Suchergebnisse

In an overlapping generations economy with incomplete insurance markets, the introduction of an employment fund (akin to the one introduced in Austria in 2003, also known as 'Austrian backpack') can enhance production effciency and social welfare, if it complements, and in part substitutes, the two classical systems of public insurance: pay-as-you-go pensions and unemployment insurance (UI). We show this in a calibrated dynamic general equilibrium model with heterogeneous agents of the Spanish economy (2014). A 'backpack' (BP) employment fund is an individual (across jobs) transferable fund, which earns the economy interest rate as a return and is financed with a small payroll tax (a BP tax). The worker can use the fund if he or she becomes unemployed or retires. To complement the existing Spanish pension and UI systems with a 2% BP tax would be preferred to the status quo by more than 90% of the households of the calibrated economy, a percentage that can be higher with a more substantial BP (i.e. higher BP tax). Our model also provides a framework where other reforms (e.g. a partial, or complete, substitution of current unsustainable pension systems) can be quantitatively assessed. ; The ADEMU Working Paper Series is being supported by the European Commission Horizon 2020 European Union funding for Research & Innovation, grant agreement No 649396.

We would like to thank Javier Díaz-Giménez who has made this project possible, the editor and two referees for detailed comments that greatly improved the paper. This research started as part of the ADEMU project, "A Dynamic Economic and Monetary Union". ADEMU was funded by the European Union's Horizon 2020 Programme under grant agreement N. 649396 (ADEMU). ; In an overlapping generations economy with incomplete insurance markets, the introduction of an employment fund—akin to the one introduced in Austria in 2003, also known as 'Austrian backpack'—can enhance production efficiency and social welfare. It complements the two classical systems of public insurance: pay-as-you-go (PAYG) pensions and unemployment insurance (UI).We showthis in a calibrated dynamic general equilibrium model with heterogeneous agents of the Spanish economy in 2018. A 'backpack' (BP) employment fund is an individual (across jobs) transferable fund, which earns a market interest rate as a return and is financed with a payroll tax (a BP tax). The worker can use the fund while unemployed or retired. Upon retirement, backpack savings can be converted into an (actuarially fair) retirement pension. To complement the existing PAYG pension and UI systems with a welfare maximizing 6% BP tax would raise welfare by 0.96% of average consumption at the new steady state, if we model Spain as an open economy. As a closed economy, there are important general equilibrium effects, and as a result, the social value of introducing the backpack is substantially greater: 16.14%, with a BP tax of 18%. In both economies, the annuity retirement option is an important component of the welfare gains. ; European Union's Horizon 2020 Programme under grant agreement N. 649396 (ADEMU)

We assess the benefits of a potential European Unemployment Insurance System (EUIS) using a multi-country dynamic general equilibrium model with labour market frictions. Our calibration provides a novel diagnosis of the European labour markets, revealing the key parameters - in particular, job-separation and job-finding rates - that explain their different performance in terms of unemployment (or employment) and its persistence. We show that there are only small welfare gains from insuring against country-specific cyclical fluctuations in unemployment expenditures. However, we find that there are substantial gains from reforming currently suboptimal unemployment benefit systems. In spite of country differences, it is possible to unanimously agree on an EUIS with unlimited duration of eligibility, which eliminates the risk of not finding a job before the receipt of benefits ends, and a low replacement rate of 15%, which stabilizes incentives to work and save. We argue that such reforms are more effectively designed at the European level than at the national level because national governments do not take into account general equilibrium effects of their reforms on citizens in other countries. Concerns regarding the political feasibility of such a system are addressed through country-specific contribution payments that eliminate cross-country transfers. The resulting tax differences across countries may be the best statistic of their structural labour market differences, in terms of job creation and destruction, providing clear incentives for reform. ; The ADEMU Working Paper Series is being supported by the European Commission Horizon 2020 European Union funding for Research & Innovation, grant agreement No 649396.