Future Social Security Benefits Research Articles

Understanding the Relationship Between Decreases in Social Security Benefits and Intergenerational Inequalities in Mental Health.

It is well-established that mental health follows similar patterns across generations. However, little is known how structural factors, such as those related to social security reforms, may impact this relationship. Our aim was to quantify the strength of association in mental health between parents and their adolescent children, and to explore how much of this correlation is explained by decreases in benefits. We used data from U.K. Household Longitudinal Study (2009-2019) from which we matched youth data to their parents, and split the sample into single- and dual-parent households. To estimate the intergenerational correlations, we estimated a series of unit- and rank-based regression models of standardized and time-averaged mental health measures for adolescents and their parents. Our findings suggest that there are statistically significant intergenerational associations in mental health between parents and children for both single- and dual-parent households, with the relationship being stronger for single-mother households. Benefit losses explain a small proportion of this association, for both single-mother and dual-parent households. Nevertheless, they are negatively associated with the mental health of adolescents in dual-parent households-independently of both adolescent and parental characteristics. Such negative effects should be considered when designing and evaluating future social security benefit policies.

Social Security Uncertainty and Demand for Retirement Saving

The life‐cycle model predicts an association between increased demand for retirement saving and the level of expected future social security benefits. The precautionary saving model shows that the risk associated to future benefits also matters. If social security benefits become more uncertain, individuals should react by increasing their demand for retirement saving. To assess the empirical relevance of this mechanism, we relate individual level measures of social security risk to demand for retirement saving vehicles. Using the Bank of Italy Survey of Household Income and Wealth, we find higher participation in private pension funds among individuals who expect lower and more uncertain social security benefits.

Relaxing household liquidity constraints through social security

More than a quarter of working-age households in the United States do not have sufficient savings to cover their expenditures after a month of unemployment. Recent proposals suggest giving workers early access to a small portion of their future Social Security benefits to finance their consumption during the COVID-19 pandemic. We empirically analyze their impact. Relying on data from the Survey of Consumer Finances, we build a measure of households' expected time to cash shortfall based on the incidence of COVID-induced unemployment. We show that access to 1% of future benefits allows 75% of households to maintain their current consumption for three months in case of unemployment. We then compare the efficacy of access to Social Security benefits to already legislated approaches, including early access to retirement accounts, stimulus relief checks, and expanded unemployment insurance.

Irrational Expectations, Future Social Security Benefits, and Life Cycle Planning

An extensive amount of literature examines the impact of expectations on economic behavior at both the micro and macro level. In the area of individual financial security, research taking into account the difference between rational expectations and actual behavioral expectations regarding asset returns, inflation, savings, and spending has contributed to better understanding and improved program design. In contrast, relatively little attention has been paid to workers’ expectations of their future Social Security benefits. Because Social Security benefits are an important source of retirement income for most workers in many countries, future Social Security benefit expectations presumably play an important role in their consumption, saving, labor supply, and portfolio investment decisions. This article surveys the literature relating to these expectations and presents evidence of workers’ expectations of future Social Security benefits in Canada, Ireland, and the United States. In all three countries, with differing systems of financing and differing politics concerning the programs, surveys find a surprising degree of pessimism and lack of trust in Social Security programs. Although rhetoric in the United States about Social Security being “broken” may be part of the explanation there, such rhetoric is not present in Canada and Ireland.

Social Security Benefit Valuation, Risk, and Optimal Retirement

We develop techniques to estimate the present day value of the future social security benefits of a retiree based upon their chosen date of retirement, the term structure of interest rates, and life expectancy forecasts. These valuation methods are then used to determine the optimal retirement time of a beneficiary given a specific wage history and health profile in the sense of maximizing the present day value of future cashflows. We then examine how a number of risk factors including interest rates, disease diagnosis, and population life table risks impact the current value of future payments. Specifically, we utilize principal component analysis in order to assess interest rate and population life expectancy variation risks. We then examine how such risks range over distinct income and demographic groups and finally summarize future research directions.

