Behavioral Economics at Tax Time

Transcription

1 Behavioral Economics at Tax Time Joe Valenti, Director of Asset Building at the Center for American Progress Dr. Michal Grinstein-Weiss, Associate Director of the Center for Social Development at Washington University in St. Louis Gayle Hamilton, Senior Fellow in the Low-Wage Workers and Communities Policy Area at MDRC Wednesday, April 30, :00PM EDT 1

2 2

3 Overview of the SSRC Virtual library with over 2900 items Designed for: Researchers Practitioners Policymakers Includes several features: Library Browse Topics Our Librarian Recommends 3

4 Overview of the SSRC Includes several features (continued): Events Calendar Data sets and data sources Partners Gallery 4

5 Presenters Joe Valenti, Director of Asset Building at the Center for American Progress Dr. Michal Grinstein-Weiss, Associate Director of the Center for Social Development at Washington University in St. Louis Gayle Hamilton, Senior Fellow in the Low-Wage Workers and Communities Policy Area at MDRC 5

6 Q&A Participants can submit questions throughout the Webinar through the Question and Answer feature on the bottom right side of your screen throughout the Webinar Questions will be answered after the presentations. If we run out of time, questions will be answered and the responses will be posted on the SSRC with other Webinar materials after the event. 6

7 The Potential of Tax- Time Savings Research P R E S E N TAT I O N TO T H E S E L F - S U F F I C I E N C Y R E S E A R C H C L E A R I N G H O U S E J O E VA L E N T I, D I R E C TO R O F A S S E T B U I L D I N G A P R I L 3 0,

8 Tax filing presents a unique opportunity to examine how financial decisions are made 110 million tax filers received a federal income tax refund in million tax filers earning less than $50,000 received refunds in Their average refund is more than $2, percent of American households filing taxes receive refunds 3 Why? Misunderstood withholding forms, or inertia as financial circumstances change 4 Attraction of receiving a refund instead of facing a tax bill in April Refundable tax credits that benefit consumers even when they exceed one s tax liability 1,2,3 Internal Revenue Service, Statistics of Income 2010, Table Damon Jones, Inertia and Overwitholding: Explaining the Prevalence of Income Tax Refunds. Working Paper (National Bureau of Economic Research, 2010). 8

9 The Earned Income Tax Credit can result in substantial refunds for working families 27 million tax filers received the Earned Income Tax Credit, or EITC, in Households with dependent children can benefit substantially from the EITC 6 A single parent earning $20,000 would receive a credit of $2,852 with one child The maximum credit for families with three or more children exceeds $6,000 Depending on family size, the EITC phases out at incomes between $36,000 and $50,000 7 Benefits phase out at lower income ranges and are far less generous for tax filers without dependent children This includes childless adults as well as noncustodial parents 5 Jimmy Charite, Indivar Dutta-Gupta, and Chuck Marr, Studies Show Earned Income Tax Credit Encourages Work and Success in School and Reduces Poverty (Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 2012). 6,7 Internal Revenue Service, Publication 596: Earned Income Credit. 9

10 Tax refunds are used to meet deferred financial needs, plan for the future 84% Pay debt, cover bills EITC Recipients Use of Refunds in Two Cities (Selected Uses) 8 61% Childrelated expenses 47% Savings 34% Car purchase, repair 29% Furniture, appliances The EITC is often the largest single payment that a lowincome family receives all year Mental accounting suggests that refunds and bonuses are spent differently from regular paychecks Recipients often commit the refund to existing needs, such as appliances or winter coats, but may also devote a portion toward saving 8 Ruby Mendenhall and others, The Role of Earned Income Tax Credit in the Budgets of Low-Income Households, Social Science Review 86 (3) (September 2012). 10

11 Behavioral economics can help frame our understanding of financial decision-making Behavioral economics looks beyond rational economic theory to uncover motivations and biases Perceptions of gains and losses 2% raise under 4% inflation 2% pay cut under no inflation Perceptions of time Save More Tomorrow: would you commit part of your raise toward retirement? 9 The use of defaults 9 Richard Thaler and Shlomo Benartzi, Save More Tomorrow TM : Using Behavioral Economics to Increase Employee Saving, Journal of Political Economy 112 (1)

12 Benevolent paternalism: the use of defaults to drive behavior, case 1 (elevators and stairs) BEFORE AFTER Source: U.S. Centers for Disease Control, Healthier Worksite Initiative: Stairwell Appearance. 12

13 Benevolent paternalism: the use of defaults to drive behavior, case 2 (retirement savings) BEFORE AFTER 401(k) Plan Participation 401(k) Plan Participation 55% 82% 76% 20% All Workers Workers Age All Workers Workers Age Source: Fidelity 13

