IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jns/jbstat/v229y2009i4p492-511.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Forecasting Behavioural and Distributional Effects of the Bofinger-Walwei Model using Microsimulation

Author

Listed:
  • Wiemers Jürgen
  • Bruckmeier Kerstin

    (Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung, Regensburger Straße 104, 90478 Nürnberg, Germany)

Abstract

Since Germany’s social assistance reform (“Hartz-IV-Reform”) in 2005 there has been a strong increase in the number of working poor and long-term unemployed. This development is often attributed to the remaining disincentives of the reformed social assistance to take up a low-paid full time job. Therefore, several proposals have been worked out to reduce these disincentives. In this paper we analyse an in-work benefit programme considered by the German government, which follows the proposal of Bofinger et al. (2006). We employ a microsimulation model for estimating labour supply as well as distributional and fiscal effects of this reform proposal.We provide “morning after effects”, i.e. fiscal effects without considering behavioural adjustments, and long run effects, which take into account the labour supply response following the introduction of the reform.We predict the labour supply responses by estimating a discrete choice model for different household types and find a moderate increase in labour supply (103,000 full-time equivalents) as well as overall low negative participation effects. The distributional analysis reveals an overall increase in poverty rates caused by lower earnings disregards as well as substantial deadweight losses, since a large part of the in-work benefit accrues to households who do not belong to the working poor in the status quo.

