IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/105032.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Universal simplicity? The alleged simplicity of Universal Credit from administrative and claimant perspectives

Author

Listed:
  • Summers, Kate
  • Young, David

Abstract

A key aim of Universal Credit is to simplify the social security system. While several aspects of its introduction have received critical attention, this overarching aim continues to receive acceptance and support. Drawing on two empirical studies involving means-tested benefit claimants, we aim to deconstruct the idea of ‘simplicity’ as a feature of social security design and argue that it is contingent on perspective. We suggest that claims of simplicity can often be justified from an administrative perspective but are not experienced as such from the perspective of claimants, who instead can face greater responsibility for managing complexity.

Suggested Citation

  • Summers, Kate & Young, David, 2020. "Universal simplicity? The alleged simplicity of Universal Credit from administrative and claimant perspectives," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 105032, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:105032
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/105032/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. (IFS), Institute for Fiscal Studies & Mirrlees, James (ed.), 2011. "Tax By Design: The Mirrlees Review," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199553747.
    2. John Hills & Abigail McKnight & Rachel Smithies, 2006. "Tracking Income: How working families incomes vary through the year," CASE Reports casereport32, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE.
    3. Paul Johnson & Gareth Myles, 2011. "The Mirrlees Review," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 32(3), pages 319-329, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Cooper, Kerris & Hills, John, 2021. "The Conservative governments’ record on social security: policies, spending and outcomes, May 2015 to pre-COVID 2020," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 121553, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Orton, Michael & Summers, Kate & Morris, Rosa, 2022. "Guiding principles for social security policy: outcomes from a bottom-up approach," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 113617, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Edmiston, Daniel & Robertshaw, David & Young, David & Ingold, Jo & Gibbons, Andrea & Summers, Kate & Scullion, Lisa & Geiger, Ben Baumberg & de Vries, Robert, 2022. "Mediating the claim? How ‘local ecosystems of support’ shape the operation and experience of UK social security," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 113829, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Kerris Cooper & John Hills, 2021. "The Conservative Governments’ Record on Social Security: Policies, Spending and Outcomes, May 2015 to pre-COVID 2020," CASE - Social Policies and Distributional Outcomes Research Papers 10, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE.

    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. European Commission, 2013. "Tax reforms in EU Member States - Tax policy challenges for economic growth and fiscal sustainability – 2013 Report," Taxation Papers 38, Directorate General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission.
    2. Langenmayr, Dominika & Haufler, Andreas & Bauer, Christian J., 2015. "Should tax policy favor high- or low-productivity firms?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 18-34.
    3. Robin Boadway & Pierre Pestieau, 2018. "The Dubious Case for Annual Wealth Taxation," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 16(02), pages 03-07, August.
    4. José Mª Durán-Cabré & Alejandro Esteller-Moré, 2014. "Tax professionals' view of the Spanish tax system: efficiency, equity and tax planning," Working Papers 2014/5, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    5. Robin Boadway & Motohiro Sato & Jean-Francois Tremblay, 2015. "Cash-flow business taxation revisited: bankruptcy, risk aversion and asymmetric information," Working Papers 1531, Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation.
    6. Hilber, Christian A.L. & Lyytikäinen, Teemu, 2017. "Transfer taxes and household mobility: Distortion on the housing or labor market?," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 57-73.
    7. Christian A. L. Hilber & Teemu Lyytikäinen, 2012. "The Effect of the UK Stamp Duty Land Tax on Household Mobility," SERC Discussion Papers 0115, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    8. Nils aus dem Moore, 2014. "Taxes and Corporate Financing Decisions – Evidence from the Belgian ACE Reform," Ruhr Economic Papers 0533, Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Universität Dortmund, Universität Duisburg-Essen.
    9. Konstantinos Angelopoulos & James R. Malley & Wei Jiang, 2011. "The distributional consequences of tax reforms under market distortions," Working Papers 2011_21, Business School - Economics, University of Glasgow.
    10. repec:ces:ifodic:v:16:y:2018:i:2:p:50000000002753 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. n.d., 2013. "Italy's corporate tax reforms and firm-specific tax rates in the period 1998-2012," STUDI ECONOMICI, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2013(111), pages 51-68.
    12. Stefanie Stantcheva, 2017. "Optimal Taxation and Human Capital Policies over the Life Cycle," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 125(6), pages 1931-1990.
    13. Haufler, Andreas & Norbäck, Pehr-Johan & Persson, Lars, 2014. "Entrepreneurial innovations and taxation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 13-31.
    14. Xavier Ruiz del Portal, 2020. "Two reasons for not using commodity taxation in the presence of an optimal income tax," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 232(1), pages 9-28, March.
    15. Gregor Schwerhoff & Ottmar Edenhofer & Marc Fleurbaey, 2020. "Taxation Of Economic Rents," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(2), pages 398-423, April.
    16. Mihir A. Desai & Dhammika Dharmapala, 2015. "Interest Deductions in a Multijurisdictional World," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 68(3), pages 653-680, September.
    17. Michael Carlos Best & Henrik Jacobsen Jacobsen, 2013. "Optimal Income Taxation with Career Effects of Work Effort," Working Papers 2013-9, Princeton University. Economics Department..
    18. Haibara Takumi, 2017. "Indirect Tax Reform in Developing Countries: A Consumption-Neutral Approach," Journal of Globalization and Development, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-11, June.
    19. Eckerstorfer, Paul & Steiner, Viktor & Wakolbinger, Florian, 2013. "Steuerreformvorschläge in der Diskussion: Eine Mikrosimulationsanalyse der Aufkommens-, Beschäftigungs- und Verteilungswirkungen für Österreich," Discussion Papers 2013/17, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.
    20. Harju Jarkko, 2014. "Policy evaluation methods in tax research – new evidence and interpretations," Nordic Tax Journal, Sciendo, vol. 2014(1), pages 76-92, May.
    21. Simone Pellegrino & Massimiliano Piacenza & Gilberto Turati, 2011. "Assessing the Distributional Effects of Housing Taxation in Italy: From the Actual Tax Code to Imputed Rent," CESifo Working Paper Series 3368, CESifo.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Universal Credit; qualitative methods; simplicity; welfare reform;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • R14 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Land Use Patterns
    • J01 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - General - - - Labor Economics: General
    • E6 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Macroeconomic Policy, Macroeconomic Aspects of Public Finance, and General Outlook

    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:ehl:lserod:105032. 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: LSERO Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.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.