Early retirees under Social Security: health status and economic resources

Some proposals to change the Social Security program to ensure long-run solvency would reduce or eliminate benefits for early retirees. This article documents the health and financial resources of Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) beneficiaries aged 62-64. It identifies a substantial minority of early retirees who might be economically vulnerable if either the early eligibility age or normal retirement age was raised. Attention is directed at the extent to which poor health limits work in this age group and the extent to which curtailment of early OASI benefits might lead to increases in the Disability Insurance (DI) program rolls. Using a set of comprehensive health measures, we estimate that over 20 percent of OASI beneficiaries aged 62-64 have health problems that substantially impair their ability to work. This finding implies that in this age range, as many severely disabled persons receive OASI benefits as disability benefits. In fact, 12 percent of early beneficiaries would meet a more stringent criterion for being classified "disabled"--SSA's medical standard for disability benefits. The evidence therefore indicates that OASI functions as a substantial, albeit unofficial, disability program for early retirees. Compared with those who have no health problems or are less severely impaired, early OASI beneficiaries who meet the medical criteria for disability benefits are more likely to be living alone and more likely to be poor or "near poor." The great majority of the group--almost 80 percent--are women. Analysis of their earnings histories suggests that most of these beneficiaries do not satisfy the insured-status requirements for Disability Insurance benefits. The article considers the different roles of the OASI program and the DI program for health-impaired individuals aged 62-64. Disability modelers sometimes overlook an important aspect of program administration. Under customary screening procedures implemented in Social Security field offices, applicants for early OASI benefits who appear to be severely impaired simultaneously apply for DI benefits if they are disability insured. If they are found eligible for DI benefits, those applicants become DI beneficiaries. The implication is that raising the earliest entitlement age would have little impact on the DI rolls. Unless there are changes in eligibility criteria, the DI program would not serve as a safety net for many of the most severely disabled early retirees.     

Social Security's special minimum benefit

Social Security's special minimum primary insurance amount (PIA) provision was enacted in 1972 to increase the adequacy of benefits for regular long-term, low-earning covered workers and their dependents or survivors. At the time, Social Security also had a regular minimum benefit provision for persons with low lifetime average earnings and their families. Concerns were rising that the low lifetime average earnings of many regular minimum beneficiaries resulted from sporadic attachment to the covered workforce rather than from low wages. The special minimum benefit was seen as a way to reward regular, low-earning workers without providing the windfalls that would have resulted from raising the regular minimum benefit to a much higher level. The regular minimum benefit was subsequently eliminated for workers reaching age 62, becoming disabled, or dying after 1981. Under current law, the special minimum benefit will phase out over time, although it is not clear from the legislative history that this was Congress's explicit intent. The phaseout results from two factors: (1) special minimum benefits are paid only if they are higher than benefits payable under the regular PIA formula, and (2) the value of the regular PIA formula, which is indexed to wages before benefit eligibility, has increased faster than that of the special minimum PIA, which is indexed to inflation. Under the Social Security Trustees' 2000 intermediate assumptions, the special minimum benefit will cease to be payable to retired workers attaining eligibility in 2013 and later. Their benefits will always be larger under the regular benefit formula. As policymakers consider Social Security solvency initiatives--particularly proposals that would reduce benefits or introduce investment risk--interest may increase in restoring some type of special minimum benefit as a targeted protection for long-term low earners. Two of the three reform proposals offered by the President's Commission to Strengthen Social Security would modify and strengthen the current-law special minimum benefit. Interest in the special minimum benefit may also increase because of labor force participation and marital trends that suggest that enhancing workers' benefits may be a more effective means of reducing older women's poverty rates than enhancing spousal or widow's benefits. By understanding the Social Security program's experience with the special minimum benefit, policymakers will be able to better anticipate the effectiveness of other initiatives to enhance benefits for long-term low earners. This article presents the most recent and comprehensive information available about the special minimum benefit in order to help policymakers make informed decisions about the provision's future. Highlights of the current special minimum benefit include the following: Very few persons receive the special minimum benefit. As of December 2001, about 134,000 workers and their dependents and survivors were entitled to a benefit based on the special minimum. Of those, only about 79,000 received a higher total benefit because of the special minimum; the other 55,000 were dually entitled. (In effect, when persons are eligible for more than one type of benefit--that is, they are dually eligible--the highest benefit payable determines total benefits. If the special minimum benefit is not the highest benefit payable, it does not increase total benefits paid.) As of February 2000, retired workers who were special minimum beneficiaries with unreduced benefits and were not dually entitled were receiving, on average, a monthly benefit of $510 per month. That amount is approximately $2,000 less than the annual poverty threshold for an aged individual. Special minimum benefits provide small increases in total benefits. For special minimum beneficiaries who were not dually entitled as of December 2001, the average special minimum monthly PIA was just $39 higher than the regular PIA. Most special minimum beneficiaries are female retired workers. About 90 percent of special minimum beneficiaries are retired workers, and 77 percent of those retired workers are women. The special minimum benefit has never provided poverty-level benefits. Maximum payable special minimum benefits (unreduced for early retirement) equal 85 percent of the poverty level for aged persons, down from 96 percent at the provision's inception. Major public policy considerations raised by this analysis include the following: Social Security benefits alone do not protect all long-term low earners from poverty. Low earners with 30 years of earnings equal to the annual full-time minimum wage who retired in selected years from 1982 to 2000 received benefits that were 3.9 percent to 20.1 percent below the poverty threshold, depending on the year they retired. For 40-year earners, the range was 3.9 percent to 15.3 percent below poverty. Furthermore, in 1993, 29.2 percent of retired-worker beneficiaries who were poor had 30 or more years of coverage. The size of the universe of persistently low earners with significant attachment to the covered workforce is unknown. Available research that examines two 28-month periods suggests that only 4 percent to 6 percent of full-time, full-period earners had below-minimum wages for more than 12 consecutive months. Targeting enhanced benefits only toward long-term, regular workers who are low earners is difficult under the current Social Security program. All else being equal, if total wage-indexed lifetime covered earnings are the same for both a full-career low earner and for a high earner who has worked only occasionally, then their Social Security benefits will be identical. Social Security has no information on number of hours worked, hourly wages, or other information that could distinguish between two such persons.     

