  I develop a novel macroeconomic epidemiological agent-based model to study
the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic under varying policy scenarios. Agents
differ with regard to their profession, family status and age and interact with
other agents at home, work or during leisure activities. The model allows to
implement and test actually used or counterfactual policies such as closing
schools or the leisure industry explicitly in the model in order to explore
their impact on the spread of the virus, and their economic consequences. The
model is calibrated with German statistical data on time use, demography,
households, firm demography, employment, company profits and wages. I set up a
baseline scenario based on the German containment policies and fit the
epidemiological parameters of the simulation to the observed German death curve
and an estimated infection curve of the first COVID-19 wave. My model suggests
that by acting one week later, the death toll of the first wave in Germany
would have been 180% higher, whereas it would have been 60% lower, if the
policies had been enacted a week earlier. I finally discuss two stylized fiscal
policy scenarios: procyclical (zero-deficit) and anticyclical fiscal policy. In
the zero-deficit scenario a vicious circle emerges, in which the economic
recession spreads from the high-interaction leisure industry to the rest of the
economy. Even after eliminating the virus and lifting the restrictions, the
economic recovery is incomplete. Anticyclical fiscal policy on the other hand
limits the economic losses and allows for a V-shaped recovery, but does not
increase the number of deaths. These results suggest that an optimal response
to the pandemic aiming at containment or holding out for a vaccine combines
early introduction of containment measures to keep the number of infected low
with expansionary fiscal policy to keep output in lower risk sectors high.
