Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Demography
Published in: Demography 1/2018

29-01-2018

The Changing Safety Net for Low-Income Parents and Their Children: Structural or Cyclical Changes in Income Support Policy?

Authors: Bradley Hardy, Timothy Smeeding, James P. Ziliak

Published in: Demography | Issue 1/2018

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Refundable tax credits and food assistance are the largest transfer programs available to able-bodied working poor and near-poor families in the United States, and simultaneous participation in these programs has more than doubled since the early 2000s. To understand this growth, we construct a series of two-year panels from the 1981–2013 waves of the Current Population Survey Annual Social and Economic Supplement to estimate the effect of state labor-market conditions, federal and state transfer program policy choices, and household demographics governing joint participation in food and refundable tax credit programs. Overall, changing policy drives much of the increase in the simultaneous, biennial use of food assistance and refundable tax credits. This stands in stark contrast from the factors accounting for the growth in food assistance alone, where cyclical and structural labor market factors account for at least one-half of the growth, and demographics play a more prominent role. Moreover, since 2000, the business cycle factors as the leading determinant in biennial participation decisions in food programs and refundable tax credits, suggesting a recent strengthening in the relationship between economic conditions and transfer programs.
previous article Racial and Ethnic Variation in the Relationship Between Student Loan Debt and the Transition to First Birth
next article Differences in Child Health Across Rural, Urban, and Slum Areas: Evidence From India

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Footnotes
1
A recent study by Heflin et al. (2015) highlighted that although 35 states in 2014 had reportedly removed liquid asset tests, 28 of them still listed the test in their prescreening web-based tools for potential SNAP eligibility, which could have the effect of deterring some from applying.
 
2
Online Resource 1 details sample construction and characteristics of our CPS data set, including matching procedures. It also contains numerous specification checks on the baseline estimates presented in the main text.
 
3
The focus on federal EITC is informative for understanding state EITC participation and eligibility as well given that, by construction, almost all state EITC programs allocate refunds using federal rules and as a fixed proportion of federal EITC received (Johnson and Williams 2011).
 
4
With the 1994 survey, the CPS also asked about country of birth. Because the variable is available for only two-thirds of the sample period, we do not include it in our main analyses. We do, however, report the counterfactual simulations for 2000–2012 inclusive of nativity status in Tables S9 and S10 (Online Resource 1), with no substantive change in results reported in this article.
 
5
Because most research has found little evidence that marriage or fertility responds endogenously to the generosity of welfare benefits (Bitler et al. 2004; Hoynes 1997; Lopoo and Raissan 2014; Moffitt et al. 1998), the family size–specific EITC and SNAP parameters are treated as exogenous in the model.
 
6
The data on the state economic and policy environment are obtained from the University of Kentucky Center for Poverty Research, and the SNAP policy variables come from the Economic Research Service in the U.S. Department of Agriculture (http://​www.​ers.​usda.​gov/​data-products/​snap-policy-database.​aspx#.​UhQQ-ZLVC3I). All income and spending data are deflated by the 2010 Personal Consumption Expenditure Deflator (http://​www.​whitehouse.​gov/​sites/​default/​files/​docs/​erp2013/​ERP2013_​Appendix_​B.​pdf).
 
7
See http://​www.​bls.​gov/​lau/​lauov.​htm for details on construction of state unemployment rates.
 
8
For the minimum wage, we use the maximum of the state and federal minimum in each state and year; for the median wage, we compute the average annual hourly wage across the two years for each matched individual in the CPS and then compute the median in each state and year. We use the personal consumption expenditure deflator with 2010 base year to adjust for inflation.
 
9
A Wald test of the null hypothesis that the three unemployment rate coefficients are jointly zero is rejected at the p < .001 level.
 