The U.S. study of work incapacity and reintegration

In many countries, including the United States, the number of persons being awarded long-term or permanent disability benefits has risen dramatically in recent years. Government agencies, advocates for the disabled, and others are looking for ways to help persons with disabilities return to the labor force. The Work Incapacity and Reintegration (WIR) Study was developed to address that issue. The United States and five other countries--Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Israel, and the Netherlands--have participated in a cross-national study of work incapacity under the auspices of the International Social Security Association. The study had two objectives: to examine the factors that influence the pattern of work resumption among persons disabled by a back condition and to identify the medical and nonmedical interventions that are most effective in helping such persons reenter the labor force. Samples for the U.S. national study were drawn from four cohorts: Social Security Disability Insurance (DI) beneficiaries, Supplemental Security Income (SSI) beneficiaries, and recipients of temporary disability insurance (TDI) benefits from the states of California and New Jersey. Only the TDI recipients were included in the comparative study. This article discusses the study design and methodology and summarizes the findings of the U.S. national study. Findings from the U.S. study show significant differences between the two cohorts in terms of work resumption and other characteristics. The proportions of respondents from the TDI cohorts who were working at the third and final study contact ranged from 53 percent to 65 percent, compared with less than 5 percent of the DI and SSI respondents. Respondents from the DI and SSI cohorts were on average about 10 years older than the TDI respondents, were less well educated, and reported more physical demands in their usual work. They also reported lower levels of functional capacity, higher levels of pain, and a much greater tendency to have other chronic illnesses. The types of medical treatments provided were remarkably uniform across cohorts and, within cohorts, between those who did and did not resume working. Thus, no medical intervention was identified that showed a significantly higher success rate in terms of facilitating a return to work. However, changes made in the work environment by the employer were an important factor in work reintegration; about 80 percent of respondents who resumed working did so with the help of workplace accommodations. In addition, since respondents with fewer physical demands in their job were more likely to return to work, there appears to be some potential for job retraining as a means of promoting a return to work. The Social Security Administration should consider these findings in developing strategies to help disabled workers reenter the labor force.     

