Should Pensions Be Progressive? Yes, at Least in Germany!

H. Fehr, M. Kallweit, F. Kindermann
{"title":"Should Pensions Be Progressive? Yes, at Least in Germany!","authors":"H. Fehr, M. Kallweit, F. Kindermann","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1809699","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recent reforms that aim at reducing the upcoming burdens of population ageing might seriously harm low income individuals. An increase in old-age poverty and disability will be the result. Under this prospect, the present paper quantitatively characterizes the optimal progressivity of unfunded pension systems in an overlapping generations model with idiosyncratic income, disability and longevity risk as well as endogenous labor supply at the intensive and extensive margin. Focusing on the German pension system, our model features the most recent demographic projections and distinguishes three skill classes with skill-dependent risk profiles. Starting from a baseline path that reflects a purely earnings related pension system, we increase the degree of progressivity and compute the resulting macroeconomic, welfare and efficiency effects. For our most preferred parametrization we find an optimal flat-rate pension share of 40 percent. This indicates that in Germany recent reforms that aim at raising retirement age and cutting benefit levels should be complemented by increases in pension progressivity, since improved insurance provision dominates higher labor supply distortions. In addition, we also find that reductions in the benefit level (i.e. privatization) will only reduce economic efficiency.","PeriodicalId":175023,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Intertemporal Consumer Choice; Life Cycle Models & Savings (Topic)","volume":"44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Intertemporal Consumer Choice; Life Cycle Models & Savings (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1809699","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

Recent reforms that aim at reducing the upcoming burdens of population ageing might seriously harm low income individuals. An increase in old-age poverty and disability will be the result. Under this prospect, the present paper quantitatively characterizes the optimal progressivity of unfunded pension systems in an overlapping generations model with idiosyncratic income, disability and longevity risk as well as endogenous labor supply at the intensive and extensive margin. Focusing on the German pension system, our model features the most recent demographic projections and distinguishes three skill classes with skill-dependent risk profiles. Starting from a baseline path that reflects a purely earnings related pension system, we increase the degree of progressivity and compute the resulting macroeconomic, welfare and efficiency effects. For our most preferred parametrization we find an optimal flat-rate pension share of 40 percent. This indicates that in Germany recent reforms that aim at raising retirement age and cutting benefit levels should be complemented by increases in pension progressivity, since improved insurance provision dominates higher labor supply distortions. In addition, we also find that reductions in the benefit level (i.e. privatization) will only reduce economic efficiency.
养老金应该是累进的吗?是的,至少在德国是这样!
最近旨在减轻即将到来的人口老龄化负担的改革可能会严重损害低收入个人。其结果将是老年贫困和残疾的增加。在此背景下,本文在收入、残疾和寿命风险以及内源性劳动力供给均具有异质性的代际重叠模型中,定量表征了无准备金养老金制度的最优累进性。我们的模型以德国养老金制度为重点,以最新的人口预测为特征,并根据技能依赖的风险概况区分出三种技能类别。从反映纯粹与收入相关的养老金制度的基线路径开始,我们增加了累进程度,并计算了由此产生的宏观经济、福利和效率效应。对于我们最喜欢的参数化,我们发现最优的固定费率养老金份额为40%。这表明,在德国,最近旨在提高退休年龄和削减福利水平的改革应辅以养老金累进率的提高,因为改善的保险规定主导了更高程度的劳动力供应扭曲。此外,我们还发现,降低福利水平(即私有化)只会降低经济效率。
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