Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/9845.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Is the Social Security Trust Fund Worth Anything?

Author

Listed:
  • Kent Smetters
Abstract
With over $1 trillion in assets, the U.S. Social Security trust fund is the largest pension reserve in the world, and potentially a model for other developed countries facing future financing problems. But are those assets actually worth anything?' This question has generated a heated debate in the U.S. as policymakers debate options for Social Security reform, with the understanding that the characterization of the trust fund influences these decisions. Some observers claim that the trust fund is not worth anything while others argue that it is valuable. However, different reasons are given for the same position. This paper provides a unified conceptual framework for thinking rigorously about the assets accumulated in the trust fund. Multiple perspectives of the trust fund are identified and are summarized under two categories: (I) storage technology arguments and (II) ownership arguments. Storage technology arguments focuses on whether the trust fund surpluses actually reduce the level of debt held by the public or, alternatively, are used to hide' smaller on-budget surpluses. Ownership arguments focus on property rights, i.e., how trust fund credits should be allocated regardless of whether they reduce the debt held by the public. Only the storage technology argument can be empirically tested, as we do herein. We find that there is no empirical evidence supporting the claim that trust fund assets have reduced the level of debt held by the public. In fact, the evidence suggests just the opposite: trust fund assets have probably increased the level of debt held by the public. Moreover, the adoption of a unified budget' framework in the late 1960s appears to play a statistically significant role in this result. We show how this counterintuitive result can be explained by a simple split the dollar game' where competition between two political parties exploits the ignorance of voters who don't understand that the government's reported budget surplus actually includes the off-budget' Social Security surplus. To be sure based on a limited annual time series (1949 2002) and so the results should be interpreted with caution. But the empirical tests are, if anything, biased toward finding a reduction in the level of debt held by the public, and not the increase that we find.