10
Extending the notation in Eq. (1), for any given continuous regressor z k , the elasticity of participation in program y k (SNAP, EITC, and ACTC) equals \( {\delta}_k\left(\frac{\overline{z_k}}{\overline{y_k}}\right) \), where \( \overline{z_k} \) and \( \overline{y_k} \) reflect mean values of the policy variable and dependent variable, respectively.
 
11
Outreach spending has an unexpected negative sign. Ziliak (2015b) found a similar result in the study of cross-sectional SNAP participation, attributing this to the federal response to SNAP during the Great Recession as the coefficient is the expected positive sign if the sample period stops in 2006.
 
12
Wald tests of the joint hypothesis that the three unemployment rate coefficients are 0 (zero) is rejected at the 0.07, 0.10, 0.002, and 0.08 level for all, low-income, low-skilled, and single-mother families, respectively.
 
13
In an independent analysis conducted concurrent to this initial draft of this paper, Bitler et al. (2014) used annual cross-sections of IRS Statistics of Income data and found that single-year EITC participation was acyclical for single-mother families and countercyclical among married-couple families.
 
14
The Wald test of the three coefficients on unemployment being jointly 0 is rejected at p < .001 level for all families, low-income, and low skilled; and at p < .034 for single mothers.
 
15
A limitation of the counterfactual simulation is that the observable and unobservable characteristics of the examined subgroups could, themselves, change over time.
 
16
Our baseline models require that the head of household remain the same across the two survey waves, which could depress the influence of demographic factors in our simulations. As a robustness check, we reestimated the models in Tables 1 and 3 that relaxed the constant headship requirement. We report the counterfactual simulations in Tables S7 and S8 (Online Resource 1). As shown in those tables, the results are little changed from the baseline models.
 
17
The forecasted spending on the EITC and ACTC was before the ARRA expansions of the ACTC, which were set to expire in 2017, were extended indefinitely as part of the federal budget agreement reached in December 2015 (Rachidi 2015).
 
