Show simple item record

Public Pension Design and Household Retirement Decisions: A Comparison of the United States and Germany

dc.contributor.authorKnapp, David
dc.contributor.authorLee, Jinkook
dc.contributor.authorLis, Maciej
dc.contributor.authorPhillips, Drystan
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-22T17:35:03Z
dc.date.available2021-06-22T17:35:03Z
dc.date.issued2021-02
dc.identifier.citationKnapp, David, Jinkook Lee, Maciej Lis, and Drystan Phillips. 2021. “Public Pension Design and Household Retirement Decisions: A Comparison of the United States and Germany.” Ann Arbor, MI. University of Michigan Retirement and Disability Research Center (MRDRC) Working Paper; MRDRC WP 2021-417. https://mrdrc.isr.umich.edu/publications/papers/pdf/wp417.pdfen_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/168229en
dc.description.abstractSocial Security provides retirement benefits to age-eligible workers and their spouses. Benefits are permanently increased if initial receipt is delayed. For benefits paid to spouses, these incentives reflect a complex interaction of the worker’s and spouse’s earnings histories, benefit claiming decisions, and age difference. We demonstrate that the benefit increment from delaying initial receipt of spousal and survivor benefits is substantial for some households. Past studies find that workers respond to potential increments in their own benefit by delaying labor force exit. Using a nationally representative panel, we investigate whether an additional dollar in expected lifetime benefits paid to the worker directly is treated the same as an additional dollar paid to the worker’s spouse from spouse and survivor benefits. We find minimal evidence that workers or their spouses change retirement behavior in a way that is theoretically consistent with spouse and survivor benefit claiming incentives. The lack of responsiveness suggests that incentives to delay claiming for benefits other than the worker’s own are not salient in the worker’s decision-making. This may reflect the complexity of benefit rules or different preferences concerning benefits paid to others. A parallel analysis using German data, where rules surrounding survivor benefits are simpler, finds that workers respond in a theoretically consistent way, but small sample sizes prevent conclusive results. Our findings suggest models estimating the policy impact of reducing spousal and survivor benefits on female labor supply are likely overstated, and that a greater understanding of survivor benefits may lead to better claiming decisions for couples.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipU.S. Social Security Administration, RDR18000002-01, UM19-13en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesMRDRC WP 2020-417en_US
dc.subjectlabor supply, OASDI trust funds, older workers, pensions, retirementen_US
dc.titlePublic Pension Design and Household Retirement Decisions: A Comparison of the United States and Germanyen_US
dc.typeWorking Paperen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelPopulation and Demography
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelSocial Sciences
dc.contributor.affiliationotherUniversity of Southern California and RANDen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherUniversity of Southern Californiaen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherOrganisation for Economic Co-operation and Developmenten_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherUniversity of Southern Californiaen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumcampusAnn Arboren_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/168229/1/wp417.pdf
dc.identifier.doihttps://dx.doi.org/10.7302/1656
dc.description.filedescriptionDescription of wp417.pdf : working paper
dc.description.depositorSELFen_US
dc.working.doi10.7302/1656en_US
dc.owningcollnameRetirement and Disability Research Center, Michigan (MRDRC)


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.