Employment among Social Security disability program beneficiaries, 1996-2007

We use linked administrative data from program and earnings records to summarize the 2007 employment rates of Social Security disability program beneficiaries at the national and state levels, as well as changes in employment since 1996. The findings provide new information on the employment activities of beneficiaries that should be useful in assessing current agency policies and providing benchmarks for ongoing demonstration projects and future return-to-work initiatives. The overall employment rate--which we define as annual earnings over $1,000--was 12 percent in 2007. Substantial variation exists within the population. Disability Insurance beneficiaries and those younger than age 40 were much more likely to work relative to other Social Security beneficiaries. Additionally, substantial regional variation exists across states; employment rates ranged from 7 percent (West Virginia) to 23 percent (North Dakota). Moreover, we find that the employment rates among beneficiaries were sensitive to the business cycle and persistent over time.     

Disability benefit coverage and program interactions in the working-age population

Over three-fourths of the working-age population in the United States is insured for Disability Insurance (DI); this group is protected against a total loss of earned income typically associated with severe disability. However, little is known about the role the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program plays in protecting against the financial consequences of severe disability for this population. We find that over one-third (36 percent) of the working-age population is covered by SSI in the event of a severe disability. Three important implications follow, which we discuss in sequence below: (1) SSI increases the overall coverage of the working-age population; (2) SSI enhances the bundle of cash benefits available to disabled individuals; and (3) interactions with other programs also enhance the safety net, most notably in the area of health insurance coverage. Ignoring these implications could lead to inaccurate inferences about disability program coverage, health insurance coverage, and the well-being of working-age individuals with disabilities. The first major finding is that SSI substantially increases overall cash benefit coverage. Thus SSI dramatically increases protection against the financial risk of disablement in the working-age population. While roughly 23 percent of the U.S. working-age population was not insured for DI in November 1996, SSI provides coverage for more than half of this seemingly "uncovered" population. An important innovation of our analysis is that we account for the possibility that many of those who appear ineligible for SSI based on current income could become eligible as a result of a disability shock that causes their earnings to drop. Thus the estimated proportion that is protected by SSI increases when the possibility of earnings loss because of disability is considered. Considering DI and SSI together, roughly 90 percent of the working-age population would be potentially covered for benefits in the event of a disability. Those who are covered by SSI--as opposed to those covered by DI alone-tend to be relatively young, less educated, and in relatively poor health. The remaining 10 percent or so are not covered by either DI or SSI. This group is economically vulnerable in some sense (they are poorer, older, and more likely to be women than those covered only by DI), but they are not as economically vulnerable in terms of income, resource holdings, and private health insurance coverage as those who are eligible for SSI. A disproportionate share of those who are not covered by either DI or SSI consists of married women. The second major finding is that SSI substantially enhances the bundle of available cash benefits. Roughly one-third of those covered by DI are initially covered by SSI as well. SSI enhances the bundle of available cash benefits through two mechanisms: (1) SSI provides cash payments during the 5-month DI waiting period, and (2) SSI supplements the DI benefit after the DI waiting period for people whose initial SSI payment is larger than the DI benefit. We find that the role of SSI cash payments is temporary for most of those who are initially covered by both SSI and DI: They would receive SSI during the DI waiting period, but would lose SSI eligibility afterwards because the higher DI benefit completely offsets the SSI benefit. However, a smaller group of DI beneficiaries with low DI benefit levels would continue to be covered by both SSI and DI after the DI waiting period because the relatively low DI benefit would not completely offset the SSI benefit. The third major finding is that interactions with other programs also substantially enhance the safety net. The most important interactions involve health insurance coverage. In the working-age population, Medicare is available to DI beneficiaries, but only after a 24-month waiting period. By contrast, SSI is an important pathway to Medicaid benefits for severely disabled adults with limited income and resources and has no waiting period. SSI can provide a pathway to health insurance coverage during the 24-month Medicare waiting period for some DI beneficiaries through providing access to Medicaid. Interactions with other programs, such as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Food Stamp, Unemployment Insurance (UI), workers' compensation (WC), and veterans' disability programs, modify the role of DI and SSI in protecting people against the adverse financial effects of disablement. The nature of the interactions with other programs differs depending on individual circumstances. Employment-related programs (including UI, WC, and veteran's disability programs) are particularly important for those who are covered by DI. By contrast, the means-tested programs (including TANF and Food Stamp) are more important for those who would be eligible for SSI. In conclusion, SSI plays a substantial role in protecting working-age people against the adverse financial consequences of disablement through three mechanisms: (1) providing coverage to many who are not DI insured; (2) providing additional cash benefits to many who are DI insured and also covered by SSI; and (3) enhancing the social safety net by interacting with other programs, most notably Medicaid. Through these mechanisms, the role of SSI is substantial enough that it cannot be safely ignored in econometric and policy research on DI.     

