Does It Pay to Work?
Does it pay to work? Given the number and complexity of federal and state tax and transfer systems, this is a tough question to answer. The problem is greatly compounded by the fact that what one earns in one year alters not just current taxes and transfer payments in that year, but in future years as well. Thus, understanding the net effective tax on work and the changes in this taxation associated with policy reforms requires an intertemporal model capable of carefully determining tax and transfer payments at each stage of the life cycle. This study uses ESPlanner, a financial planning software program, to study the net work tax levied on workers with different earnings capacities. ESPlanner smooths households' living standards subject to their capacities to borrow. In so doing, it makes highly detiled, year-by-year federal and state income tax and Social Security benefit calculations. To produce a comprehensive net work tax measure, we added to ESPlanner all other major transfer programs. We focus on lifetime average and marginal net work-tax rates, which are measured by comparing the present values of lifetime spending from working through retirement both in the presence and in the absence of all tax-transfer programs. We form these tax rates for young stylized married workers. We report seven findings. First, our fiscal system is highly progressive. Households earning the minimum wage receive 18 cents in benefits net of taxes for every dollar they earn. In contrast, households with million dollar salaries pay 54 cents in taxes net of benefits pe r dollar earned. Second, progressively is primarily restriced to the bottom end of the income distribution. Average net work tax rates of middle class households are relatively high compared with those of the rich. Third, while the poor face negative average taxes, they face significant positive marginal net taxes on working. Indeed, a minimum wage household that chooses to work is forced to surrender 34 cents of every dollar earned in net taxes. Those with earnings that exceed 1.5 times the minimum wage face marginal net taxes on full-time work above 50 percent. Fourth, low-wage workers face confiscatory tax rates on switching from part-time to full-time work. Fifth, the same is true of secondary earnings spouses in low- wage households with low incomes. Six, the marginal net tax on working is particularly high for young households with low incomes. Seventh, average and marginal net work tax rates are relatively insensitive to the assumed rate of real wage growth and the discount rate. And eighth, major tax reforms, such as switching from income to consumption taxation, can have an significant affect on the fiscal system's overall progressivity.
|Date of creation:||Aug 2002|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: http://www.nber.orgEmail:
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.:
- David Altig, 2001. "Simulating Fundamental Tax Reform in the United States," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(3), pages 574-595, June.
- 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.
- Michael J. Boskin & Laurence J. Kotlikoff & Douglas J. Puffert & John B. Shoven, 1987. "Social Security: A Financial Appraisal Across and Within Generations," NBER Working Papers 1891, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Jagadeesh Gokhale & Laurence J. Kotlikoff, 1999.
"Social Security's Treatment of Postwar Americans: How Bad Can It Get?,"
NBER Working Papers
7362, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Jagadeesh Gokhale & Laurence J. Kotlikoff, 2002. "Social Security's Treatment of Postwar Americans. How Bad Can It Get?," NBER Chapters, in: The Distributional Aspects of Social Security and Social Security Reform, pages 207-262 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Jagadeesh Gokhale & Laurence J. Kotlikoff, 1999. "Social Security's treatment of postwar Americans: how bad can it get?," Working Paper 9912, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.
- Don Fullerton & Diane Lim Rogers, 1994. "Distributional Effects on a Lifetime Basis," NBER Working Papers 4862, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Glenn R. Hubbard & Jonathan Skinner & Stephen P. Zeldes, .
"Precautionary Saving and Social Insurance,"
Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research Working Papers
03-95, Wharton School Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research.
- R. Glenn Hubbard & Jonathan Skinner & Stephen P. Zeldes, 1994. "Precautionary Saving and Social Insurance," NBER Working Papers 4884, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Glenn R. Hubbard & Jonathan Skinner & Stephen P. Zeldes, . "Precautionary Saving and Social Insurance," Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research Working Papers 3-95, Wharton School Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research.
- Michael D. Hurd & John B. Shoven, 1985.
"The Distributional Impact of Social Security,"
in: Pensions, Labor, and Individual Choice, pages 193-222
National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- David Bradford, 1995. "The Distributional Analysis of Tax Policy," Books, American Enterprise Institute, number 52866, 2.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:9096. 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.