Helping the Working Poor: Employer- vs. Employee-Based Subsidies

Stacy Dickert-Conlin and Douglas Holtz-Eakin

No 14, Center for Policy Research Reports from Center for Policy Research, Maxwell School, Syracuse University

Abstract: In the United States and Europe there has been renewed interest in subsidizing firms that employ disadvantaged workers as a means of addressing poverty and other social problems. In contrast, the prevailing practice is largely to provide social welfare benefits directly to individuals. Which approach is better? We re-examine the relative merits of employee- versus employer-based labor market subsidies and conclude there are good reasons to continue to rely on the direct, employee-based approach. In practice, low-wage workers are seldom either low-skill or low-income workers. Furthermore, workers who might quality for a firm-based subsidy are reluctant to so identify themselves for fear of being stigmatized or labeled as "needy." Thus, employer-based subsidy programs have lower participation rates and correspondingly higher per capita expenditures than employee-based subsidy programs.

JEL-codes: I38 J31 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Pages: 32 pages
Date: 1999-08
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://surface.syr.edu/cpr/29/ (application/pdf)

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: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:max:cprrpt:14

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Center for Policy Research Reports from Center for Policy Research, Maxwell School, Syracuse University 426 Eggers Hall, Syracuse, New York USA 13244-1020. Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Katrina Fiacchi ().