The Effect of Social Security Information on the Labor Supply and Savings of Older Americans

This paper examines how older workers adjust their labor supply in response to information they receive about their retirement wealth from the provision of the Social Security Statement. We find that older male workers’ labor supply is highly responsive to receiving personalized information about future Social Security benefits, leading to a reduction of 119 hours worked per year, on average. However, our estimates point to significant heterogeneity in this response, with workers at the lower end of the hours-worked distribution increasing their labor supply and those at the high end decreasing their labor supply. We argue differences in knowledge about Social Security benefits across the labor supply distribution can explain much of this heterogeneity. We additionally explore the extent to which the information on the Statement may have led some workers to mistakenly reduce their labor supply by too much due to a lack of understanding of the dynamic nature of the Statement’s benefit projections with respect to earnings. Receipt of a second Statement led all but the lowest hour workers to increase their labor supply relative to workers who did not receive a second Statement. This is consistent with workers misunderstanding the information provided as accumulated rather than projected wealth. Our results point to older workers being very responsive to Social Security information, which highlights the need to accurately convey information about both pension wealth and its sensitivity to changes in earnings.

The Welfare Cost of Perceived Policy Uncertainty: Evidence from Social Security

Policy uncertainty reduces individual welfare when individuals have limited opportunities to mitigate or insure against the resulting consumption fluctuations. We field an original survey to measure the degree of perceived policy uncertainty in Social Security benefits and to estimate the impact of this uncertainty on individual welfare. Our central estimates show that on average individuals are willing to forgo 6 percent of the benefits they are supposed to get under current law to remove the policy uncertainty associated with their future Social Security benefits. This translates to a risk premium from policy uncertainty equal to 10 percent of expected benefits.

When Should You Claim Social Security?

When to claim Social Security is for many retirees among the most important financial decisions they will make. For many families, the lifetime expected value of future Social Security benefits exceeds half a million dollars. Waiting until age 70 to claim Social Security can raise one’s monthly benefit check by up to 76%, yet only about 1 in 20 recipients waits until age 67 or older. Delayed claiming offers two key advantages. First, by raising the level of guaranteed lifetime income, it can help reduce the risk of outliving one’s wealth. Second, for many people, waiting to claim can increase expected lifetime benefits. For individuals of average life expectancy, waiting until age 69 or 70 can boost expected lifetime benefits by 14%, or $60,000 for those with high (90th percentile) income. Waiting to claim can be even more beneficial for high-income couples, potentially increasing their expected lifetime benefits by more than 20%, or $150,000. <b>TOPICS:</b>Social security, legal/regulatory/public policy, retirement

Markovian Social Security in Unequal Societies

AbstractIn this paper, we develop a dynamic political‐economic theory of social security. We analytically characterize a Markov perfect equilibrium and find that the interaction between Markovian tax policy and tax distortion on private investment in human capital shapes an intertemporal policy rule, linking taxes positively over time. By allowing current taxpayers to influence their own future social security benefits, the positive intertemporal tax linkage provides political support for social security. Moreover, this positive tax linkage leads to a negative correlation between wage inequality and the size of a nation's social security system, consistent with the empirical pattern observed across OECD countries.

Why Does Retirement Readiness Vary: Results from EBRI’s 2014 RetirementSecurity Projection Model®

In this article, the author describes and applies a model that finds that retirement income adequacy improved slightly in 2013. Because of increases in financial market and housing values, the probability that Baby Boomers and Generation Xers would not run short of money in retirement as measured by the EBRI Retirement Readiness Ratings (RRR), rose between 0.5 and 1.6 percentage points. Model simulations find that eligibility for participation in an employer-sponsored defined-contribution (DC) plan remains one of the most important factors for retirement income adequacy. Future Social Security benefits make a very large difference for the retirement income adequacy of some households, especially Gen Xers in the lowest-income quartile. In addition, longevity risk and stochastic health-care risk are associated with huge variations in retirement income adequacy. A great deal of the variability in retirement income adequacy could be mitigated by appropriate risk-management techniques. For example, the annuitization of part of DC plan and IRA balances may substantially increase the probability of not running short of money in retirement. Moreover, a well-functioning market in long-term care insurance could help control the volatility of long-term health care expenditures, especially for middle-income households.

