IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mrr/papers/wp248.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Effects of Changes in Women’s Labor Market Attachment on Redistribution Under the Social Security Benefit Formula

Author

Listed:
  • Alan L. Gustman

    (Dartmouth College and NBER)

  • Thomas L. Steinmeier

    (Texas Tech University)

  • Nahid Tabatabai

    (Dartmouth College)

Abstract

Studies using data from the early 1990s suggested that while the progressive Social Security benefit formula succeeded in redistributing benefits from individuals with high earnings to individuals with low earnings, it was much less successful in redistributing benefits from households with high earnings to households with low earnings. Wives often earned much less than their husbands. As a result, much of the redistribution at the individual level was effectively from high earning husbands to their own lower earning wives. In addition, spouse and survivor benefits accrue disproportionately to women from high income households. Both factors mitigate redistribution at the household level. This paper compares outcomes for the earlier cohort with those of a cohort born twelve years later. With greater growth in women's earnings, the aim of the study is to see whether, after the recent growth in two earner households, and the growth in women's labor market activity and earnings, the Social Security system now fosters somewhat more redistribution from high to low earning households. We use data from the Health and Retirement Study to study a population consisting of members of households with at least one person age 51 to 56 in either 1992 or in 2004. We use four different measures of redistribution: the ratio of the present value of benefits to taxes for households arrayed by decile of covered earnings; the fraction of total Social Security benefits redistributed from households with high earnings to those with low earnings; the share of total benefits paid to members of each cohort redistributed from households falling in the highest deciles of earners to those with lower covered earnings; and the rate of return to Social Security taxes for members with different amounts of covered earnings. Considering differences in earnings between cohorts, women enjoyed a more rapid growth of labor force participation, hours of work and covered earnings than men. This increased the redistribution of Social Security benefits among households. Nevertheless, a considerable gap remains between the labor market activities and earnings of women versus men. As a result, the Social Security system remains much less successful in redistributing benefits from households with high covered earnings to those with lower covered earnings than in redistributing benefits from individuals with high covered earnings to those with lower covered earnings.

Suggested Citation

  • Alan L. Gustman & Thomas L. Steinmeier & Nahid Tabatabai, 2011. "The Effects of Changes in Women’s Labor Market Attachment on Redistribution Under the Social Security Benefit Formula," Working Papers wp248, University of Michigan, Michigan Retirement Research Center.
  • Handle: RePEc:mrr:papers:wp248
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://mrdrc.isr.umich.edu/publications/Papers/pdf/wp248.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Feldstein, Martin & Liebman, Jeffrey B. (ed.), 2002. "The Distributional Aspects of Social Security and Social Security Reform," National Bureau of Economic Research Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226241067, October.
    2. Martin Feldstein & Jeffrey B. Liebman, 2002. "The Distributional Aspects of Social Security and Social Security Reform," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number feld02-1, January.
    3. Gustman, Alan L. & Steinmeier, Thomas L., 2001. "How effective is redistribution under the social security benefit formula?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 1-28, October.
    4. repec:aei:rpbook:24949 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Andrew G. Biggs, 2011. "Social Security: The Story of Its Past and a Vision for Its Future," Books, American Enterprise Institute, number 6033, September.
    6. Alan L. Gustman & Thomas L. Steinmeier & Nahid Tabatabai, 2010. "The Growth in Social Security Benefits Among the Retirement Age Population from Increases in the Cap on Covered Earnings," Working Papers wp227, University of Michigan, Michigan Retirement Research Center.
    7. Amy Rehder Harris & John Sabelhaus, 2005. "How Does Differential Mortality Affect Social Security Finances and Progressivity? Working Paper 2005-05," Working Papers 16493, Congressional Budget Office.
    8. Norma B. Coe & Zhenya Karamcheva & Richard W. Kopcke & Alicia, 2011. "How Does the Personal Income Tax Affect the Progressivity of OASI Benefits?," Working Papers, Center for Retirement Research at Boston College wp2011-21, Center for Retirement Research, revised Nov 2011.
    9. Gopi Shah Goda & John B. Shoven & Sita Nataraj Slavov, 2011. "Differential Mortality by Income and Social Security Progressivity," NBER Chapters, in: Explorations in the Economics of Aging, pages 189-204, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Michael D. Hurd, 2011. "Comment on "Differential Mortality by Income and Social Security Progressivity"," NBER Chapters, in: Explorations in the Economics of Aging, pages 205-208, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    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. Seonglim Lee & Jinkook Lee & Yunhee Chang, 2014. "Is Dual Income Costly for Married Couples? An Analysis of Household Expenditures," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 161-177, June.