Recent trends in the Social Security Disability Insurance Program

Earlier analysis documented the rapid growth of the Disability Insurance (DI) program from 1966 to 1975; this article discusses trends since 1975. Over the decade of the 1970's, the population insured for disability increased by 34 percent, and women as a proportion of the insured population rose from 32.4 percent in 1970 to 39.1 percent in 1980, reflecting the increase in female labor-force participation. Of disabled workers receiving benefits, the proportion that were women rose from 28.4 percent in 1970 to 32.4 percent in 1979. Although inflation caused total benefit costs to rise over the entire period, the number of DI beneficiaries began to decline in 1978. Disabled-worker awards reached a peak in 1975 and fell subsequently so that the 1969 and 1981 figures are approximately equal. Relative to 1970, the fraction of awards going to women increased, the share for persons aged 50-54 rose, and the proportion received by those aged 60-64 declined. Decreased in total awards, and hence recipients, stemmed primarily from higher rates of denial at both the initial application and the reconsideration stages. Higher denials were countered by substantial rises in the number of hearings and reversals by administrative law judges (ALJ's). in 1980, only 65 percent of all awards came from initial applications, while over a fourth resulted from ALJ reversals. In future years, recent legislative changes may be expected to curtail program expansion further.     

Receipt of multiple benefits by disabled-worker beneficiaries

In 1971, 44 percent of workers who had been currently entitled to social security disability insurance (DI) benefits for 1 year or more also received benefits from at least one other source. Their average disability insurance benefit was higher than that of persons who received only DI benefits. On the average, total benefits to those receiving multiple benefits were double the amounts paid to those receiving only DI benefits. The combined benefits for the former produced median replacement rates about 50 percent larger than the median replacement rates for the latter. High replacement rates--defined here as more than 80 percent of predisability earnings replaced by benefit--predominate among those with multiple benefits. Considering replacement rates based solely on disability insurance benefits substantially understates the extent to which benefits from public and private programs actually replace predisability earnings. Replacement rates based solely on DI benefits are generally higher for those receiving DI benefits only than for persons receiving multiple benefits. Limiting DI benefits to the replacement rate from DI benefits alone is disadvantageous for persons who receive only DI benefits, compared with those who also receive other benefits.     

