IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jpenef/v12y2013i01p1-27_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Redistribution under the Social Security benefit formula at the individual and household levels, 1992 and 2004

Author

Listed:
  • GUSTMAN, ALAN L.
  • STEINMEIER, THOMAS L.
  • TABATABAI, NAHID

Abstract

Studies using data from the early 1990s suggested that while the progressive Social Security benefit formula succeeded in redistributing benefits from individuals with high earnings to individuals with low earnings, it was much less successful in redistributing benefits from households with high earnings to households with low earnings. Wives often earned much less than their husbands. As a result, much of the redistribution at the individual level was effectively from high earning husbands to their own lower earning wives. In addition, spouse and survivor benefits accrue disproportionately to women from high income households. Both factors mitigate redistribution at the household level. It has been argued that with the increase in the labor force participation and earnings of women, Social Security now should do a better job of redistributing benefits at the household level. To be sure, when we compare outcomes for a cohort with a household member age 51 to 56 in 1992 with those from a cohort born twelve years later, redistribution at the household level has increased over time. Nevertheless, as of 2004 there still is substantially less redistribution of benefits from high to low earning households than from high to low earning individuals.

Suggested Citation

  • Gustman, Alan L. & Steinmeier, Thomas L. & Tabatabai, Nahid, 2013. "Redistribution under the Social Security benefit formula at the individual and household levels, 1992 and 2004," Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(1), pages 1-27, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:jpenef:v:12:y:2013:i:01:p:1-27_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1474747212000108/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alan L. Gustman & Thomas L. Steinmeier & Nahid Tabatabai, 2013. "The Social Security Windfall Elimination and Government Pension Offset Provisions for Public Employees in the Health and Retirement Study," Working Papers wp288, University of Michigan, Michigan Retirement Research Center.
    2. Philipp Bewerunge & Harvey S. Rosen, 2013. "Wages, Pensions, and Public-Private Sector Compensation Differentials for Older Workers," NBER Working Papers 19454, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Jing Guo & Marilyn Moon, 2018. "Lifetime Taxpayer Contributions And Benefits Of Medicare And Social Security," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 36(3), pages 483-492, July.
    4. Li Tan & Cory Koedel, 2019. "The Effects of Differential Income Replacement and Mortality on U.S. Social Security Redistribution," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 86(2), pages 613-637, October.
    5. Alan Gustman & Thomas Steinmeier & Nahid Tabatabai, 2014. "Distributional Effects of Means Testing Social Security: An Exploratory Analysis," Working Papers wp306, University of Michigan, Michigan Retirement Research Center.
    6. Javier Pla-Porcel & Manuel Ventura-Marco & Carlos Vidal-Meliá, 2017. "How do unisex life care annuities embedded in a pay-as-you-go retirement system affect gender redistribution?," Documentos de Trabajo del ICAE 2017-11, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Instituto Complutense de Análisis Económico.

    More about this item

    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:cup:jpenef:v:12:y:2013:i:01:p:1-27_00. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/pef .

    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.