Suggested Citation

  • Wiemers Jürgen & Bruckmeier Kerstin, 2009. "Forecasting Behavioural and Distributional Effects of the Bofinger-Walwei Model using Microsimulation," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 229(4), pages 492-511, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:jns:jbstat:v:229:y:2009:i:4:p:492-511
    DOI: 10.1515/jbnst-2009-0408
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/jbnst-2009-0408
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/jbnst-2009-0408?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bonin, Holger & Schneider, Hilmar, 2006. "Analytical prediction of transition probabilities in the conditional logit model," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 90(1), pages 102-107, January.
    2. Bonin, Holger & Rinne, Ulf & Schneider, Hilmar, 2007. "Untersuchung der beschäftigungs- und finanzpolitischen Auswirkungen des Bofinger/Walwei-Konzepts zur Neuordnung des Niedriglohnbereichs," IZA Research Reports 11, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    3. Koch, Susanne & Walwei, Ulrich, 2006. "Hinzuverdienstregelung im SGB II: Quo vadis?," Wirtschaftsdienst – Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftspolitik (1949 - 2007), ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 86(7), pages 423-427.
    4. Blank, Rebecca M. & Card, David & Robins, Philip K., 1999. "Financial Incentives for Increasing Work and Income Among Low-Income Families," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt2f15x7sg, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    5. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387.
    6. Blundell, Richard, 2000. "Work Incentives and 'In-Work' Benefit Reforms: A Review," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 16(1), pages 27-44, Spring.
    7. Brewer, Mike & Duncan, Alan & Shephard, Andrew & Suarez, Maria Jose, 2006. "Did working families' tax credit work? The impact of in-work support on labour supply in Great Britain," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 699-720, December.
    8. Arntz, Melanie & Clauss, Markus & Kraus, Margit & Schnabel, Reinhold & Spermann, Alexander & Wiemers, Jürgen, 2007. "Arbeitsangebotseffekte und Verteilungswirkungen der Hartz-IV-Reform," IAB-Forschungsbericht 200710, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
    9. John Creedy & Guyonne Kalb, 2006. "Labour Supply and Microsimulation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 4236.
    10. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    11. Hans-Werner Sinn & Christian Holzner & Wolfgang Meister & Wolfgang Ochel & Martin Werding, 2002. "Active Welfare - A path to higher employment and growth," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 55(09), pages 03-52, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bruckmeier, Kerstin & Mühlhan, Jannek & Wiemers, Jürgen, 2018. "Erwerbstätige im unteren Einkommensbereich stärken : Ansätze zur Reform von Arbeitslosengeld II, Wohngeld und Kinderzuschlag," IAB-Forschungsbericht 201809, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
    2. Bruckmeier, Kerstin & Wiemers, Jürgen, 2011. "A new targeting - a new take-up? : non-take-up of social assistance in Germany after social policy reforms," IAB-Discussion Paper 201110, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
    3. Jürgen Wiemers, 2015. "Endogenizing take-up of social assistance in a microsimulation model. A case study for Germany," International Journal of Microsimulation, International Microsimulation Association, vol. 8(2), pages 4-27.
    4. Kerstin Bruckmeier & Jürgen Wiemers, 2017. "Benefit take-up and labour supply incentives of interdependent means-tested benefit programmes for low-income households," EcoMod2017 10295, EcoMod.
    5. Kerstin Bruckmeier & Jürgen Wiemers, 2018. "Benefit Take-Up and Labor Supply Incentives of Interdependent Means-Tested Benefit Programs for Low-Income Households," Comparative Economic Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Association for Comparative Economic Studies, vol. 60(4), pages 583-604, December.
    6. Bruckmeier, Kerstin & Wiemers, Jürgen, 2016. "Differences in welfare take-up between immigrants and natives : a microsimulation study," IAB-Discussion Paper 201608, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
    7. Wiemers, Jürgen, 2015. "Endogenizing take-up of social assistance in a microsimulation model : a case study for Germany," IAB-Discussion Paper 201520, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
    8. Bruckmeier, Kerstin & Wiemers, Jürgen, 2016. "Differences in welfare take-up between immigrants and natives," VfS Annual Conference 2016 (Augsburg): Demographic Change 145828, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Olivier Bargain, 2004. "On modeling household labor supply with taxation," DELTA Working Papers 2004-14, DELTA (Ecole normale supérieure).
    2. Bessho, Shun-ichiro & Hayashi, Masayoshi, 2014. "Intensive margins, extensive margins, and spousal allowances in the Japanese system of personal income taxes: A discrete choice analysis," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 162-178.
    3. Spermann, Alexander & Strotmann, Harald, 2005. "The Targeted Negative Income Tax (TNIT) in Germany: Evidence from a Quasi Experiment," ZEW Discussion Papers 05-68, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    4. Schaefer, Thilo & Peichl, Andreas & Fuest, Clemens, 2007. "Is a Flat Tax politically feasible in a grown-up Welfare State?," FiFo Discussion Papers - Finanzwissenschaftliche Diskussionsbeiträge 07-6, University of Cologne, FiFo Institute for Public Economics.
    5. Thoresen, Thor O. & Vattø, Trine E., 2015. "Validation of the discrete choice labor supply model by methods of the new tax responsiveness literature," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 38-53.
    6. Bruckmeier, Kerstin & Mühlhan, Jannek & Wiemers, Jürgen, 2018. "Erwerbstätige im unteren Einkommensbereich stärken : Ansätze zur Reform von Arbeitslosengeld II, Wohngeld und Kinderzuschlag," IAB-Forschungsbericht 201809, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
    7. H. W. Boer, 2016. "For Better or for Worse: Tax Reform in the Netherlands," De Economist, Springer, vol. 164(2), pages 125-157, June.
    8. Henk-Wim Boer & Egbert L. W. Jongen, 2023. "Analysing tax-benefit reforms in the Netherlands using structural models and natural experiments," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 36(1), pages 179-209, January.
    9. D'Addio, Anna Cristina & De Greef, Isabelle & Rosholm, Michael, 2002. "Assessing Unemployment Traps in Belgium Using Panel Data Sample Selection Models," IZA Discussion Papers 669, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    10. Konrad Menzel, 2021. "Structural Sieves," Papers 2112.01377, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2022.
    11. Sauer, Johannes & Zilberman, David, 2009. "Innovation Behaviour At Farm Level – Selection And Identification," 83rd Annual Conference, March 30 - April 1, 2009, Dublin, Ireland 51073, Agricultural Economics Society.
    12. Hetschko, Clemens & Schöb, Ronnie & Wolf, Tobias, 2020. "Income support, employment transitions and well-being," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    13. Giulio Zanella, 2004. "Discrete Choice with Social Interactions and Endogenous Memberships," Department of Economics University of Siena 442, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    14. Jörg Schwiebert, 2016. "Multinomial choice models based on Archimedean copulas," AStA Advances in Statistical Analysis, Springer;German Statistical Society, vol. 100(3), pages 333-354, July.
    15. Richard Blundell & Monica Costa Dias & Costas Meghir & Jonathan Shaw, 2016. "Female Labor Supply, Human Capital, and Welfare Reform," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 84, pages 1705-1753, September.
    16. Matilde P. Machado & Ricardo Mora & Antonio Romero-Medina, 2012. "Can We Infer Hospital Quality From Medical Graduates’ Residency Choices?," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 10(6), pages 1400-1424, December.
    17. CARPENTIER, Alain & GOHIN, Alexandre & SCKOKAI, Paolo & THOMAS, Alban, 2015. "Economic modelling of agricultural production: past advances and new challenges," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement (RAEStud), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 96(1), March.
    18. Mauro Mastrogiacomo & Nicole M. Bosch & Miriam D. A. C. Gielen & Egbert L. W. Jongen, 2017. "Heterogeneity in Labour Supply Responses: Evidence from a Major Tax Reform," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 79(5), pages 769-796, October.
    19. Barrios, Javier A., 2004. "Generalized sample selection bias correction under RUM," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 129-132, October.
    20. Chiara Daniela Pronzato, 2015. "Fighting Lone Mothers’ Poverty Through In-Work Benefits: Methodological Issues and Policy Suggestions," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 61(1), pages 95-122.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:jns:jbstat:v:229:y:2009:i:4:p:492-511. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.