Estimating the Effect of Unearned Income on Labor Supply, Earnings, Savings, and Consumption: Evidence from a Survey of Lottery Players

Knowledge of the effect of unearned income on economic behavior of individuals in general, and on labor supply in particular, is of great importance to policy makers. Estimation of income effects, however, is a difficult problem because income is not randomly assigned and exogenous changes in income are difficult to identify. Here we exploit the randomized assignment of large amounts of money over long periods of time through lotteries. We carried out a survey of people who played the lottery in the mid-eighties and estimate the effect of lottery winnings on their subsequent earnings, labor supply, consumption, and savings. We find that winning a modest prize ($15,000 per year for twenty years) does not affect labor supply or earnings substantially. Winning such a prize does not considerably reduce savings. Winning a much larger prize ($80,000 rather than $15,000 per year) reduces labor supply as measured by hours, as well as participation and social security earnings; elasticities for hours and earnings are around -0.20 and for participation around -0.14. Winning a large versus modest amount also leads to increased expenditures on cars and larger home values, although mortgages values appear to increase by approximately the same amount. Winning $80,000 increases overall savings, although savings in retirement accounts are not significantly affected. The results do not vary much by gender, age, or prior employment status. There is some evidence that for those with zero earnings prior to winning the lottery there is a positive effect of winning a small prize on subsequent labor market participation.

[1]  F. Skidmore.  Availability of Data from the Graduated Work Incentive Experiment , 1974 .

[2]  R. Avery,et al.  The Labor-Supply Response of Husbands. , 1974 .

[3]  D. Rubin,et al.  Reducing Bias in Observational Studies Using Subclassification on the Propensity Score , 1984 .

[4]  R. Thaler.  Saving, Fungibility, and Mental Accounts , 1990 .

[5]  David Card,et al.  Measuring the Effect of Subsidized Training Programs on Movements in Andout of Employment , 1987 .

[6]  Thomas MaCurdy,et al.  An Empirical Model of Labor Supply in a Life-Cycle Setting , 1981, Journal of Political Economy.

[7]  P. Cook,et al.  The Demand for Lottery Products , 1989 .

[8]  Jerry A. Hausman,et al.  Social Experimentation, Truncated Distributions, and Efficient Estimation , 1977 .

[9]  F. Stafford.  Income-Maintenance Policy and Work Effort: Learning from Experiments and Labor-Market Studies , 1985 .

[10]  John H. Pencavel,et al.  Chapter 1 Labor supply of men: A survey , 1986 .

[11]  D. Hyslop.  Rising U.S. Earnings Inequality and Family Labor Supply: The Covariance Structure of Intrafamily Earnings , 2001 .

[12]  Douglas Holtz-Eakin,et al.  The Carnegie Conjecture: Some Empirical Evidence , 1992 .

[13]  Jerry A. Hausman,et al.  Technical Problems in Social Experimentation: Cost Versus Ease of Analysis , 1983 .

[14]  D. Hyslop.  The Covariance Structure of Intrafamily Earnings, Rising Inequality and Family Labor Supply , 1994 .

[15]  D. Rubin,et al.  Assessing Sensitivity to an Unobserved Binary Covariate in a Nonrandomized Experiment with Binary Outcome. , 1982 .

[16]  D. Rubin.  Assignment to Treatment Group on the Basis of a Covariate , 1976 .

[17]  G. Cain,et al.  The Labor-Supply Response of Married Women, Husband Present. , 1974 .

[18]  Terry R. Johnson,et al.  Dynamic Hours of Work Functions for Husbands, Wives, and Single Females , 1984 .

[19]  Stanley H. Masters.  The Effect of Family Income on Children's Education: Some Findings on Inequality of Opportunity. , 1969 .

[20]  Jerry A. Hausman,et al.  Attrition Bias in Experimental and Panel Data: The Gary Income Maintenance Experiment , 1979 .

[21]  Donald B. Rubin,et al.  Bayesian Inference for Causal Effects: The Role of Randomization , 1978 .

[22]  R. Lalonde.  Evaluating the Econometric Evaluations of Training Programs with Experimental Data , 1984 .

[23]  O. Ashenfelter.  The Labor Supply Response of Wage Earners in the Rural Negative Income Tax Experiment , 1977 .

[24]  P. Holland.  Statistics and Causal Inference , 1985 .

[25]  A. Rees.  An Overview of the Labor-Supply Results , 1974 .

[26]  James J. Heckman,et al.  Alternative methods for evaluating the impact of interventions: An overview , 1985 .

[27]  J. Pechman,et al.  Welfare in Rural Areas: The North Carolina-Iowa Income Maintenance Experiment , 1979 .

[28]  Bruce Sacerdote,et al.  Why is There More Crime in Cities? , 1996, Journal of Political Economy.

[29]  D. Rubin,et al.  Assessing Sensitivity to an Unobserved Binary Covariate in an Observational Study with Binary Outcome , 1983 .

[30]  D. Rubin.  INFERENCE AND MISSING DATA , 1975 .

[31]  D. R. Cox,et al.  Planning of Experiments , 1959 .

[32]  I. Walker,et al.  The welfare effects of lotto: evidence from the UK , 1999 .

[33]  I. Friend,et al.  WINDFALL INCOME AND CONSUMPTION , 1960 .

[34]  J. Heckman,et al.  Female labor supply: A survey , 1986 .

[35]  T. Philipson.  Observational Agency and Supply-Side Econometrics , 1997 .

[36]  P. Cook,et al.  Selling Hope: State Lotteries in America. , 1990 .

[37]  D. Rubin,et al.  Statistical Analysis with Missing Data. , 1989 .

[38]  Petra E. Todd,et al.  Matching As An Econometric Evaluation Estimator , 1998 .

[39]  John C. Ham,et al.  Education, Unemployment, and Earnings , 1979, Journal of Political Economy.

[40]  J. Angrist,et al.  Empirical Strategies in Labor Economics , 1998 .

[41]  D. Rubin,et al.  The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects , 1983 .

[42]  R. Pollak,et al.  Parental Preferences and Provision for Progeny , 1982, Journal of Political Economy.

[43]  James J. Heckman,et al.  The Estimation of Income and Substitution Effects in a Model of Family Labor Supply , 1971 .