Social Security's Treatment of Postwar Americans
Social Security faces a major long-term funding crisis. A 38 or greater percentage increase in the systems' tax rate is needed to meet current benefit payments on an ongoing basis. Tax increases of this magnitude or comparable benefit cuts would significantly worsen what is already a very bad deal for postwar Americans. This paper uses CORSIM -- a dynamic micro simulation model -- and SOCSIM -- a detailed Social Security benefit calculator -- to study this deal. The study finds that baby boomers will, under current law, lose roughly 5 cents of every dollar they earn to the OASI program in taxes net of benefits. For today's children the figure is 7 cents. Measured as a proportion of their lifetime labor incomes, the middle class are the biggest losers, but measured in absolute dollars, the rich lose the most. Out of every dollar that postwar Americans contribute to the OASI system, 74 cents represent a pure tax. The system treats women better than men, whites better than non-whites, and the college educated better than the non-college educated. While the system has been partially effective in pooling risk across households, it offers postwar cohorts internal rates of return on their contributions that are quite low. Those born right after World War II will earn, on average, a 2.4 percent real rate of return. Those born in the early 1970's will average about a 1 percent real rate of return, and those born at the end of this decade will average essentially a zero rate of return.
|Date of creation:||Jun 1998|
|Publication status:||published as Social Security's Treatment of Postwar Americans , Steven Caldwell, Melissa Favreault, Alla Gantman, Jagadeesh Gokhale, Thomas Johnson, Laurence J. Kotlikoff. in Tax Policy and the Economy, Volume 13 , Poterba. 1999|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138, U.S.A.|
Web page: http://www.nber.org
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Hayashi, Fumio & Altonji, Joseph & Kotlikoff, Laurence, 1996. "Risk-Sharing between and within Families," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(2), pages 261-294, March.
- Julia Lynn Coronado & Don Fullerton & Thomas Glass, 1999.
"Distributional Impacts of Proposed Changes to the Social Security System,"
NBER Working Papers
6989, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Julia Lynn Coronado & Don Fullerton & Thomas Glass, 1999. "Distributional Impacts of Proposed Changes to the Social Security System," NBER Chapters, in: Tax Policy and the Economy, Volume 13, pages 149-186 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Panis, C.W.A. & Lillard, L.A., 1996. "Socioeconomic Differentials in the Returns to Social Security," Papers 96-05, RAND - Labor and Population Program.
- Olivia S. Mitchell & James M. Poterba & Mark J. Warshawsky, 1997.
"New Evidence on the Money's Worth of Individual Annuities,"
NBER Working Papers
6002, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Olivia S. Mitchell, 1999. "New Evidence on the Money's Worth of Individual Annuities," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1299-1318, December.
- Olivia S. Mitchell & James M. Poterba & Mark J. Warshawsky, "undated". "New Evidence on the Money's Worth of Individual Annuities," Pension Research Council Working Papers 97-9, Wharton School Pension Research Council, University of Pennsylvania.
- Michael D. Hurd & John B. Shoven, 1983.
"The Distributional Impact of Social Security,"
NBER Working Papers
1155, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Steven Caldwell & Melissa Favreault & Alla Gantman & Jagadeesh Gokhale & Thomas Johnson & Laurence J. Kotlikoff, 1999.
"Social Security's Treatment of Postwar Americans,"
in: Tax Policy and the Economy, Volume 13, pages 109-148
National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Peter Diamond & Jonathan Gruber, 1997. "Social Security and Retirement in the U.S," NBER Working Papers 6097, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Anthony Pellechio & Gordon Goodfellow, 1983. "Individual Gains and Losses from Social Security before and after the 1983 Amendments," Cato Journal, Cato Journal, Cato Institute, vol. 3(2), pages 417-442, Fall.
- Jagadeesh Gokhale, 1998. "Social Security's treatment of postwar generations," Economic Commentary, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, issue Nov.
- Robert Fogel & Dora Costa, 1997. "Erratum to: A theory of technophysio, with come implications for forecasting population, health care costs, and pension costs," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 34(2), pages 1-1, May.
- Ronald Lee & Shripad Tuljapurkar, 1997. "Death and Taxes: Longer life, consumption, and social security," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 34(1), pages 67-81, February.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:6603. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ()
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.