IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/128942.html

Economic Analysis of Multi-Tier Conditional Universal Basic Income System --A Comprehensive Theoretical Study of the Five-Core-Rule Framework

Author

Listed:
  • Wu, Chang-Min

Abstract

This paper conducts a systematic economic analysis of a Multi-Tier Conditional Universal Basic Income (MTC-UBI) system comprising five core rules. Rule 1 excludes persons working 0 or 7 days per week, and those aged ≤18 or ≥60 from receiving UBI. Rule 2 excludes the top three workday categories among workers with 1 to 6 working days per week. Rule 3 mandates that monthly UBI shall not exceed one-third of the local minimum living guarantee (dibao). Rule 4 requires annual declaration of working days. Rule 5 establishes that non-declaration results in default 1

Suggested Citation

  • Wu, Chang-Min, 2026. "Economic Analysis of Multi-Tier Conditional Universal Basic Income System --A Comprehensive Theoretical Study of the Five-Core-Rule Framework," MPRA Paper 128942, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:128942
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/128942/1/MPRA_paper_128942.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Janet Currie, 2004. "The Take Up of Social Benefits," NBER Working Papers 10488, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. David W. Emmons & Eva Madly & Stephen A. Woodbury, 2005. "Refundable Tax Credits for Health Insurance: The Sensitivity of Simulated Impacts to Assumed Behavior," Upjohn Working Papers 05-119, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
    2. Martin Persson, U. & Alpízar, Francisco, 2013. "Conditional Cash Transfers and Payments for Environmental Services—A Conceptual Framework for Explaining and Judging Differences in Outcomes," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 124-137.
    3. Hauge, Janice A. & Jamison, Mark A. & Todd Jewell, R., 2008. "Discounting telephone service: An examination of participation in the Lifeline Assistance Program using panel data," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 135-149, June.
    4. Keys, Benjamin J. & Pope, Devin G. & Pope, Jaren C., 2016. "Failure to refinance," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(3), pages 482-499.
    5. Julie Janssens & Tim Goedemé & Koen Ponnet, 2021. "The Claiming Costs Scale: A new instrument for measuring the costs potential beneficiaries face when claiming social benefits," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(8), pages 1-17, August.
    6. Sylvain Chareyron & Patrick Domingues, 2018. "Take‐Up of Social Assistance Benefits: The Case of the French Homeless," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 64(1), pages 170-191, March.
    7. Delis, Manthos & Galariotis, Emilios & Monne, Jerome, 2021. "Financial vulnerability and seeking expert advice: Evidence from a survey experiment," MPRA Paper 107095, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Hermes, Henning & Krauß, Marina & Lergetporer, Philipp & Peter, Frauke & Wiederhold, Simon, 2022. "Early Child Care and Labor Supply of Lower-SES Mothers: A Randomized Controlled Trial," IZA Discussion Papers 15814, IZA Network @ LISER.
    9. Jes Winther Hansen, 2005. "Present-Biased Individuals, Optimal Paternalism, and Transfers in Kind," EPRU Working Paper Series 05-11, Economic Policy Research Unit (EPRU), University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
    10. Marieke Huysentruyt & Eva Lefevere, 2010. "Child Benefit Support and Method of Payment: Evidence from a Randomized Experiment in Belgium," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 2(2), pages 163-184, May.
    11. Momi Dahan, 2021. "Poverty and economic behavior: gambling on social security paydays," International Gambling Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(1), pages 38-58, January.
    12. Bertrand, Marianne & Shafir, Eldar & Mullainathan, Sendhil, 2006. "Behavioral Economics and Marketing in Aid of Decision Making Among the Poor," Scholarly Articles 2962609, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    13. repec:pri:indrel:dsp01bc386j227 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Krueger, Alan B. & Kuziemko, Ilyana, 2013. "The demand for health insurance among uninsured Americans: Results of a survey experiment and implications for policy," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 780-793.
    15. Tara Watson, 2014. "Inside the Refrigerator: Immigration Enforcement and Chilling Effects in Medicaid Participation," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 6(3), pages 313-338, August.
    16. van den Berg, Gerard J. & Bonev, Petyo & Mammen, Enno, 2016. "Nonparametric Instrumental Variable Methods for Dynamic Treatment Evaluation," IZA Discussion Papers 9782, IZA Network @ LISER.
    17. Bargain, Olivier B. & Immervoll, Herwig & Viitamäki, Heikki, 2007. "How Tight Are Safety-Nets in Nordic Countries? Evidence from Finnish Register Data," IZA Discussion Papers 3004, IZA Network @ LISER.
    18. Rosenqvist, Olof & Selin, Håkan, 2023. "Explaining benefit take-up behavior – the role of incentives and habits," Working Paper Series 2023:24, IFAU - Institute for Evaluation of Labour Market and Education Policy.
    19. Blanco Mariana & Vargas Juan F., 2014. "Can SMS Technology Improve Low Take-up of Social Benefits?," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 20(1), pages 61-81, January.
    20. Ronney Thulisile & Muleya Jameson Denzilizium, 2025. "Enhancing Police Training: A Literature Review of Best Practices and Innovations," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 9(7), pages 1938-1946, July.
    21. Chao, Ying H., 2025. "A quantitative analysis of relaxing UI eligibility requirements," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • H53 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Government Expenditures and Welfare Programs

    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:pra:mprapa:128942. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.