Sticky Ages: Why is Age 65 Still a Retirement Peak?

When Social Security’s Full Retirement Age (FRA) increased to age 66 for recent retirees, the peak retirement age increased with it. However, a large share of people continue to claim their Social Security benefits at age 65. This paper explores two potential explanations for the “stickiness” of age 65 as a claiming age: Medicare eligibility and workers’ lack of knowledge about their future Social Security benefits. First, we analyze the impact of Medicare eligibility by comparing two groups – one has an FRA of exactly 65; the other, between age 65 and 2 months and age 66. We find that the group with later FRAs who do not have access to retiree health benefits through their employer are more likely to claim Social Security at age 65. We interpret this finding as evidence that Medicare eligibility persuades more people to retire, because they can begin receiving federal health coverage. Individuals without access to retiree health insurance at work are 7.5 percentage points more likely to retire soon after their 65th birthdays and are 5.8 percentage points less likely to delay retirement until the FRA than those with that insurance. This result fits into extensive research showing that access to health insurance is an important component of the retirement decision. On the question of whether misinformation about Social Security benefits may drive individuals to claim at age 65, we find that some individuals are unable to accurately forecast their retirement benefits. However, our analysis suggests that there is no relationship between this confusion and the age 65 peak for claiming Social Security.

The Perception of Social Security Incentives for Labor Supply and Retirement: The Median Voter Knows More Than You’d Think

Executive Summary The degree to which the Social Security tax distorts labor supply depends on the extent to which individuals perceive the link between current earnings and future Social Security benefits. Some Social Security reform plans have been motivated by an assumption that workers fail to perceive this link and that increasing the salience of the link could result in significant efficiency gains. To measure the perceived linkage between labor supply and Social Security benefits, we administered a survey to a representative sample of Americans aged 50–70. We find that the majority of respondents believe that their Social Security benefits increase with labor supply. Indeed, respondents generally report a link between labor supply and future benefits that is somewhat greater than the actual incentive. We also surveyed people about their understanding of various other provisions in the Social Security benefit rules. We find that some of these provisions (e.g., effects of delayed benefit claiming and rules on widow benefits) are relatively well understood while others (e.g., rules on spousal benefits, provisions on which years of earnings are taken into account) are less well understood. In addition, our survey incorporated a framing experiment, which shows that how the incentives for delayed claiming are presented has an impact on hypothetical claiming decisions. In particular, the traditional “break-even” framing used by the Social Security Administration leads to earlier claiming than other presentations do.

Introduction

Introduction

Individuals' uncertainty about future social security benefits and portfolio choice

Little is known about the degree to which individuals are uncertain about their future Social Security benefits, how this varies within the U.S. population, and whether this uncertainty influences financial decisions related to retirement planning. To illuminate these issues, we present empirical evidence from the Health and Retirement Study Internet Survey and document systematic variation in respondents' uncertainty about their future Social Security benefits by individual characteristics. We find that respondents with higher levels of uncertainty about future benefits hold a smaller share of their wealth in stocks.

Effect of Informal Care on Work, Wages, and Wealth

Cross-sectional evidence in the United States finds that informal caregivers have less attachment to the labor force, measured both by the number of hours worked and labor force participation. The causal mechanism is unclear: do children who work less become informal caregivers, or are children who become caregivers working less? Using longitudinal data from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS), this project identifies the relationship between informal care and labor force participation in the United States, both on the intensive and extensive margins, and whether there are wage penalties from informal care. We use our results to examine retirement wealth effects, in particular, changes in Social Security benefits. In our approach we carefully test for endogeneity; control for time invariant individual heterogeneity; and, lastly, explore the effects across key domains of behavior for men and women – stage and duration of care. We find that there are modest decreases – around 2 percentage points – in the likelihood of being in the labor force for caregivers. We find that female caregivers who have longer spells face significant but modest risks of not working, that the negative effect on work for male caregivers occurs right away, and that both male and female caregivers who have ended caregiving are not significantly more likely to work. In addition, wage penalties exist for female caregivers and wage premiums exist for male caregivers. There are minimal expected changes to caregivers’ future Social Security benefits. Finally, despite strong instruments, there is no evidence of endogeneity between informal care and work, suggesting that controlling for individual heterogeneity with fixed effects is a sufficient approach in longitudinal inquiries of informal care’s effect on work and wealth.

