@article {9558,
	title = {The Affordable Care Act as retiree health insurance: implications for retirement and Social Security claiming},
	journal = {Journal of Pension Economics and Finance},
	volume = {18},
	year = {2019},
	pages = {415-449},
	type = {Journal},
	abstract = {This paper investigates the effects of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) on retirement. The first part of the paper is a difference-in-difference analysis of changes in retirement (and retirement expectations) before and after adoption of the ACA. We find no statistically significant evidence that ACA increased the propensity to retire or changed retirement expectations. The second part of the analysis is based on a structural retirement model. For those age 50 at the time ACA was introduced, the overall reduction in full-time work over the age span 54{\textendash}65 is simulated to be about 0.1 percentage points. Data are from the Health and Retirement Study.},
	keywords = {Affordable Care Act, Pensions, Policy, Retirement Planning and Satisfaction, Social Security},
	issn = {1474-7472},
	doi = {10.1017/S1474747218000033},
	url = {https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-pension-economics-and-finance/article/affordable-care-act-as-retiree-health-insurance-implications-for-retirement-and-social-security-claiming/24601D49E42B0714381FC2B9F4D55D10},
	author = {Alan L Gustman and Thomas L. Steinmeier and N. Tabatabai}
}
@article {7987,
	title = {Mismeasurement of pensions before and after retirement: the mystery of the disappearing pensions with implications for the importance of Social Security as a source of retirement support},
	journal = {Journal of Pension Economics and Finance},
	volume = {13},
	year = {2014},
	pages = {1-26},
	publisher = {13},
	abstract = {A review of the literature suggests that when pension values are measured by the wealth equivalent of promised defined benefit pension benefits and defined contribution balances for those approaching retirement, pensions account for more support in retirement than is suggested when their contribution is measured by incomes received directly from pension plans by those who have already retired. Estimates from the Health and Retirement Study for respondents in their early fifties suggest that pension wealth is about 82  as valuable as Social Security wealth. In data from the Current Population Survey (CPS), for members of the same cohort, measured when they are 65-69, pension incomes are about 58  as valuable as incomes from Social Security. Our empirical analysis uses data from the HRS to examine the reasons for these differences in the contributions of pensions as measured in income and wealth data. Key factors accounting for these differences include: a difference in methodology between surveys affecting what is included in pension income; some pension wealth {\textquoteright}disappears{\textquoteright} at retirement because respondents change their pension into other forms that are not counted as pension income; and the form of annuitization may influence the measure of pension income. A series of caveats notwithstanding, the bottom line is that CPS data on pension incomes received in retirement understates the full contribution pensions make to supporting retirees.  PUBLICATION ABSTRACT},
	keywords = {Net Worth and Assets, Pensions, Public Policy, Retirement Planning and Satisfaction, Social Security},
	author = {Alan L Gustman and Thomas L. Steinmeier and N. Tabatabai}
}
@article {8012,
	title = {The Social Security Windfall Elimination and Government Pension Offset Provisions for Public Employees in the Health and Retirement Study},
	journal = {Social Security Bulletin},
	volume = {74},
	year = {2014},
	note = {Date revised - 2015-04-01 Availability -  URL:http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/ssb/  Publisher{\textquoteright}s URL},
	pages = {55-69},
	publisher = {74},
	abstract = {This article uses Health and Retirement Study data to investigate the effects of Social Security{\textquoteright}s Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and Government Pension Offset (GPO) on Social Security benefits received by households. The provisions reduce benefits for individuals or the dependents of individuals whose work histories include jobs for which they were entitled to a pension and were not subject to Social Security payroll taxes ( noncovered  employment). We find that about 3.5 percent of households are subject to either the WEP or the GPO, and that the provisions reduce the present value of their Social Security benefits by roughly one-fifth. Households affected by both provisions experience benefit reductions of about one-third. Under the WEP, the Social Security benefit reduction is capped at one-half of the amount of the pension from noncovered employment, which substantially reduces the WEP penalty and prevents the WEP adjustment from falling disproportionately on households in the lowest earnings category.},
	keywords = {Employment and Labor Force, Income, Pensions, Public Policy, Retirement Planning and Satisfaction, Social Security},
	author = {Alan L Gustman and Thomas L. Steinmeier and N. Tabatabai}
}
@article {7791,
	title = {Redistribution under the Social Security benefit formula at the individual and household levels, 1992 and 2004},
	journal = {Journal of Pension Economics and Finance},
	volume = {12},
	year = {2013},
	note = {Times Cited: 0},
	pages = {1-27},
	publisher = {12},