    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. Li Tan & Cory Koedel, 2019. "The Effects of Differential Income Replacement and Mortality on U.S. Social Security Redistribution," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 86(2), pages 613-637, October.
    2. Eytan Sheshinski & Frank N. Caliendo, 2021. "Social Security and the increasing longevity gap," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 23(1), pages 29-52, February.
    3. Sánchez-Romero, Miguel & Prskawetz, Alexia, 2017. "Redistributive effects of the US pension system among individuals with different life expectancy," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 51-74.
    4. Jeffrey R. Brown & Julia Lynn Coronado & Don Fullerton, 2009. "Is Social Security Part of the Social Safety Net?," NBER Chapters, in: Tax Policy and the Economy, Volume 23, pages 37-72, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Coronado Julia Lynn & Fullerton Don & Glass Thomas, 2011. "The Progressivity of Social Security," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-45, November.
    6. Tim Krieger & Christine Meemann & Stefan Traub, 2022. "Inequality, Life Expectancy, and the Intragenerational Redistribution Puzzle - Some Experimental Evidence," CESifo Working Paper Series 9677, CESifo.
    7. Alan Gustman & Thomas Steinmeier & Nahid Tabatabai, 2014. "Distributional Effects of Means Testing Social Security: An Exploratory Analysis," NBER Working Papers 20546, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Laun, Tobias & Markussen, Simen & Vigtel, Trond Christian & Wallenius, Johanna, 2018. "Health, Longevity and Pension Reform," Working Paper Series 2018:9, Uppsala University, Department of Economics.
    9. Alan J. Auerbach & Kerwin K. Charles & Courtney C. Coile & William Gale & Dana Goldman & Ronald Lee & Charles M. Lucas & Peter R. Orszag & Louise M. Sheiner & Bryan Tysinger & David N. Weil & Justin W, 2017. "How the Growing Gap in Life Expectancy May Affect Retirement Benefits and Reforms," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 42(3), pages 475-499, July.
    10. Jeffrey B. Liebman, 2002. "Redistribution in the Current U.S. Social Security System," NBER Chapters, in: The Distributional Aspects of Social Security and Social Security Reform, pages 11-48, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Dennis Fredriksen & Nils Martin Stølen, 2015. "Life time pension benefits relative to life time contributions," Discussion Papers 825, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    12. Huang, Rachel J. & Tsai, Jeffrey T. & Tzeng, Larry Y., 2008. "Government-provided annuities under insolvency risk," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 377-385, December.
    13. Oliver Denk & Robert P. Hagemann & Patrick Lenain & Valentin Somma, 2013. "Inequality and Poverty in the United States: Public Policies for Inclusive Growth," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1052, OECD Publishing.
    14. Haan, Peter & Kemptner, Daniel & Lüthen, Holger, 2020. "The rising longevity gap by lifetime earnings – Distributional implications for the pension system," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 17(C).
    15. Liqun Liu & Andrew J. Rettenmaier, 2003. "Social Security Outcomes by Racial and Education Groups," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 69(4), pages 842-864, April.
    16. Holger Lüthen, 2016. "Rates of Return and Early Retirement Disincentives: Evidence from a German Pension Reform," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 17(2), pages 206-233, May.
    17. Rachel J. Huang & Larry Y. Tzeng, 2008. "Consumption Externality and Equilibrium Underinsurance," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 75(4), pages 1039-1054, December.
    18. John F. Cogan & Olivia S. Mitchell, 2003. "Perspectives from the President's Commission on Social Security Reform," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 17(2), pages 149-172, Spring.
    19. Fatih Guvenen & Greg Kaplan & Jae Song & Justin Weidner, 2017. "Lifetime Incomes in the United States over Six Decades," NBER Working Papers 23371, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Martin Feldstein, 2005. "Structural Reform of Social Security," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(2), pages 33-55, Spring.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D31 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - Personal Income and Wealth Distribution
    • H55 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Social Security and Public Pensions
    • J11 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Demographic Trends, Macroeconomic Effects, and Forecasts
    • J14 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of the Elderly; Economics of the Handicapped; Non-Labor Market Discrimination
    • J16 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination
    • J18 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Public Policy
    • J26 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Retirement; Retirement Policies
    • J38 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Wages, Compensation, and Labor Costs - - - Public Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:mrr:papers:wp248. 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: MRRC Administrator (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/isumius.html .

    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.