 25% of average expenditures per month with the largest gains to poor and minority households (30%) and smallest to wealthiest (20%) – these are enormous gains, particularly since poor spend larger portions of their expenditures in supercenters than non-poor.

8. Selling a Cheaper Mousetrap: Wal-Marts Effect on Retail Prices – EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE by Emily Basker Estimates effects of Wal-Mart on average city-level prices for variety of consumer goods using 20 year panel of data Findings: 1.Wal-Mart entry results in average short-run price decreases of between 1.5% and 3.0% 2.Wal-Mart entry results in average long-run price decreases of between 6.0% and 12.0% at the city level.

9. The Economic Impact of Wal-Mart – EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE by Global Insight Estimates effects of Wal-Mart on overall U.S. economy and on Dallas-FW economy Estimates impact of entry on county composition and levels of retail employment Findings: 1.Expansion of Wal-Mart between 1985-2004 led to a cumulative decline in food prices of 9.2%and also a cumulative decline in goods prices of 4.2% and a ceteris paribus decline in national CPI of 3.1%. 2.These price declines have led to a cumulative amount of consumer savings of $263 billion. 3.Wal-Marts impact on the U.S. economy has been a net positive – resulting in an increase in 210,000 net jobs over the period. 4.U.S. Total Factor Productivity increased by 0.75% more due to Wal- Mart than it otherwise would have been. 5.Nominal wages are 2.2% lower in the U.S. – resulting in a net increase in real disposable income of 0.9%.

10. The Economic Impact of Wal-Mart – EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE, continued by Global Insight Findings, continued: 1.Cumulative cost savings in Dallas-FW are 4.0%. 2.Wal-Mart has led to a net increase of 6,300 jobs in Dallas-FW. 3.Real disposable income has increased by 2.6% in Dallas-FW. 4.At the county level, short term retail employment increases by 137 jobs after the entry of a 150-350 person store and long-term increases of 97. 5.At the county level, there are net job declines in in food stores and apparel and accessory stores, but to net job increases in building materials, garden supplies and general merchandise stores.