	abstract = {Studies using data from the early 1990s suggested that while the progressive Social Security benefit formula succeeded in redistributing benefits from individuals with high earnings to individuals with low earnings, it was much less successful in redistributing benefits from households with high earnings to households with low earnings. Wives often earned much less than their husbands. As a result, much of the redistribution at the individual level was effectively from high earning husbands to their own lower earning wives. In addition, spouse and survivor benefits accrue disproportionately to women from high income households. Both factors mitigate redistribution at the household level. It has been argued that with the increase in the labor force participation and earnings of women, Social Security now should do a better job of redistributing benefits at the household level. To be sure, when we compare outcomes for a cohort with a household member age 51 to 56 in 1992 with those from a cohort born twelve years later, redistribution at the household level has increased over time. Nevertheless, as of 2004 there still is substantially less redistribution of benefits from high to low earning households than from high to low earning individuals.},
	keywords = {Adult children, Income, Pensions, Social Security, Women and Minorities},
	doi = {10.1017/s1474747212000108},
	author = {Alan L Gustman and Thomas L. Steinmeier and N. Tabatabai}
}
@article {5939,
	title = {Mismeasurement of Pensions Before and After Retirement: The Mystery of the Disappearing Pensions with Implications for the Importance of Social Security as a Source of Retirement Support},
	number = {WP 2012-268},
	year = {2012},
	institution = {Michigan Retirement and Disability Research Center, University of Michigan},
	address = {Ann Arbor, MI},
	abstract = {A review of the literature suggests that when pension values are measured by the wealth equivalent of promised DB pension benefits and DC balances for those approaching retirement, pensions account for more support in retirement than is suggested when their contribution is measured by incomes received directly from pension plans by those who have already retired. Estimates from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS) for respondents in their early fifties suggest that pension wealth is about 86 percent as valuable as Social Security wealth. In data from the Current Population Survey (CPS), for members of the same cohort, measured when they are 65 to 69, pension incomes are about 56 percent as valuable as incomes from Social Security. Our empirical analysis uses data from the Health and Retirement Study to examine the reasons for these differences in the contributions of pensions as measured in income and wealth data. A number of factors cause the contribution of pensions to be understated in retirement income data, especially data from the CPS. One factor is a difference in methodology between surveys affecting what is included in pension income, especially in the CPS, which ignores irregular payments from pensions. In CPS data on incomes of those ages 64 to 69 in 2006, pension values are 59 percent of the value of Social Security. For the same cohort, in HRS data, the pension value is 67 percent of the value of Social Security benefits. Some pension wealth  disappears  at retirement because respondents change their pension into other forms that are not counted as pension income in surveys of income. Altogether, 16 percent of pension wealth is transformed into some other form at the time of disposition. For those who had a defined benefit pension just before termination, the dominant plan type for current retirees, at termination 12 percent of the benefit was transformed into a state that would not count as pension income after retirement. For those who receive benefits soon after termination, there is a 3.5 percent reduction in DB pension value at termination compared to the year before termination. One reason may be the form of annuitization that is chosen. A series of caveats notwithstanding, the bottom line is that CPS data on pension incomes received in retirement understates the full contribution pensions make to supporting retirees.},
	keywords = {Methodology, Net Worth and Assets, Pensions, Retirement Planning and Satisfaction},
	url = {https://mrdrc.isr.umich.edu/pubs/mismeasurement-of-pensions-before-and-after-retirement-the-mystery-of-the-disappearing-pensions-with-implications-for-the-importance-of-social-security-as-a-source-of-retirement-support-2/},
	author = {Alan L Gustman and Thomas L. Steinmeier and N. Tabatabai}
}
@article {5907,
	title = {The Effects of Changes in Women s Labor Market Attachment on Redistribution Under the Social Security Benefit Formula},
	number = {WP 2011-248},
	year = {2011},
	institution = {Michigan Retirement and Disability Research Center, University of Michigan},
	address = {Ann Arbor, MI},
	abstract = {Studies using data from the early 1990s suggested that while the progressive Social Security benefit formula succeeded in redistributing benefits from individuals with high earnings to individuals with low earnings, it was much less successful in redistributing benefits from households with high earnings to households with low earnings. Wives often earned much less than their husbands. As a result, much of the redistribution at the individual level was effectively from high earning husbands to their own lower earning wives. In addition, spouse and survivor benefits accrue disproportionately to women from high income households. Both factors mitigate redistribution at the household level.   This paper compares outcomes for the earlier cohort with those of a cohort born twelve years later. With greater growth in women{\textquoteright}s earnings, the aim of the study is to see whether, after the recent growth in two earner households, and the growth in women{\textquoteright}s labor market activity and earnings, the Social Security system now fosters somewhat more redistribution from high to low earning households.   We use data from the Health and Retirement Study to study a population consisting of members of households with at least one person age 51 to 56 in either 1992 or in 2004. We use four different measures of redistribution: the ratio of the present value of benefits to taxes for households arrayed by decile of covered earnings; the fraction of total Social Security benefits redistributed from households with high earnings to those with low earnings; the share of total benefits paid to members of each cohort redistributed from households falling in the highest deciles of earners to those with lower covered earnings; and the rate of return to Social Security taxes for members with different amounts of covered earnings.   Considering differences in earnings between cohorts, women enjoyed a more rapid growth of labor force participation, hours of work and covered earnings than men. This increased the redistribution of Social Security benefits among households. Nevertheless, a considerable gap remains between the labor market activities and earnings of women versus men. As a result, the Social Security system remains much less successful in redistributing benefits from households with high covered earnings to those with lower covered earnings than in redistributing benefits from individuals with high covered earnings to those with lower covered earnings.},
