Social Security

This paper reviews why Social Security fails to lift more aged low-wage workers and people of color out of poverty. It examines the payroll tax and benefit formula and reviews literature about OASDI outcomes by race, gender, and earnings level. It describes how mortality, earnings, disability, childbearing, immigration and emigration, and marriage patterns all differ across U.S. racial/ethnic groups, and highlights the importance of these differences for program outcomes. The paper then uses the DYNASIM model to examine lifetime OASDI redistribution under current law and a trust fund-neutral reform package that would enhance system progressivity and improve outcomes for some vulnerable to retirement poverty.

One-quarter of workers ages 51 to 55 develop work disabilities before age 62. Disabilities often force people to curtail their work hours, derailing retirement preparations. However, protections built into Social Security, including disability and spouse benefits and the system's tilt toward workers with low lifetime earnings, cushion the impact of midlife health problems. After other factors are controlled for, the onset of health-related work limitations between ages 51 and 61 reduces Social Security retirement benefits at ages 63 to 67 by only about 2 percent, much less than the impact on other retirement savings.

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette op-ed, September 28, 2008. The current financial crisis poses a severe threat to the economy, but it also creates a tremendous opportunity, writes Rudolph Penner in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. It gives politicians cover for undertaking painful actions to get the long-run deficit under control-actions that should have been taken long ago.

Low-wage workers find it difficult to save for retirement. Without savings, they will have to rely on Social Security and pensions. Yet these income sources are based on earnings, which means that low-wage workers will have lower Social Security and pension benefits than higher-wage workers. This brief assesses whether boomers with low earnings between ages 22 and 62 are destined for low income at age 67. We find that nearly two-thirds of this group will end up with low income at retirement, but more than one-third will manage to defy the odds and escape being among the lowest-income older Americans.

In April 2008, the Urban Institute convened an expert panel of researchers inside and outside of government agencies to discuss how best to perform distributional analyses of proposals to reform Social Security and private pensions. The panel discussed key technical issues, including how to measure the baseline income distribution and characterize current policies, how to address changes that alter the timing of taxes and benefits, and how to measure and report gains and losses from policy interventions. The group revealed diverse viewpoints, but we conclude that current methods used in recent UI research fall within the range of reasonable alternatives.

This study uses the Urban Institute's DYNASIM model to project wealth and income at retirement for low-income boomers. The findings suggest that most with low lifetime earnings will also have low incomes at older ages unless they either continue working or move in with others who help support them financially. Saving more, working more consistently over their lifetime, and delaying retirement is projected to improve outcomes for low-earning boomers, but none of these actions will increase retirement living standards dramatically.

In this interview for the American Bar Association Taxation Section News Quarterly, Eric Toder discusses the relationship between the Social Security trust fund account surplus and budget deficits, prospects for future tax reform, reforms of corporate taxation, and the possible future role of consumption taxes in the federal tax code.

Increasing older people's employment rates could reduce the economic pressures of an aging population, and many older adults say they want to delay retirement. Yet, numerous public policies and private practices continue to encourage early retirement. The Urban Institute, with support from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, sponsored an October 2007 roundtable to examine the value of older adults' work. Researchers, practitioners, employers, and policymakers discussed the potential supply of and demand for older workers, the benefits of working longer, barriers to continued employment, and policy solutions to encourage work at older ages. This document summarizes the issues and discussion.

Growing fiscal pressures and increasing life expectancy have prompted calls to raise retirement ages. Some fear this change might harm long-career, lower-wage workers. Tying retirement benefit eligibility to years of service might protect low-wage workers who start their careers early. But higher disability rates and greater employment volatility could offset lower-wage workers’ early labor force starts. Using survey data matched to administrative records, we describe how work histories vary by gender, education, and other characteristics. We find that years of service are not likely to effectively protect the lowest-wage workers, as those with the least education also work the least.

Tax rates can affect decisions regarding work, investment in human capital, and wealth accumulation, each of which modulates intra- and intergenerational economic mobility. Similarly, government spending affects mobility either by purchasing goods that may drive mobility, such as education and health, or by effectively lowering the cost of mobility-enhancing goods through tax deductions and credits. This review summarizes the literature on the effects of government tax and spending policy on economic mobility, with a focus on the impacts of changes in marginal tax rates, the tax treatment of wealth, and government spending on health care, education, and Social Security. (Review 10 of 11.)