Suggested Citation

  • Kent Smetters, 2003. "Is the Social Security Trust Fund Worth Anything?," NBER Working Papers 9845, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:9845
    Note: AG PE
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w9845.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bosworth, Barry & Burtless, Gary, 2004. "Pension Reform and Saving," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 57(3), pages 703-727, September.
    2. Peter Diamond, 2004. "Social Security," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(1), pages 1-24, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sylvester J. Schieber, 2010. "Aging Populations, Pension Operations, Potential Economic Disappointment and Its Allocation," NBER Chapters, in: Demography and the Economy, pages 293-325, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Oshio, Takashi, 2004. "Social security and trust fund management," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 528-550, December.
    3. Kent Smetters, 2004. "Is the Social Security Trust Fund a Store of Value?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(2), pages 176-181, May.
    4. Jung, Juergen & Tran, Chung, 2022. "Social health insurance: A quantitative exploration," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    5. Jagadeesh Gokhale & Kent Smetters, 2003. "Fiscal and generational imbalances: new budget measures for new budget priorities," Policy Discussion Papers, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, issue Dec.
    6. Shantanu Bagchi, 2023. "Means Testing and Social Security in the U.S," Working Papers 2023-01, Towson University, Department of Economics, revised Mar 2023.
    7. Bagchi, Shantanu, 2019. "Differential mortality and the progressivity of social security," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 1-1.
    8. Bagchi Shantanu, 2017. "Can removing the tax cap save Social Security?," The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics, De Gruyter, vol. 17(2), pages 1-28, June.
    9. Shantanu Bagchi, 2024. "Means testing and Social Security in the United States," International Studies of Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(1), pages 68-91, March.
    10. Takashi Oshio, 2004. "Social Security and Trust Fund Management," NBER Working Papers 10444, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Sita Nataraj & John B. Shoven, 2004. "Has the Unified Budget Undermined the Federal Government Trust Funds?," NBER Working Papers 10953, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Liu, Liqun & Rettenmaier, Andrew J. & Saving, Thomas R. & Wang, Zijun, 2017. "The effects of trust fund surpluses on the rest of the federal budget," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 228-237.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Antón Pérez, José Ignacio, 2006. "The Reform of the Pension Systems in Easterm Europe and these Impact about the Efficiency and Equity/La reforma de los sistemas de pensiones en Europa del Este y su impacto sobre la eficiencia y la eq," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 24, pages 643(20á)-64, Agosto.
    2. Sylvester J. Schieber, 2010. "Aging Populations, Pension Operations, Potential Economic Disappointment and Its Allocation," NBER Chapters, in: Demography and the Economy, pages 293-325, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Heikki Oksanen, 2005. "Actuarial Neutrality across Generations Applied to Public Pensions under Population Ageing: Effects on Government Finances and National Saving," CESifo Working Paper Series 1501, CESifo.
    4. Martin S. Feldstein & Jeffrey B. Liebman, 2002. "The Distributional Effects of an Investment-Based Social Security System," NBER Chapters, in: The Distributional Aspects of Social Security and Social Security Reform, pages 263-326, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Robert J. Shiller, 2005. "The Life-Cycle Personal Accounts Proposal for Social Security: An Evaluation," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1504, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    6. Alisdair McKay, 2011. "Household Saving Behavior and Social Security Privatization," Boston University - Department of Economics - Working Papers Series WP2011-027, Boston University - Department of Economics.
    7. John Geanakoplos & Olivia S. Mitchell & Stephen P. Zeldes, "undated". "Social Security Money's Worth," Pension Research Council Working Papers 97-20, Wharton School Pension Research Council, University of Pennsylvania.
    8. Cremer, Helmuth & De Donder, Philippe & Maldonado, Dario & Pestieau, Pierre, 2007. "Voting over type and generosity of a pension system when some individuals are myopic," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(10), pages 2041-2061, November.
    9. David Robalino, 2005. "Pensions in the Middle East and North Africa: Time for Change," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 7427.
    10. Susanne Pech, 2004. "Adverse Selection with individual- and joint-life annuities," Economics working papers 2004-12, Department of Economics, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria.
    11. Peter Diamond, 2006. "Reforming Public Pensions in the US and the UK," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 116(509), pages 94-118, February.
    12. Shiller, Robert J., 1999. "Social security and institutions for intergenerational, intragenerational, and international risk-sharing," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 165-204, June.
    13. Mauro Visaggio, 2019. "Extending the retirement age for preserving the costitutive pension system mission," Public Finance Research Papers 40, Istituto di Economia e Finanza, DSGE, Sapienza University of Rome.
    14. Vittas, Dimitri, 1998. "Institutional investors and securities markets : which comes first?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2032, The World Bank.
    15. Gerhard Glomm & Juergen Jung, 2013. "The Timing of Redistribution," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 80(1), pages 50-80, July.
    16. Andersen, Torben M. & Bhattacharya, Joydeep & Gestsson, Marias H., 2021. "Pareto-improving transition to fully funded pensions under myopia," Journal of Demographic Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 87(2), pages 169-212, June.
    17. Timm Bönke & Markus M. Grabka & Carsten Schröder & Edward N. Wolff, 2020. "A Head‐to‐Head Comparison of Augmented Wealth in Germany and the United States," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 122(3), pages 1140-1180, July.
    18. Alicia H. Munnell, 2009. "Should social Security Rely Solely On The Payroll Tax?," Issues in Brief ib2009-9-16, Center for Retirement Research, revised Aug 2009.
    19. Peter Diamond, 1993. "Privatization of Social Security: Lessons from Chile," NBER Working Papers 4510, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Felipe Morandé & Raimundo Soto, "undated". "Reformas Económicas en Chile: Una Perspectiva Institucional," ILADES-UAH Working Papers inv121, Universidad Alberto Hurtado/School of Economics and Business.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • H5 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies
    • H6 - Public Economics - - National Budget, Deficit, and Debt

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:9845. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.