Individuals’ Uncertainty about Future Social Security Benefits and Portfolio Choice

Little is known about the degree to which individuals are uncertain about their future Social Security benefits, how this varies within the U.S. population, and whether this uncertainty influences financial decisions related to retirement planning. To illuminate these issues, the authors present empirical evidence from the Health and Retirement Study Internet Survey and document systematic variation in respondents’ uncertainty about their future Social Security benefits by individual characteristics. They find that respondents with higher levels of uncertainty about future benefits hold a smaller share of their wealth in stocks.

The portfolio effect of pension reforms: evidence from Italy

AbstractWe estimate the portfolio effect of changes in social security wealth exploiting a decade of Italian pension reforms. The Italian Survey of Household Income and Wealth records detailed portfolio data and elicits expectations of retirement outcomes, thus allowing us to measure expected social security wealth and assess to what extent Italian households perceive the innovations brought about by the reforms. We find that households have responded to cuts in pension benefits mostly by increasing real estate wealth, and that this response is stronger among households able more accurately to estimate future social security benefits. We also compute that for the average household consumable wealth increases by 40 percent of the reduction in social security wealth.

Individuals’ Uncertainty about Future Social Security Benefits and Portfolio Choice

Little is known about the degree to which individuals are uncertain about their future Social Security benefits, how this varies within the U.S. population, and whether this uncertainty influences financial decisions related to retirement planning. To illuminate these issues, the authors present empirical evidence from the Health and Retirement Study Internet Survey and document systematic variation in respondents' uncertainty about their future Social Security benefits by individual characteristics. They find that respondents with higher levels of uncertainty about future benefits hold a smaller share of their wealth in stocks.

Marking Social Security’s Open Group Liability to Market

This paper marks Social Security’s open group liability to market taking into account the riskiness of its aggregate benefit payments and tax receipts. The open group liability references the present value of the system’s net cash flow from now through the indefinite future. We treat the growth rates of the system’s aggregate benefits and taxes as implicit securities that are spanned by the returns on marketed securities. Our pricing of Social Security’s infinite horizon net liability builds on prior independent work by Blocker, Kotlikoff, and Ross (2009) and Geanakoplos and Zeldes (2009). Our results, which we view as preliminary, suggest that the market value of Social Security’s open group liability may be many times larger than the $15.1 trillion stated in the Trustees’ Report. Unlike Blocker, Kotlikoff, and Ross (2009), this discrepancy between our financial valuation and Social Security’s does not reflect differences in the value assumed for the safe rate of return. To control for this factor, we simply follow Social Security (and Geanakoplos, et. al., 2009) in assuming a 2.9 percent safe real rate of discount. We also find that the precise marketed assets used to price future Social Security benefits and taxes can significantly alter the estimate of the open group liability.

Consumption Response to Expected Future Income

This paper shows empirical evidence in favor of forward-looking household consumption--that consumption today depends directly on household-specific ex-ante expectations of future income. This analysis is unique in using a direct consumption measure combined with an ex-ante household-specific measure of expected future income, constructed from detailed survey and administrative data on Social Security, pensions, and retirement plans. Households with high expected future income spend more today than households that have lower future income but identical current income and net worth. Omitting household-specific future income can cause mis-estimation of key consumption questions. Furthermore, when all three resources for consumption (current income, net worth, and future income) are accounted for, the average propensity to spend out of current income is similar to predictions of optimal consumption under uncertainty in a dynamic stochastic model, although the propensities to spend out of accumulated net worth and expected future income are notably lower in the data than the optimal model. Finally, these data also provide evidence on the effect of risk on consumption while controlling for all three resources. Households with high measured risk aversion consume less out of future income. All households, on average, consume more out of the more predictable sources of future income, such as future Social Security benefits.