Disabled workers and the indexing of Social Security benefits

We examine how benefit amounts and family income would change in response to changing the Social Security (Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance, OASDI) benefit indexing scheme. We are interested in a class of reform options designed to gradually slow the growth of benefits across the board. These options include the "price indexing" and "longevity indexing" proposals that have been part of the recent Social Security reform debate in the United States as well as a range of proposals developed in Europe. In this article, we focus on the distributional effects on the disabled. This focus leads to two comparisons. First, we compare disabled-worker beneficiaries to another group that would be affected by the changes, retired-worker beneficiaries. Second, we examine relative changes for particularly vulnerable subgroups of disabled workers. In the empirical analysis, we use two illustrative examples of potential indexing changes: Shifting from wage indexing to price indexing of the initial level of OASDI benefits; and Adjusting the initial benefit level for changes in life expectancy at retirement, that is, longevity indexing. We employ a historical counterfactual simulation to evaluate outcomes that would have resulted from changing the indexing scheme at one particular point in time. The hypothetical implementation period begins with the historical start of the current regime of indexing in 1979 and ends with one of the reference periods of the 1996 Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP), a 17-year period. However, we briefly assess the extent to which the results would be applicable to other time horizons. The analysis uses a cross-sectional sample of OASDI beneficiaries from the 1996 SIPP matched to Social Security administrative records. Further, we use total income from the SIPP (as adjusted to correspond to the calculated OASDI benefit amounts) to simulate eligibility for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and SSI benefit amounts. Our overall findings pertain to three outcomes: (1) effects on OASDI benefits viewed in isolation, (2) the offsetting role of SSI, and (3) the diluting effect of other sources of family income. We find that a broader perspective incorporating all three measures is necessary to obtain an appropriate picture of distributional outcomes. Even though the proposals were designed to have proportional effects, differences between groups--such as disabled and retired workers--can arise from differences in the timing of benefit claiming, mortality, and other factors. Specifically, our cross-sectional estimates suggest that the average change in OASDI benefit levels would be higher for disabled-worker beneficiaries than for retired-worker beneficiaries. These differences are attributable to the fact that a higher proportion of the stock of disabled beneficiaries have been on the Disability Insurance (DI) program rolls for a relatively short period of time and therefore have been affected by the shift in indexing scheme for a longer period of time. These results must be interpreted within the context of the methodology that was used. Further, other methodologies may lead to different results. For example, in previous studies that restricted the sample to a particular birth cohort, a higher proportion of disabled workers than retired workers were observed to have been on the DI program rolls for a relatively long period of time. Longer time on the beneficiary rolls corresponds to less exposure to the new indexing scheme and smaller estimated benefit changes. Thus, the same underlying factor-the timing of benefit claiming-influences both results. When the offsetting role of SSI benefits is also considered, we estimate smaller overall changes, especially for those at the bottom of the income distribution. When OASDI and SSI are considered together, differences in average benefit changes between disabled and retired workers are removed. This is due to a higher rate of SSI program participation among disabled workers than among retired workers. In addition, including SSI substantially reduces the proportion of disabled workers that have large simulated changes in benefit amounts. The estimated effects of changing the indexing scheme are further muted when total family income is considered. This occurs on a roughly equivalent scale for disabled and retired workers. As a result, changing the indexing scheme would produce little change in the status quo differences in poverty status between disabled and retired workers. Finally, we examine the most economically vulnerable subgroups of OASDI beneficiaries. Within the general group of beneficiaries, we find that the most vulnerable would be less affected than average, primarily as a result of the mitigating effect of SSI benefits. Further, within the population of disabled-worker beneficiaries, we examine economically vulnerable subgroups including those in the lowest primary insurance amount quartile, with less than a high school education, with an early onset of disability, or a primary mental impairment. These groups would also be less affected than average.     

The erosion of retiree health benefits and retirement behavior: implications for the disability insurance program

The effects of retiree health insurance on the decision to retire have not been examined until recently. It is an area of increasing significance because of rising health care costs for retirees, the uncertain future of Medicare, and increased life expectancy. In general, studies suggest that individual retirement decisions are strongly responsive to the availability of retiree health insurance. Early retiree benefits and retirement behavior are also important because they may affect the Social Security Disability Insurance (DI) program. It is not apparent that if a person loses retiree health benefits, or if fewer people are eligible for retiree health benefits in general, claims for DI will increase. The potential 2-year loss of health benefits may be a deterrent to leaving the labor force and claiming DI, although persons who are unable to work would leave the labor force even without health benefits. In order to understand how the decline in retiree health benefits may affect enrollment in DI, analysts must at least incorporate the role of coverage under the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (COBRA). That act provides many people with access to health insurance during the 2-year gap between eligibility for DI and Medicare. In fact, persons with sufficient means to retire early could use the income from Disability Insurance to buy COBRA coverage during the first 2 years of DI coverage. Determining the effect of the erosion of retiree health benefits on DI must account properly for the role of other factors that affect DI eligibility and participation. The financial incentives of Social Security, pension plans, retirement savings programs, health status, the availability of health insurance, and other factors influencing retirement decisions must be taken fully into account in order to isolate the precise effect of retiree health benefits.     

