Abstract
Can simply changing the public definition of a normal retirement age impact retirement, without any associated financial incentive changes? We study a reformulation of the retirement system in Finland that relabeled retirement ages with only modest and continuous changes in financial incentives. We find that relabeling matters: both graphical evidence and estimated hazard models reveal an enormous change in retirement when individuals face a newly defined “normal retirement” age. We also find evidence consistent with increased retirement “regret,” as the marginal workers induced to retire by relabeling are more likely to return to work.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
