Ben M. Marx
Department of Economics
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
214 David Kinley Hall, 1407 W. Gregory
Urbana, IL 61801
NBER Working Papers and Publications
|September 2017||ProPelled: The Effects of Grants on Graduation, Earnings, and Welfare|
with Jeffrey T. Denning, Lesley J. Turner: w23860
We estimate the effect of grant aid on poor college students' attainment and earnings using student-level administrative data from four-year public colleges in Texas. To identify these effects, we exploit a discontinuity in grant generosity as a function of family income. Eligibility for the maximum Pell Grant significantly increases degree receipt and earnings beginning four years after entry. Within ten years, imputed taxes on eligible students' earnings gains fully recoup total government expenditures generated by initial eligibility. To clarify how these estimates relate to social welfare, we develop a general theoretical model and derive sufficient statistics for the welfare implications of changes in the price of college. Whether additional grant aid increases welfare depends on (1) ...
|January 2015||Borrowing Trouble? Student Loans, the Cost of Borrowing, and Implications for the Effectiveness of Need-Based Grant Aid|
with Lesley J. Turner: w20850
We use regression discontinuity and regression kink designs to estimate the impact of need-based grant aid on the borrowing and educational attainment of students enrolled in a large public university system. Pell Grant aid substantially reduces borrowing: among students who would borrow in the absence of a Pell Grant, every dollar of Pell Grant aid crowds-out over $1.80 of loans. A simple model illustrates that our findings are consistent with students facing a fixed cost of incurring debt. The presence of such a fixed cost may lead to the unintended consequence of additional grant aid decreasing some students' attainment. Empirically, we rule out all but modest average impacts of Pell Grant aid on attainment, and we provide suggestive evidence of heterogeneous effects consistent with our...
|January 2008||To Roth or Not? -- That is the Question|
with Laurence J. Kotlikoff, David Rapson: w13763
Do regular 401(k) and IRA accounts offer greater tax benefits than Roth 401(k)s and Roth IRAs? This is a tough question. Regular 401(k)s and IRAs save taxes in the short term; Roth accounts save taxes in the long term. Regular 401(k)s and IRAs are vulnerable to future income tax hikes, but may benefit from a future switch to consumption taxation if the switch exempts withdrawals from income taxation. Roth accounts are exempt from future income tax hikes, but are exposed to future consumption taxation. For any given assumption about future tax policy, assessing the relative merits of the two types of saving vehicles requires very accurate calculations of taxes in each future year -- calculations that incorporate not just standard federal income tax provisions, but also the Savers Credit...
|November 2006||Americans' Dependency on Social Security|
with Laurence J. Kotlikoff, Pietro Rizza: w12696
This paper determines the standard of living reductions that young, middle aged, and older households would experience were the U.S. government to cut Social Security benefits (but not taxes) to deal with its well documented (see Gokhale and Smetters, 2005) long-term fiscal crisis. To determine pre- and post-retirement living standards in the absence and presence of Social Security benefit cuts the paper relies on ESPlanner, a financial planning software program. ESPlanner calculates a household's highest sustainable living standard taking into account the household's economic resources including its claims to future Social Security benefits. The program also incorporates borrowing/liquidity constraints that limit households' abilities to smooth their living standards over their life cy...