Actuarial status of the OASI and DI Trust Funds

This article presents the summary of the 1988 Annual Report of the Board of Trustees of the Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (OASDI) Trust Funds. It summarizes the financial condition and actuarial status of the OASDI program based on the alternative projections. The long-range 75-year estimates indicate that, under the intermediate (II-A and II-B) assumptions, the OASDI program will experience about three decades of positive annual balances, with continuing annual deficits thereafter. The positive balances in the first part of the 75-year projection period nearly offset the later deficits, so that the program, as a whole is in close actuarial balance. Over the long-range projection period, the OASDI program has an actuarial deficit of 0.58 percent of taxable payroll, based on the intermediate alternative II-B assumptions and calculated on a level-financing basis. The DI program by itself, however, is not in close actuarial balance for the next 75 years. The actuarial deficit for the DI program could be remedied by a small reallocation of the contribution rate from OASI to DI, in such a way that the OASI program would remain in close actuarial balance. Although the Trustees are not recommending such a reallocation, they note that the financial condition of the DI program will need to be carefully monitored.     

Workers' compensation: 1980-84 benchmark revisions

The first workers' compensation program was introduced 80 years ago. Its purpose was to compensate occupationally injured workers and their families for lost wages and medical expenses from job-related injury, regardless of fault. Today, each of the State and Federal programs that provides coverage to more than 86 percent of the work force uses a combination of private insurance, State or Federal funds, and self-insurance to meet its benefit obligations. The workers' compensation program is of continuing interest to the Social Security Administration (SSA) for several reasons. Since 1965, Social Security Disability Insurance benefits have been subject to reduction if such benefits, when combined with those provided under workers' compensation laws, exceed 80 percent of the worker's earnings. Because the two programs have gaps in protection as well as duplication in coverage, a periodic review of the workers' compensation program is necessary. In addition, SSA administers Part B of the Black Lung program--established to provide income-maintenance protection to coal miners disabled by pneumoconiosis--to about 1 million beneficiaries whose claims were filed before July 1973. This article provides revised benchmark data on the workers' compensation programs and presents a review of program operations during the early 1980's.     

Disability beneficiaries who work and their experience under program work incentives.

This research examines the return to work by Disability Insurance beneficiaries who were first entitled to benefits in 1980-81 and who were originally selected to be interviewed in the New Beneficiary Survey. To facilitate an examination of actual labor-force participation by beneficiaries, information on work and participation in program work incentives was collected from their claims folders. The analysis shows that approximately 10 percent of disability beneficiaries work during their initial period of benefit entitlement. About 80 percent are granted a trial work period, and over 70 percent of those granted trial work successfully complete it. More than half of them, however, were not successful in leaving the rolls through their work effort. In fact, benefit terminations due to work occurred for fewer than 3 percent of all beneficiaries in the cohort; approximately one-third of them had returned to the rolls by the end of the period under study. Beneficiaries most likely to make a work attempt were young and had a high level of education. Those with a high Social Security benefit amount were less likely to make a work attempt.     

Comparison of individual characteristics and death rates of disabled-worker beneficiaries entitled in 1972 and 1985.

The many changes to the Disability Insurance (DI) program that took place during the early 1980's suggest that there may be significant differences in the characteristics of newly awarded beneficiaries over time. This study compares two cohorts of newly entitled beneficiaries--one from 1972 and the other from 1985--in order to assess changes in individual characteristics and death rates between the pre-1980's and the late 1980's. The 1985 cohort had a greater percentage of beneficiaries with mental impairments and a lower percentage with diseases of the circulatory system. The 1985 cohort was also younger, more educated, had higher primary insurance amount levels, and had greater percentages of women and black beneficiaries. Although the death rates and survival curves for both cohorts were very similar, differences in the curves occurred for some covariate subgroups. When the populations were standardized, the estimated percentages of beneficiaries who survived 5 years after entitlement were 78 percent for the 1972 cohort and 77 percent for the 1985 cohort.     

