IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/pubmmg/v44y2024i6p462-471.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Political budget cycle and unfunded pension liabilities in states in the USA

Author

Listed:
  • Ljubinka Andonoska
  • H. Daniel Xu

Abstract

Evidence shows that gubernatorial elections affect pension funding in US states. Contrary to expectations, this article shows that pension plans in election and post-election years tend to be better funded. Other political factors, such as partisanship and unionization, also play a role in funding state employees’ pension plans—the higher the level of unionization, the lower the pension funding. Institutional factors, including tax and expenditure limits (TELs), ‘rainy day funds’ (RDFs), and balanced budget requirements (BBRs), also affect pension funding. TELs positively affect pension funding, while the level of RDFs and the stringency of BBRs tend to reduce pension funding. These findings caution state fiscal administrators and state-level policy-makers as they indicate that political factors along with fiscal institutions are important to consider for their long-term impacts on the viability of pension plans. This article informs policy-makers in the USA and in other countries to exercise more caution during election years as electoral politics may affect pension funding. Political factors are critical in making fiscal decisions, and while this study focuses on the USA states, the lessons are equally important for pension administrators and policy-makers in other countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Ljubinka Andonoska & H. Daniel Xu, 2024. "Political budget cycle and unfunded pension liabilities in states in the USA," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(6), pages 462-471, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:pubmmg:v:44:y:2024:i:6:p:462-471
    DOI: 10.1080/09540962.2023.2250090
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/09540962.2023.2250090
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/09540962.2023.2250090?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:taf:pubmmg:v:44:y:2024:i:6:p:462-471. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RPMM20 .

    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.