%0 Report %D 2021 %T How Much Does Social Security Offset the Motherhood Penalty? %A Matthew S. Rutledge %A Alice Zulkarnain %A Sara Ellen King %K Motherhood %K Social Security %X When women become mothers, their labor market income often takes a substantial hit. This “motherhood earnings penalty” becomes even larger with each additional child and permanently reduces earnings throughout mothers’ worklives. Previous studies have linked the penalty to mothers’ reduced educational attainment, more time out of the workforce, higher job search costs, and poor job matches. What remains unanswered is the extent to which the penalty impacts women’s retirement income. This brief, based on a recent study, answers part of this question by looking at how Social Security provisions address the motherhood penalty. The discussion proceeds as follows. The first section explains how Social Security can impact the motherhood earnings penalty and reduce retirement income shortfalls for mothers. The second section lays out the data and methodology for this analysis. The third section finds that Social Security offsets a substantial portion of the earnings penalty. The final section concludes that – despite the equalizing role played by Social Security – a motherhood earnings penalty will remain without policy intervention, such as earnings credits for caregivers. %B Briefs %I Center for Retirement Research at Boston College %C Chestnut Hill, MA %G eng %U https://crr.bc.edu/briefs/how-much-does-social-security-offset-the-motherhood-penalty/ %0 Report %D 2017 %T How Much Does Motherhood Cost Women in Social Security Benefits? %A Matthew S. Rutledge %A Alice Zulkarnain %A Sara Ellen King %K Labor force participation %K Motherhood %K Social Security %K Women and Minorities %X The increase in female labor force participation coupled with a higher number of women reaching retirement unmarried has increased the share of women claiming Social Security benefits earned through their own job histories. But they still bear the lion’s share of caregiving responsibilities, and the previous literature has provided clear evidence that motherhood reduces earnings during the childbearing and child-rearing years. What remains understudied is the extent to which mothers face lower lifetime earnings and, consequently, lower Social Security income. This paper uses the Health and Retirement Study (HRS) linked to administrative earnings records to answer three questions. First, how much less do mothers earn over their careers compared to childless women, and how much less do they earn for each additional child? Second, how do Social Security benefits differ between mothers and non-mothers? Third, how does each of the existing elements of the Social Security system that indirectly help mothers – namely, spousal benefits and the progressivity of the benefit formula – contribute to reducing the motherhood penalty? %B Working Papers %I Center for Retirement Research at Boston College %C Boston, MA %P 2-22 %8 10/2017 %G eng %U http://crr.bc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/wp_2017-14.pdf %0 Report %D 2017 %T How much does Out-of-Pocket Medical Spending Eat Away at Retirement Income? %A Melissa McInerney %A Matthew S. Rutledge %A Sara Ellen King %K Gender Differences %K Income %K Medicare %K Social Security %X The adequacy of retirement income – from Social Security benefits and other sources – is substantially reduced by Medicare’s high out-of-pocket (OOP) costs. This project uses the 2002-2014 Health and Retirement Study to calculate post-OOP benefit ratios, defined as the share of either Social Security benefits or total income available for non-medical spending. The project decomposes the share of income that is going toward premium payments and services delivered and examines how these post-OOP benefit ratios differ by age, gender, income, supplemental insurance coverage, and health status. The project also updates previous studies’ estimates to document how OOP spending and the post-OOP income ratios changed following the introduction of Medicare Part D prescription drug coverage in 2006 and the closing of the “donut hole” coverage gap in 2010, which decreased OOP costs under Part D for those spending moderate amounts on prescriptions. %B Working Papers %I Center for Retirement Research at Boston College %C Boston, MA %P 2-31 %8 10/2017 %G eng %U http://crr.bc.edu/working-papers/how-much-does-out-of-pocket-medical-spending-eat-away-at-retirement-income/ %0 Report %D 2017 %T Social Security and Total Replacement Rates in Disability and Retirement %A Khan, Mashfiqur R. %A Matthew S. Rutledge %A Geoffrey T. Sanzenbacher %K Consumption and Savings %K Disabilities %K Retirement Planning and Satisfaction %K Social Security %X Social Security provides higher replacement rates to disability insurance beneficiaries than retired beneficiaries. This fact reflects two factors: 1) Disability Insurance (SSDI) beneficiaries have lower career earnings, and Social Security benefits are progressive; and 2) SSDI benefits are not reduced for claiming early. This project uses the 1992-2010 waves of the Health and Retirement Study (HRS) linked to Social Security Administration earnings records to decompose the differences between the Social Security replacement rates for retired worker and SSDI beneficiaries into these two factors. The project also examines how the total replacement rate – which accounts for other sources of income in addition to Social Security – differs between retirees and SSDI beneficiaries to capture the difference in overall retirement security between the two groups. The results indicate that about half of the 10-percentage-point advantage in Social Security replacement rates for SSDI beneficiaries is due to the actuarial adjustment applied to retirement benefits, implying that career earnings are not that different between retired workers and SSDI beneficiaries. But total replacement rates are substantially lower for SSDI beneficiaries, which indicates that, despite Social Security’s vital role in providing a reliable income source, SSDI beneficiaries have much lower post-career well-being than retired workers. %B Working Papers %I Center for Retirement Research at Boston College %C Chestnut Hill, MA %8 05/2017 %G eng %U http://crr.bc.edu/working-papers/social-security-and-total-replacement-rates-in-disability-and-retirement/ %0 Report %D 2013 %T How Important Is Medicare Eligibility in the Timing of Retirement? %A Norma B Coe %A Khan, Mashfiqur R. %A Matthew S. Rutledge %K Medicare/Medicaid/Health Insurance %K Public Policy %K Retirement Planning and Satisfaction %K Social Security %X Eligibility for Medicare at age 65 is widely viewed as an important factor in retirement decisions. However, it has been difficult to quantify the influence of Medicare because eligibility for Medicare came at the same age as Social Security s Full Retirement Age (FRA). The recent rise in the FRA, along with other changes, has decoupled the age-related incentives in the two programs, making it easier to estimate the effect of Medicare eligibility on the timing of retirement. This brief, based on a recent study, provides such estimates of the importance of Medicare on retirement decisions. %I Boston, Center for Retirement Research at Boston College %G eng %4 Medicare/retirement planning/social Security/Public Policy %$ 69314