michaellevere.bsky.social
Assistant Professor of Economics at Colgate University. Avid cyclist. Studying disability policy and health/labor/public economics.
56 posts
463 followers
233 following
Prolific Poster
Conversation Starter
comment in response to
post
OBBB's tax provisions are more regressive than the Bush tax cut deal. The latter had refundable tax credit expansions helping the bottom OBBB lacks and didn't include the top rate cut/pass-through deduction.
And the Bush tax cut deal didn't cut SNAP/Medicaid at the same time.
comment in response to
post
Here’s a recent one we published on how changing work incentives for SSDI doesn’t affect disability beneficiaries work activity, along with exploring why it did not have effects
www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...
comment in response to
post
Ack! Bad writing :(
comment in response to
post
thank you for sharing! i appreciate it
comment in response to
post
Got it, thanks. Are there details anywhere on what the rule is? I'm teaching in my public econ class tomorrow about health and talking about the ACA, so would love to be able to share more details.
comment in response to
post
Is this the expiration of enhanced subsidies?
comment in response to
post
Nice! We'll be talking about it in mine in two weeks :)
comment in response to
post
Amplifying: @donmoyn.bsky.social @pamherd.bsky.social @kathleenromig.bsky.social @annielowrey.bsky.social @haroldpollack.bsky.social @bencasselman.bsky.social @kathleenjmullen.bsky.social
comment in response to
post
It's also important (and sad) to note this is now the only official evidence of this project as SSA removed all references and prior reports from its website. Needless to say, transparency in research is important and this is sad to see!
See paper at www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...
5/5
comment in response to
post
This idea of an offset rather than cash cliff to promote SSDI beneficiaries' work has been around for 25 years, but it just doesn't work. One idea that emerges is that of redemption costs: typically admin burden prevents accessing benefits, but here it may prevent effectively using the program.
4/5
comment in response to
post
The size of the incentive and general employment barriers also mattered. For those with the most prior work activity, the offset theoretically REDUCES incentive to work (but for this small group, employment did not change). 90% noted difficulty working, and 55% had zero earnings.
3/5
comment in response to
post
One big factor was administrative burden. Beneficiaries REALLY struggled with understanding rules (both for the new rules and the current rules). Frequent overpayments for those who worked made it that much harder to connect work activity to benefit amounts. Learning costs make a difference!
2/5
comment in response to
post
I'd be curious to hear about what you were all doing on disability benefit applications. We've been working on a tool (about to test in an RCT) that uses Medicaid data to automatically fill key parts of the child SSI application to simplify the app process. Would love to connect on this.