	keywords = {Employment and Labor Force, Income, Pensions, Social Security, Women and Minorities},
	url = {https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/86250/wp248.pdf?sequence=1},
	author = {Alan L Gustman and Thomas L. Steinmeier and N. Tabatabai}
}
@article {5808,
	title = {Financial Knowledge and Financial Literacy at the Household Level},
	number = {16500},
	year = {2010},
	institution = {National Bureau of Economic Research},
	address = {Cambridge, MA},
	abstract = {This paper uses data from the Health and Retirement Study to explore the mechanism that underlies the robust relation found in the literature between cognitive ability, and in particular numeracy, and wealth, income constant. We have a number of findings. First, the more valuable the pension, the more knowledgeable are covered workers about their pensions. We suggest that causality is more likely to run from pension wealth to pension knowledge, rather than the other way around. Second, most measures of cognitive ability, including numeracy, are not significant determinants of pension and Social Security knowledge. Third, standardizing for incomes and other factors, a pension of higher value does not substitute for other forms of wealth. Rather, counting pensions in total wealth, those with more valuable pensions save more for retirement, other things the same. Fourth, there is no evidence that wealth held outside of pensions is influenced by knowledge of pensions.  In sum, numeracy does not influence wealth in whole or in part by affecting financial knowledge of one{\textquoteright}s pension plan, where financial knowledge of the pension then influences other decisions about retirement saving.  These findings raise questions about the mechanism that underlies the relation between cognition, especially numeracy, and wealth. From a policy perspective, they suggest that the numeracy-wealth relation should not be taken as evidence that increasing financial literacy will increase the wealth of households as they enter into retirement.},
	keywords = {Health Conditions and Status, Net Worth and Assets, Other, Pensions},
	doi = {10.3386/w16500},
	author = {Alan L Gustman and Thomas L. Steinmeier and N. Tabatabai}
}
@book {5284,
	title = {Pensions in the Health and Retirement Study},
	year = {2010},
	publisher = {Harvard University Press},
	organization = {Harvard University Press},
	address = {Cambridge and London},
	abstract = {Draws evidence from the National Institute on Aging{\textquoteright}s Health and Retirement Study to examine the pensions held by those approaching retirement age in the United States. Discusses theories explaining pensions; employment and retirement in the Health and Retirement Study; pension data in the Health and Retirement Study; pension plan participation in the Health and Retirement Study; pension plan type; imperfect knowledge of pension plan type; pension retirement ages; pension values; retirement incentives from defined benefit pensions; disposition of pensions upon leaving a job and pension incomes in retirement; and the changing role of pensions in total wealth.},
	keywords = {Employment and Labor Force, Net Worth and Assets, Pensions, Retirement Planning and Satisfaction},
	url = {https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674048669\&content=toc},
	author = {Alan L Gustman and Thomas L. Steinmeier and N. Tabatabai}
}
@article {5701,
	title = {Imperfect Knowledge of Pension Plan Type},
	number = {13379},
	year = {2007},
	institution = {National Bureau of Economic Research },
	address = {Cambridge, MA},
	abstract = {This paper investigates the reasons for discrepancies between the pension plan type reported by respondents to the Health and Retirement Study (HRS) and pension plan type obtained from documents produced by their employers, called Summary Plan Descriptions (SPDs). The analysis suggests the  discrepancies are sizable and are mainly due to misreports by respondents. Discrepancies between  respondent and firm reports of plan type are first documented for different years and from different data  sources. Changes over time in respondent and firm reports are analyzed for those who say their plans did  not change. Plan type from payroll data produced by Watson Wyatt, a pension consulting company, is  examined and compared to respondent reports for employees covered by Watson Wyatt plans. The Watson Wyatt payroll data report plan type without error, and yet we find the patterns of discrepancies between  respondent and firm provided data are the same as for the HRS employer and respondent data. We also explore  other evidence gathered by the HRS in the course of interviews and various experiments. Our findings that  errors are mainly the result of misreporting by respondents, together with findings from experiments, suggest a number of changes in survey design that can help to reduce reporting error. They also suggest that models of retirement and saving behavior should allow for imperfect knowledge by decision makers.},
	keywords = {Methodology, Pensions},
	doi = {DOI 10.3386/w13379},
	author = {Alan L Gustman and Thomas L. Steinmeier and N. Tabatabai}
}
