Social Security Around the World XI: Measuring Benefits
July 8, 2006 in Econometrics, Social Security | Permalink
Throughout the past week, I have spoke of the work disincentives many social security programs create. The question is: how do we measure these disincentives. The economics literature has given three different metrics to measure implicit social security wealth a retiree has and I will discuss each in turn.
Accrual
The accrual method measures how much the value social security benefits would increase (or decrease) if a person decides to postpone retirement by one year at age ‘t‘.
- Accrual=SSW{t+1} – SSW{t}
SSW_{t} is one’s implicit social security wealth if they retire at age ‘t’. This is calculated by taking the nominal benefits at each future date and multiplying them by the probability of surviving to that date as well as a discount factor.
Take the example below:
| Age | Benefit | P(Surv) | NPV factor | Value |
| 64 | 1000 | 1 | 1.00 | 1000.00 |
| 65 | 1000 | 0.75 | 0.94 | 795.00 |
| 66 | 1000 | 0.5 | 0.89 | 561.80 |
| 67 | 1000 | 0.25 | 0.84 | 297.75 |
| 68 | 1000 | 0 | 0.79 | 0.00 |
| 2654.55 |
Here, a pension for someone who retires at age 64 is $1000 per year. I assume that everyone dies at age 68. The total value of the individuals SSW is $2654. What if the person decided to postpone retirement to age 65?
| Age | Benefit | P(Surv) | Discount | Value |
| 64 | 0 | 1 | 1.00 | 0 |
| 65 | 2000 | 0.75 | 0.94 | 1590 |
| 66 | 2000 | 0.5 | 0.89 | 1123.6 |
| 67 | 2000 | 0.25 | 0.84 | 595.51 |
| 68 | 2000 | 0 | 0.79 | 0 |
| 3309.11 |
In my example, the individual receives $2000 per year if they retire at age 65 (instead of 64). After taking into account the probability of surviving to each age as well as the discount factor, the person’s new SSW is $3309. Thus the accrual amount is $655. By postponing retirement, the individual increases their Social Security Wealth. In many systems, this amount can be a large negative amount which gives individuals an incentive to retire early.
Peak Value
The peak value calculation is similar to the accrual method.
- Peak value=SSW{r*}-SSW{t}
This method takes the SSW at the age of retirement (‘r*‘) where r* is the age of retirement which maximizes the value of social security benefits and subtracts the SSW which would result from retirement this year. This method may be optimal to capture the fact that many people retire at a target year and don’t calculate their own incentives each year.
Option Value
The option value is the most sophisticated method. It takes into account utility from not working, but requires the researcher to model a utility function and assume parameter values. First, let us calculate the value of retirement (V)at date ‘s’. This is equal to the discounted expected utility of wages earned between the current date t and date ‘s-1′ plus the discounted expected utility of social security benefits earned between date ‘s’ and the end of life.
The option value is equal to: V(r*)-V(t). This is the difference between the discounted expected utility from retiring at r* (the date that maximizes utility) and the discounted expected utility from retirement today (date ‘t’). If the option value is positive, the individual will continue to work. If the option value is negative, the individual will retire.
A more comprehensive treatment is given in Stock and Wise (1990).
Stock and Wise (1990) “Pensions, the Option Value of Work and Retirement”, Econometrica, Vol. 58(5), pp. 1151-1180
Blogroll
- Barry Shafrin
- Becker-Posner
- Brew Crew Ball
- Cato Blog
- Courtside Analyst
- Covert Rationing
- Econbrowser
- EconLog
- Economist, The
- Ezra Klein
- Free exchange
- Global Financial Data
- Goolge News: HealthCare
- HC Policy & Marketplace Rev
- Health Affairs Blog
- Health Business Blog
- Health Care Blog
- Health Policy Wonk
- Healthcare Technology News
- JASON SHAFRIN's Homepage
- John Goodman
- la Vanguardia
- Marginal Revolution
- Marketplace (NPR)
- Medical Rants
- Megan McArdle
- Retired Doc’s Thoughts
- Running a Hospital
- Statistical Modeling
- The Treatment
- WonkBlog
Archives
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
Recent comments