Minimum wages and the economic well‐being of single mothers

Using pooled cross‐sectional data from the 1992 to 2005 March Current Population Survey (CPS), this study examines the relationship between minimum wage increases and the economic well‐being of single mothers. Estimation results show that minimum wage increases were ineffective at reducing poverty among single mothers. Most working single mothers were not affected by minimum wage hikes because they already earned wages above state and federal minimum wages. And less‐educated single mothers who were affected did not see a rise in net income because of negative employment and hours effects. For this low‐skilled population, a 10 percent increase in the minimum wage was associated with an 8.8 percent reduction in employment and an 11.8 percent reduction in annual hours worked. © 2008 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management     

How common is "parking" among Social Security Disability Insurance beneficiaries? Evidence from the 1999 change in the earnings level of substantial gainful activity

Fewer Social Security Disability Insurance (DI) beneficiaries have their earnings suspended or terminated because of work than those who are actually working, partly because beneficiaries "park" earnings at a level below substantial gainful activity (SGA) to retain benefits. We assess the extent of parking by exploiting the 1999 change in the SGA earnings level from $500 to $700 monthly for nonblind beneficiaries using a difference-indifference analysis that compares two annual cohorts of beneficiaries who completed their trial work period, one that was affected by the SGA change and one that was not. Our impact estimates, along with results from other sources, suggest that from 0.2 to 0.4 percent of all DI beneficiaries were parked below the SGA level in the typical month from 2002 through 2006. The SGA change did not yield any difference in mean earnings, although it did result in a small reduction in months spent off of the rolls because of work.     

Reported reasons retired workers left their last job: findings from the New Beneficiary Survey

About a third of all new retired-worker beneficiaries who had stopped work reported that the main reason they left their last job was a desire to retire. The existence of health problems was the next most frequently given reason, and it was reported by about a fourth of the group. These responses were made to questions in the 1982 New Beneficiary Survey, conducted by the Social Security Administration (SSA) in October-December 1982. Recently retired workers not only said they wished to retire, but more of them began receiving benefits at age 62 than at older ages; by age 65 most were beneficiaries. Forty-five percent of the men and almost 54 percent of the women had already left their last job at the time they received their first benefit. Married women in particular had not only stopped work but frequently had left their last job more than 3 years before they received their first benefit check.     

Actuarial status of the OASI (old age survivors insurance) and DI (disability insurance) Trust Funds

This article summarizes the current financial condition and actuarial status of the Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (OASDI) program, as shown in the 1987 Annual Report of the Board of Trustees. The Trustees note that the assets of the OASI and DI Trust Funds, on a combined basis, will be sufficient to permit the timely payment of OASDI benefits for many years into the future, on the basis of all four sets of assumptions shown in the report. For the next 75 years, the estimates show that the OASDI program, overall, is in close actuarial balance, based on the two intermediate sets of assumptions. The DI program by itself, however, is not in close actuarial balance for the next 75 years. The actuarial deficit for the DI program could be remedied by a small reallocation of the contribution rate from OASI to DI, in such a way that the OASI program would remain in close actuarial balance and OASDI benefits would not be affected. Although the Trustees are not recommending such a reallocation, they note that the financial condition of the DI program will need to be carefully monitored.     

The impact of changing financial work incentives on the earnings of Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) beneficiaries

SSDI beneficiaries lose their entire cash benefit if they perform work that is substantial gainful activity (SGA) after using Social Security work incentive programs. The complete loss of benefits might be a work disincentive for beneficiaries. We report results from a pilot project that replaces the complete loss of benefits with a gradual reduction in benefits of $1 for every $2 earned above an earnings disregard level. Beneficiaries who volunteered to participate in the project were randomly assigned to a group receiving the new program or to a control group. The policy led to a 25 percent increase in the percentage of beneficiaries with earnings above the annualized SGA amount, or $11,760 in 2009 dollars. It did not result in a reduction in benefit payments. © 2011 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.     

The Social Security Administration's 10-percent sample file of OASDI beneficiaries.

This is another in a series of technical articles describing Social Security Administration sample files and statistical systems. The focus of this article is the 10-percent sample file that provides program and demographic information on Social Security beneficiaries under the Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance program. The article explains the contents and availability of the 10-percent sample and presents several statistical tabulations as examples of the wide variety of data that can be developed from the file.