Literature
Akee, R., Simeonova, E., Costello, E. J., & Copeland, W. (2015). How does household income affect child personality and behaviors? (NBER Working Paper No. 21562). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
Almond, D., Hoynes, H. W., & Schanzenbach, D. W. (2011). Inside the war on poverty: The impact of food stamps on birth outcomes. Review of Economics and Statistics, 93, 387–403.
Autor, D. H. (2014). Skills, education, and the rise of earnings inequality among the “other 99 percent.” Science, 344, 843–851.
Autor, D. H., & Duggan, M. G. (2007). Distinguishing income from substitution effects in disability insurance. American Economic Review, 97, 119–124.
Autor, D. H., Katz, L. F., & Kearney, M. S. (2008). Trends in U.S. wage inequality: Revising the revisionists. Review of Economics and Statistics, 90, 300–323.
Ben-Shalom, Y., Moffitt, R., & Scholz, J. K. (2012). An assessment of the effectiveness of antipoverty programs in the United States. In P. N. Jefferson (Ed.), Oxford handbook of the economics of poverty (pp. 709–749). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Bitler, M. P., & Hoynes, H. W. (2010). The state of the social safety net in the post-welfare reform era. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 2010(2), 71–127.
Bitler, M., & Hoynes, H. (2016). The more things change the more they stay the same? The safety net and poverty in the Great Recession. Journal of Labor Economics, 34, S403–S444.CrossRef
Bitler, M., Hoynes, H., & Kuka, E. (2014). Do in-work tax credits serve as a safety net? (NBER Working Paper No. 19785). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
Bitler, M. P., Gelbach, J. B., Hoynes, H. W., & Zavodny, M. (2004). The impact of welfare reform on marriage and divorce. Demography, 41, 213–236.
Blank, R. M. (2009). What we know, what we don’t know, and what we need to know about welfare reform. In J. Ziliak (Ed.), Welfare reform and its long-term consequences for America’s poor (pp. 22–58). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Bloome, D., & Western, B. (2011). Cohort change and racial differences in educational and income mobility. Social Forces, 90, 375–395.CrossRef
Cancian, M., Han, E., & Noyes, J. L. (2014). From multiple program participation to disconnection: Changing trajectories of TANF and SNAP beneficiaries in Wisconsin. Children and Youth Services Review, 42, 91–102.CrossRef
Cancian, M., & Reed, D. (2009). Family structure, childbearing, and parental employment: Implications for the level and trend in poverty. In M. Cancian & S. Danziger (Eds.), Changing poverty, changing policies (pp. 92–121). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
Chetty, R., Friedman, J. N., & Saez, E. (2013). Using differences in knowledge across neighborhoods to uncover the impacts of the EITC on earnings. American Economic Review, 103, 2683–2721.CrossRef
Congressional Budget Office (CBO). (2013a). Growth in means-tested programs and tax credits for low-income households (CBO Publication No. 4504). Washington, DC: CBO.
Congressional Budget Office (CBO). (2013b). Refundable tax credits (CBO Publication No. 4152). Washington, DC: CBO.
Corcoran, M. (2001). Mobility, persistence, and the consequences of poverty for children: Child and adult outcomes. In S. H. Danziger & R. H. Haveman (Eds.), Understanding poverty (pp. 127–161). Cambridge, MA: Russell Sage Foundation.
Currie, J. M. (2006). Welfare vs. “making work pay.” In J. M. Currie, The invisible safety net: Protecting the nation’s poor children and families (pp. 11–31). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Currie, J. M. (2012). Programs to address child poverty and their effects. In P. N. Jefferson (Ed.), Oxford handbook of the economics of poverty (pp. 277–315). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Dahl, G. B., & Lochner, L. (2012). The impact of family income on child achievement: Evidence from the earned income tax credit. American Economic Review, 102, 1927–1956.CrossRef
Duncan, G. J., Magnuson, K., & Votruba-Drzal, E. (2014). Boosting family income to promote child development. Future of Children, 24(1), 99–120.
Duncan, G. J., Morris, P., & Rodrigues, C. (2011). Does money really matter? Estimating impacts of family income on young children’s achievement with data from random-assignment experiments. Developmental Psychology, 47, 1263–1279.CrossRef
Eissa, N., & Hoynes, H. (2004). Taxes and the labor market participation of married couples: The earned income tax credit. Journal of Public Economics, 88, 1931–1958.CrossRef
Evans, W. N., & Garthwaite, C. L. (2014). Giving mom a break: The impact of higher EITC payments on maternal health. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 6(2), 258–290.
Feng, S. (2008). Longitudinal matching of recent current population surveys: Methods, non-matches and mismatches. Journal of Economic and Social Measurement, 33, 241–252.
