Relabeling, Retirement and Regret

Abstract

acquiring the data. We wish to thank various participants in seminars and conferences who have commented on the paper. In particular, we thank Roope Uusitalo and Satu Nivalainen. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research.NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peer-reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications.

The Impact of Social Security on Pension Claiming and Retirement: Active vs. Passive Decisions

“…In the case of benefit claiming, Behaghel and Blau (2012) find that in the US the spike in the claiming hazard at the FRA moves with an increase in the FRA in a way that is hard to explain with a standard model of behavior. Gruber et al (2020) find that simply "relabeling" a statutory retirement age affects claiming behavior in Finland, and those who claim at relabeled ages display "regret", they are more likely to return to work. This paper makes three important contributions relative to the earlier literature.…”

Communicating Social Security Reform

“…retirement tend to concentrate around the point where people become eligible for social security even when incentives to retire are not very strong, e.g. Gruber and Wise, 1998;Atalay and Barrett, 2015;Seibold, 2021;Gruber et al, 2020. In particular, Amin-Smith and Crawford (2018) and MacCuish ( 2022) Notes: Fitted values of the weight on the life table policy, p k,D , for D = (C, T ), i.e., for the control and treatment groups, for all cohort groups, k. Mean values for all but the three oldest cohort groups are overlaid. For the oldest cohort groups, p k,D is not identified as there is no discernible difference between the beliefs of the treatment and control groups.…”

“…4 Amin-Smith and Crawford (2018), Amin-Smith and Crawford (2018), Atalay and Barrett (2015), Behaghel and Blau (2012), Cribb et al (2016), Gruber et al (2020), Gruber and Wise (1998), Lalive et al (2020), MacCuish (2022), Manoli and Weber (2016), Mastrobuoni (2009), Seibold (2021).…”

Communicating Social Security Reform

“…retirement tend to concentrate around the point where people become eligible for social security even when incentives to retire are not very strong (e.g. Gruber and Wise, 1998;Atalay and Barrett, 2015;Seibold, 2021;Gruber et al, 2020). Hence one might expect misunderstanding of eligibilty age translates into misunderstanding of retirement age.…”

“…4 Amin-Smith and Crawford (2018), Atalay and Barrett (2015), Behaghel and Blau (2012), Cribb et al (2016), Gruber et al (2020), Gruber and Wise (1998), Lalive et al (2020), MacCuish (2022), Manoli and Weber (2016), Mastrobuoni (2009), Seibold (2021). 5 The US Social Security Amendments of 1983 raised the age of eligibility for unreduced retirement benefits to 67 by the year 2027, see https://www.ssa.gov/history/1983amend.html 6 Confusion about social security eligibility rules is not confined to Denmark.…”