Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T14:16:47.009Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Bridging the gap in pension participation: how much can universal tax-deferred pension coverage hope to achieve?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 February 2014

NADIA S. KARAMCHEVA  and
GEOFFREY SANZENBACHER
NADIA S. KARAMCHEVA
Affiliation:
The Urban Institute (e-mail: [email protected])
GEOFFREY SANZENBACHER
Affiliation:
Analysis Group and The Center for Retirement Research at Boston College (e-mail: [email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In light of the declining pension coverage of low-income workers, policy makers have discussed requiring all employers to offer individual retirement accounts, similar to defined contribution plans. How likely to participate are workers who currently do not have access to a pension plan? We address this question by using plausibly exogenous variation in pension-plan availability to estimate the determinants of participation in a standard selection on unobservables model. We find that currently uncovered low-income workers are fairly likely to participate in a newly offered plan, yet they are much less likely to do so than currently covered workers.

Keywords

J08J26J32private pensionsparticipationself-selectionuniversal coverage
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Pension Economics & Finance , Volume 13 , Issue 4 , October 2014 , pp. 439 - 459
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bassett, William F., Fleming, Michael J., Anthony, M. J. and Rodrigues, P. (1998) How workers use 401(k) plans: the participation, contribution, and withdrawal decisions. National Tax Journal, 51: 263–289.Google Scholar
Beshears, John, Choi, James J., Laibson, David and Madrian, Brigitted C. (2010) The impact of employer matching on savings plan participation under automatic enrollment. In Wise, David A. (ed.), Research Findings in the Economics of Aging. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, pp. 311–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butrica, Barbara A. and Karamcheva, Nadia S. (2012) Automatic Enrollment, Employee Compensation, and Retirement Security. Urban Institute Program on Retirement Security Discussion Paper 12–02.Google Scholar
Butrica, Barbara A., Smith, Karen E. and Iams, Howard M. (2012) This is not your parents' retirement: comparing retirement income across generations. Social Security Bulletin, 72: 37–58.Google Scholar
Cameron, A. Colin and Trivedi, Pravin K. (2006) Microeconometrics: Methods and Applications. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Choi, James J., Laibson, David, Madrian, Brigitte C. and Metrick, Andrew (2004) For better or for worse: default effects and 401(k) savings behavior. In Wise, David A. (ed.), Perspectives in the Economics of Aging. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, pp. 81–121.Google Scholar
Dushi, Irena, Iams, Howard and Tamborini, Christopher R. (2011) Defined contribution pension participation and contributions by earnings levels using administrative data. Social Security Bulletin, 71: 67–76.Google Scholar
Dworak-Fisher, Keenan (2011) Matching matters in 401(k) plan participation. Industrial Relations, 50: 713–737.Google Scholar
Engelhardt, Gary V. and Kumar, Anil (2007) Employer matching and 401(k) saving: evidence from the health and retirement study. Journal of Public Economics, 91: 1920–1943.Google Scholar
Even, William. E. and MacPherson, David A. (2005) The effects of employer matching in 401(k) plans. Industrial Relations, 44: 525–549.Google Scholar
Freedman, David A. and Sekhon, Jasjeet S. (2010) Endogeneity in Probit Response Models. Political Analysis, 18(2): 138–150.Google Scholar
Green, William H. (2008) Discrete choice modeling. In Milles, Terence C. and Patterson, Karry (eds), Palgrave Handbook of Econometrics. London: Palgrave, pp. 473–556.Google Scholar
Heckman, James J. (1979) Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica, 47: 153–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huberman, Gur, Iyengar, Shena S. and Jiang, Wei (2007) Defined contribution pension plans: determinants of participation and contribution rates. Journal of Financial Services Research, 31: 1–32.Google Scholar
Hurd, Michael D. and Rohwedder, Susann (2012) Economic preparation for retirement. In Wise, David A. (ed.), Investigations of the Economics of Aging. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 77–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iwry, J. Mark and John, David C. (2007) Pursuing Universal Retirement Security through automatic IRAs. Retirement Security Project Paper 2007–2.Google Scholar
Karamcheva, Nadia S. and Sanzenbacher, Geoffrey (2010) Is Pension Inequality Growing? Center for Retirement Research at Boston College Issues in Brief, 10–1.Google Scholar
Kusko, Andrea L., Poterba, James M. and Wilcox, David W. (1998) Employee decisions with respect to 401(k) plans. In Mitchell, Olivia S. and Schieber, Sylvester J. (eds), Living with Defined Contribution Pensions. Philadelphia, PA: Pension Research Council and the University of Pennsylvania Press, pp. 98–112.Google Scholar
Madrian, Brigitte C. and Shea, Dennis F. (2001) The power of suggestion: inertia in 401(K) participation and savings behavior. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116: 1149–1187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munnell, Alicia. H., Sunden, Annika and Taylor, Catherine (2003) What determines 401(k) participation and contributions? Social Security Bulletin, 64(3): 64–75.Google Scholar
Munnell, Alicia. H., Kopcke, Richard, Golub-Sass, Francesca N. and Muldoon, Dan (2009) An update on 401(k) plans: Insights from the 2007 Survey of Consumer Finance. Center for Retirement Research at Boston College Working Paper 2009–26.Google Scholar
Munnell, Alicia H., Webb, Anthnony and Golub-Sass, Francesca N. (2012) The National Retirement Index: An Update. Center for Retirement Research at Boston College Issue in Brief 12–20.Google Scholar
Plan Sponsor Council of America (PSCA) (2012) 55th Annual Survey. PSCA's Annual Survey of Profit Sharing and 401(k) Plans. http://www.psca.org/55th_surveyGoogle Scholar
Purcell, Patrick (2007) Automatic Enrollment in 401(k) Plans. Congressional Research Service Report for Congress. http://www.aging.senate.gov/crs/pension18.pdfGoogle Scholar
Scholz, John K., Sedhadri, Ananth and Khitatrakun, Surachai A. (2006) Are Americans saving ‘optimally’ for retirement? Journal of Political Economy, 114: 607–643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soto, Maurico and Butrica, Barbara A. (2009) Will Automatic Enrollment Reduce Employer Contributions to 401(k) Plans? Urban Institute Program on Retirement Policy Discussion Paper 09–04.Google Scholar
Van de Ven, Wynand. P. M. M. and Van Pragg, Bernand M. S. (1981) The demand for deductibles in private health insurance: a probit model with sample selection. Journal of Econometrics, 17: 229–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, April Yanyuan, Karamcheva, Nadia S., Munnell, Alicia H. and Purcell, Patrick (2013) How does the changing labor supply behavior and marriage patterns of women affect social security replacement rates? Social Security Bulletin, 73(4): 1–29.Google Scholar