Take It or Leave It: Take-Up, Optimal Transfer Programs, and Monitoring

Laurence Jacquet
{"title":"Take It or Leave It: Take-Up, Optimal Transfer Programs, and Monitoring","authors":"Laurence Jacquet","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1592813","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper studies the optimal income redistribution and optimal monitoring when disability benefits are intended for disabled people but when some able agents with high distaste for work mimic them (type II errors). Labor supply responses are at the extensive margin and endogenous take-up costs may burden disabled recipients (because of either a reputational externality caused by cheaters or a snowball effect). Under paternalistic utilitarian preferences that do not compensate for distaste for work, inactive disabled recipients should obtain strictly lower consumption than disabled workers. The cost of monitoring supports adoption of an Earned Income Tax Credit. However, and surprisingly, with or without take-up costs, even if perfect monitoring is costless, it proves optimal to have type II errors. These results are robust to a utilitarian criterion. The paper provides numerical simulations calibrated on U.S. data.","PeriodicalId":190801,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Income & In-Kind Transfer Policy (Sub-Topic)","volume":"166 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"64","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Income & In-Kind Transfer Policy (Sub-Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1592813","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 64

Abstract

This paper studies the optimal income redistribution and optimal monitoring when disability benefits are intended for disabled people but when some able agents with high distaste for work mimic them (type II errors). Labor supply responses are at the extensive margin and endogenous take-up costs may burden disabled recipients (because of either a reputational externality caused by cheaters or a snowball effect). Under paternalistic utilitarian preferences that do not compensate for distaste for work, inactive disabled recipients should obtain strictly lower consumption than disabled workers. The cost of monitoring supports adoption of an Earned Income Tax Credit. However, and surprisingly, with or without take-up costs, even if perfect monitoring is costless, it proves optimal to have type II errors. These results are robust to a utilitarian criterion. The paper provides numerical simulations calibrated on U.S. data.
要么接受要么放弃:接受、最佳转移方案和监控
本文研究了当残障福利发放给残障人士,但某些对工作有高度厌恶的有能力的代理人模仿残障人士时的最优收入再分配和最优监控问题(II型错误)。劳动力供给反应具有广泛的边际效应,而内生的接受成本可能会给残疾接受者带来负担(因为骗子造成的声誉外部性或滚雪球效应)。在家长式的功利主义偏好下,对工作的厌恶不会得到补偿,不活跃的残疾接受者应该获得严格低于残疾工人的消费。监测成本支持采用劳动所得税抵免。然而,令人惊讶的是,无论有没有占用成本,即使完美的监测是无成本的,也证明了出现II型错误是最理想的。这些结果符合实用主义标准。本文提供了根据美国数据校准的数值模拟。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信