Fox, L., Wimer, C., Garfinkel, I., Kaushal, N., & Waldfogel, J. (2015). Waging war on poverty: Poverty trends using a historical supplemental poverty measure. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 34, 567–592.CrossRef
Ganong, P., & Liebman, J. B. (2013). The decline, rebound, and further rise in SNAP enrollment: Disentangling business cycle fluctuations and policy changes (NBER Working Paper No. 19363). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
Gundersen, C., & Ziliak, J. P. (2004). Poverty and macroeconomic performance across space, race, and family structure. Demography, 41, 61–86.
Hardy, B. L. (2014). Childhood income volatility and adult outcomes. Demography, 51, 1641–1665.
Hardy, B. L. (2016). Income instability and the response of the safety net. Contemporary Economic Policy, 35, 312–330.
Hardy, B. L., Muhammad, D., & Samudra, R. (2015). The effect of the earned income tax credit in the District of Columbia on poverty and income dynamics (Upjohn Institute Working Paper No. 15–230). Kalamazoo, MI: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
Heflin, C. M., Mueser, P., & Cronin, J. M. (2015). The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program asset limit: Reports of its death may be exaggerated (Working Paper No. 15–06). Columbia: University of Missouri.
Hotz, V. J., & Scholz, J. K. (2003). The earned income tax credit. In R. Moffitt (Ed.), Means-tested transfer programs in the United States (pp. 141–198). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRef
Hoynes, H. W. (1997). Work, welfare, and family structure: What have we learned? In A. Auerbach (Ed.), Fiscal policy: Lessons from economic research (pp. 101–146). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Hoynes, H., & Schanzenbach, D. W. (2016). U.S. food and nutrition programs. In R. A. Moffitt (Ed.), Economics of means-tested transfer programs in the United States (Vol. 1, 219–302). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Hoynes, H. W., Page, M. E., & Huff Stevens, A. (2006). Poverty in America: Trends and explanations. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(1), 47–68.CrossRef
Hoynes, H. W., & Schanzenbach, D. W. (2009). Consumption responses to in-kind transfers: Evidence from the introduction of the Food Stamp Program. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 1(4), 109–139.
Hoynes, H., Schanzenbach, D. W., & Almond, D. (2016). Long-run impacts of childhood access to the safety net. American Economic Review, 106, 903–934.
Johnson, N., & Williams, E. (2011). A hand up: How state earned income tax credits help working families escape poverty in 2011 (Report). Washington, DC: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
Jones, M. R. (2014). Changes in EITC eligibility and participation, 2005–2009 (CARRA Working Paper No. 2014–04). Washington, DC: Center for Administrative Records Research and Applications, U.S. Census Bureau.
Jones, M. R. (2015). The EITC over the Great Recession: Who benefited? (Report). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.
Kreider, B., Pepper, J. V., Gundersen, C., & Jolliffe, D. (2012). Identifying the effects of SNAP (food stamps) on child health outcomes when participation is endogenous and misreported. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 107, 958–975.CrossRef
Larrimore, J., Burkhauser, R. V., & Armour, P. (2013). Accounting for income changes over the Great Recession (2007–2010) relative to previous recessions: The importance of taxes and transfers (NBER Working Paper No. 19699). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
Leftin, J., Eslami, E., & Strayer, M. (2011). Trends in Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program participation rates: Fiscal year 2002 to fiscal year 2009 (Mathematica Policy Research Report). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service.
Lopoo, L. M., & Raissan, K. M. (2014). U.S. social policy and family complexity. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 654, 213–230.
Madrian, B. C., & Lefgren, L. J. (1999). A note on longitudinally matching Current Population Survey (CPS) respondents (NBER Working Paper No. 247). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
Meyer, B. D., Goerge, R. M., & Mittag, N. (2014). Errors in survey reporting and imputation and their effects on estimates of Food Stamp Program participation (CES Report No. 11-14). Washington, DC: Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
Meyer, B. D., Mok, W. K. C., & Sullivan, J. X. (2015). Household surveys in crisis (NBER Working Paper No. 21399). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
Meyer, B. D., & Rosenbaum, D. T. (2001). Welfare, the earned income tax credit, and the labor supply of single mothers. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116, 1063–1114.
