IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/uwp/jhriss/v14y1979i4p477-487.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Labor Supply Response in the Gary Experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Robert A. Moffitt

Abstract

The results of the Gary Negative Income Tax Experiment show significant work disincentives of 3 to 6 percent for husbands, 26 to 30 percent for female heads, but none for wives. The response of husbands is similar to those in other experiments. The response of female heads is somewhat larger than that in Seattle-Denver, the only other experiment reporting female-head results, because of a larger guarantee effect in Gary. The response of wives is very dissimilar to that in the other experiments, possibly because the Gary labor market offers few part-time possibilities for married women. In general, tax effects are much weaker than guarantee effects, which may also be a result of the steel-dominated, highly structured local labor market.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert A. Moffitt, 1979. "The Labor Supply Response in the Gary Experiment," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 14(4), pages 477-487.
    • Handle: RePEc:uwp:jhriss:v:14:y:1979:i:4:p:477-487
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/145318
    Download Restriction: A subscription is required to access pdf files. Pay per article is available.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Riddell, Chris & Riddell, William Craig, 2025. "What did we learn from the North American income maintenance experiments? New data and evidence on household behavior and labor supply," CLEF Working Paper Series 91, Canadian Labour Economics Forum (CLEF), University of Waterloo.
    2. Robert A. Moffitt & Mark Wilhelm, 1998. "Taxation and the Labor Supply: Decisions of the Affluent," NBER Working Papers 6621, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. repec:cdl:econwp:qt7957p9g6 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. George Planiteros, 2022. "Reverse matching for ex-ante policy evaluation," DEOS Working Papers 2206, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    5. Larry L. Orr & Daniel Gubits, 2023. "Some Lessons From 50 Years of Multiarm Public Policy Experiments," Evaluation Review, , vol. 47(1), pages 43-70, February.
    6. repec:cdl:indrel:qt6605k20b is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Deaton, Angus & Cartwright, Nancy, 2018. "Understanding and misunderstanding randomized controlled trials," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 210(C), pages 2-21.
    8. Orazio P. Attanasio & Costas Meghir & Ana Santiago, 2012. "Education Choices in Mexico: Using a Structural Model and a Randomized Experiment to Evaluate PROGRESA," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 79(1), pages 37-66.
    9. repec:cdl:econwp:qt6605k20b is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Sebastian Galiani & Juan Pantano, 2021. "Structural Models: Inception and Frontier," NBER Working Papers 28698, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Manuela A. de Paz-Báñez & María José Asensio-Coto & Celia Sánchez-López & María-Teresa Aceytuno, 2020. "Is There Empirical Evidence on How the Implementation of a Universal Basic Income (UBI) Affects Labour Supply? A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-36, November.
    12. repec:eee:labchp:v:1:y:1986:i:c:p:3-102 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:uwp:jhriss:v:14:y:1979:i:4:p:477-487. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://jhr.uwpress.org/ .

    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.