Optimal Design of Means Tested Retirement Benefits

James Sefton and Justin vandeVen

Economic Journal, 2009, vol. 119, issue 541, pages F461-F481

Abstract: Design of welfare benefits is a tricky business. In this regard, James Meade believed that it is important to avoid excessive distortions to the price of labour. He also recognised that means testing is a useful way of limiting the 'hideously expensive' cost of universal benefits provision; he conjectured that a 50% claw-back rate might be appropriate. We use a rational agent model to explore the welfare effects of alternative retirement benefits arrangements in the UK. Our analysis supports an extensive role for means testing, consistent with Meade's conjecture, and highlights the distortions associated with alternative methods of benefits financing. Copyright © The Author(s). Journal compilation © Royal Economic Society 2009.

Date: 2009

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1468-0297.2009.02316.x link to full text (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: http://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ecj:econjl:v:119:y:2009:i:541:p:f461-f481

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... al.asp?ref=0013-0133

Access Statistics for this article

Economic Journal is edited by Antonio Ciccone, Leonardo Felli, Steve Machin, Andrew Scott, Steve Pischke and David Myatt

More articles in Economic Journal from Royal Economic Society
Contact information at EDIRC.
Series data maintained by Christopher F. Baum ().