Milligan, K., & Stabile, M. (2009). Child benefits, maternal employment, and children’s health: Evidence from Canadian child benefit expansions. American Economic Review, 99(2), 128–132.
Moffitt, R. A. (2013). The Great Recession and the social safety net. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 650, 143–166.
Moffitt, R. A. (2015a). Multiple program participation and the SNAP program. In J. Bartfeld, C. Gundersen, T. M. Smeeding, & J. P. Ziliak (Eds.), SNAP matters: How food stamps affect health and well being (pp. 213–242). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Moffitt, R. A. (2015b). The deserving poor, the family, and the U.S. welfare system. Demography, 52, 729–749.
Moffitt, R. A., Reville, R., & Winkler, A. E. (1998). Beyond single mothers: Cohabitation and marriage in the AFDC program. Demography, 35, 259–278.
Mollborn, S., Lawrence, E., James-Hawkins, L., & Fomby, P. (2014). How resource dynamics explain accumulating developmental and health disparities for teen parents’ children. Demography, 51, 1199–1224.CrossRef
Nichols, A., & Rothstein, J. (2016). The Earned Income Tax Credit. In R. Moffitt (Ed.), Economics of means-tested transfer programs in the United States (Vol. 1, pp. 137–218). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Piketty, T., & Saez, E. (2003). Income inequality in the United States, 1913–1998. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118, 1–39.CrossRef
Ratcliffe, C., McKernan, S.-M., & Finegold, K. (2008). Effects of food stamp and TANF policies on food stamp receipt. Social Service Review, 82, 291–334.
Slack, K. S., Kim, B., Yang, M.-Y., & Berger, L. M. (2014). The economic safety net for low-income families with children. Children and Youth Services Review, 46, 213–219.
Steuerle, E. (2015, June 25). Marginal tax rates and 21st century social welfare reform (Statement before the Joint Hearing of the Subcommittee on Human Resources, Committee on Ways and Means, and Subcommittee on Nutrition, Committee on Agriculture). Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
Tach, L. M., & Eads, A. (2015). Trends in the economic consequences of marital and cohabitation dissolution in the United States. Demography, 52, 401–432.
Tiehen, L., Jolliffe, D., & Smeeding, T. M. (2015). The effect of SNAP on poverty. In J. Bartfeld, C. Gundersen, T. M. Smeeding, & J. P. Ziliak (Eds.), SNAP matters: How food stamps affect health and well being (pp. 49–73). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Wheaton, L. (2007). Underreporting of means-tested transfer programs in the CPS and SIPP. In Proceedings of the American Statistical Association, Social Statistics Section [CD-ROM]. Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association.
Wooldridge, J. (2007). Inverse probability weighted estimation for general missing data problems. Journal of Econometrics, 141, 1281–1301.CrossRef
Ziliak, J. P. (2014). Supporting low-income workers through refundable child-care credits. In M. Kearney & B. Harris (Eds.), Policies to address poverty in America (pp. 109–118). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
Ziliak, J. P. (2015a). Recent developments in antipoverty policies in the United States. In J. K. Scholz, H. Moon, & S.-H. Lee (Eds.), Social policies in an age of austerity: A comparative analysis of the US and Korea (pp. 235–262). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Ziliak, J. P. (2015b). Why are so many Americans on food stamps? The role of the economy, policy, and demographics. In J. Bartfeld, C. Gundersen, T. M. Smeeding, & J. P. Ziliak (Eds.), SNAP matters: How food stamps affect health and well being (pp. 18–48). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Ziliak, J. P., Hardy, B., & Bollinger, C. (2011). Earnings volatility in America: Evidence from matched CPS. Labour Economics, 18, 742–754.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
The Changing Safety Net for Low-Income Parents and Their Children: Structural or Cyclical Changes in Income Support Policy?
Authors
Bradley Hardy
Timothy Smeeding
James P. Ziliak
Publication date
29-01-2018
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Demography / Issue 1/2018
Print ISSN: 0070-3370
Electronic ISSN: 1533-7790
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-017-0642-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Demography 1/2018 Go to the issue

OriginalPaper

Differences in Child Health Across Rural, Urban, and Slum Areas: Evidence From India

OriginalPaper

The Differential Mortality of Undesired Infants in Sub-Saharan Africa

OriginalPaper

Family Trajectories Across Time and Space: Increasing Complexity in Family Life Courses in Europe?

OriginalPaper

Three Dimensions of Change in School Segregation: A Grade-Period-Cohort Analysis

OriginalPaper

Racial and Ethnic Variation in the Relationship Between Student Loan Debt and the Transition to First Birth

OriginalPaper

Marital Status and Mothers’ Time Use: Childcare, Housework, Leisure, and Sleep