
handle: 10419/314497 , 11565/4075156
This paper tests whether partially unemployed workers value future preserved benefits when they bunch at the kink of the unemployment insurance benefit-withdrawal schedule. I extend the bunching formula of Saez (2010) to a dynamic setting that accounts for the value of future benefits tied to taxation. This yields new tests of tax-benefit linkage based on bunching heterogeneity. I verify in quasi-experiments that UI extension programs that decrease the value of future preserved benefits lead to more bunching and to lower labor supply. Last, a quantification exercise of the dynamic bunching formula provides extra support for a strong tax-benefit linkage. (JEL H24, H31, H71, J22, J65)
ddc:330, J65, tax-benefit linkage, H24, H31, unemployment insurance, TAX-BENEFIT LINKAGE, BUNCHING, UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE, bunching
ddc:330, J65, tax-benefit linkage, H24, H31, unemployment insurance, TAX-BENEFIT LINKAGE, BUNCHING, UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE, bunching
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 1 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
