Home About us Contact | |||
Labor Supply Model (labor + supply_model)
Selected AbstractsTHE EFFECTS OF THE 1.03 MILLION YEN CEILING IN A DYNAMIC LABOR SUPPLY MODELCONTEMPORARY ECONOMIC POLICY, Issue 2 2009YUKIKO ABE In this paper I examine the effects of a means-tested transfer system in Japan ("1.03 million yen ceiling") in a dynamic labor supply model with endogenous retirement. In Japan, married women have reason to limit their annual earnings to no more than 1.03 million yen in order to receive a number of benefits available to low-income wives, and in fact often choose to do so. In a dynamic model, the optimal labor supply schedule follows a pattern that is not seen in a static framework, which I call the "spillover effect." The paper also examines the properties of dynamic welfare cost of this ceiling. (JEL J22, H24, H55) [source] The estimation of utility-consistent labor supply models by means of simulated scoresJOURNAL OF APPLIED ECONOMETRICS, Issue 4 2008Hans G. Bloemen We consider a utility-consistent static labor supply model with flexible preferences and a nonlinear and possibly non-convex budget set. Stochastic error terms are introduced to represent optimization and reporting errors, stochastic preferences, and heterogeneity in wages. Coherency conditions on the parameters and the support of error distributions are imposed for all observations. The complexity of the model makes it impossible to write down the probability of participation. Hence we use simulation techniques in the estimation. We compare our approach with various simpler alternatives proposed in the literature. Both in Monte Carlo experiments and for real data the various estimation methods yield very different results. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] Did the Tax Cuts Increase Hours of Work?KYKLOS INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF SOCIAL SCIENCES, Issue 3 2000A Statistical Analysis of a Natural Experiment Effects on hours worked of cuts in the Swedish income taxes are analyzed using longtitudinal data that cover periods before and after a major tax reform in 1991. The results show that working males probably changed their hours very little as a result of reduced marginal tax rates, while women increased their hours in the order of 10 percent. One can thus conclude that the tax reforms increased gender inequality in workhours. Most of this effect comes directly from the tax changes and not through a change in the after tax net wage, a result that is not explained by a conventional myopic labor supply model with a static budget set. [source] |