14 Tax filers are a captive audience for both behavioral research and policy development The study participants are already present Tax filers are already thinking about money and are looking for trusted sources Tax preparers already fulfill other roles for low-income consumers The good: benefits screening, healthcare access/enrollment, bank account opening The bad: refund anticipation loans, high-cost prepaid cards, predatory financial products Joe Valenti, Helping Working Families Build Wealth at Tax Time (Washington: Center for American Progress, 2013). 14

15 Savings matters for working families economic stability Having even a small amount of savings under $2,000 makes families significantly less likely to face food insecurity, forgone doctor visits, missed housing or utility payments, and having utilities shut off 11 In multiple national surveys, percent of respondents at all incomes report that they would probably or certainly not be able to come up with $2,000 in 30 days to deal with an emergency 12,13 In the absence of savings, low-income families may turn to high-cost, potentially predatory credit options such as payday or auto title loans 11 Gregory Mills and Joe Amick, Can Savings Help Overcome Income Instability? (Washington: Urban Institute, 2010). 12 Annamaria Lusardi, Daniel J. Schneider, and Peter Tufano, Financially Fragile Households: Evidence and Implications. Working Paper (National Bureau of Economic Research, 2011). 13 FINRA Investor Education Foundation, Financial Capability in the United States: Report of Findings from the 2012 National Financial Capability Study, May

16 Selected resources for further reading FINRA Investor Education Foundation, Financial Capability in the United States: Report of Findings from the 2012 National Financial Capability Study, May 2013: Richard Thaler and Shlomo Benartzi, Save More Tomorrow TM : Using Behavioral Economics to Increase Employee Saving, Journal of Political Economy 112 (1) 2004: Annamaria Lusardi, Daniel J. Schneider, and Peter Tufano, Financially Fragile Households: Evidence and Implications. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Spring 2011: Ruby Mendenhall and others, The Role of Earned Income Tax Credit in the Budgets of Low-Income Households, Social Science Review 86 (3) (September 2012): Gregory Mills and Joe Amick, Can Savings Help Overcome Income Instability? (Washington: Urban Institute, 2010): Joe Valenti, Helping Working Families Build Wealth at Tax Time (Washington: Center for American Progress, 2013): 16

17 Joe Valenti Director of Asset Building Center for American Progress 1333 H Street NW, 10 th Floor Washington, DC (202) jvalenti@americanprogress.org 17

18 Refund to Savings: Evidence of Tax- Time Saving in a National Randomized Control Trial Michal Grinstein-Weiss April 30, 2014 Note: Statistical compilations disclosed in this document relate directly to the bona fide research of and public policy discussions concerning the use of the IRS split refund capability and promotion of increased savings in connection with the tax compliance process. All compilations are anonymous and do not disclose cells containing data from fewer than ten tax returns. IRS Reg

19 About the Refund to Savings Initiative Largest saving experiment ever conducted in the United States in terms of sample size Developing and testing model for a universal, scalable savings policy Tax time is a major financial event for households 146M individual returns filed $323 billion refunded Median tax payer $**2,902

20 2013 Refund to Savings Initiative Randomized controlled trial in TurboTax 684,000 participants Household Financial Survey 6 months 20,000 survey takers 8,300 survey takers

21

22 In-Product Intervention

23 Motivational Prompts Family Future Emergency

24 Anchors

25 R2S Participant Characteristics Household Income: $13,294 Federal Tax Refund: $921 Claiming EITC: 39%; Median: $1,985 Age: 28 68% Single; 21% Head; 11% Married

26 Key Questions 1. Can behavioral economics techniques increase deposits to savings at tax time? 2. Does R2S increase savings 6 months later? 3. What factors are associated with saving?

27 Key Questions 1. Can behavioral economics techniques increase deposits to savings at tax time? 2. Does R2S increase savings 6 months later? 3. What factors are associated with saving?

28 Overall Tax Time Impact Increased number of people who deposited to savings 4,800 additional savers Increased amount deposited to savings $5.9 million dollars more deposited into savings

29 Percentage Who Split Refunds into Savings % of Participants Who Split Refund n = 228,828

30 Amount Deposited into Savings Amount Deposited to Savings ($) n = 228,828

31 Splitters: Amounts Deposited into Savings Amount Deposited to Savings ($) n = 10,365

32 Key Questions 1. Can behavioral economics techniques increase deposits to savings at tax time? 2. Does R2S increase savings 6 months later? 3. What factors are associated with saving?

33 Probability of Saving Refund 6 Months % of Participants Who Saved Refund * * n = 4,833

34 Percentage of Refund Saved 6 Months 5.0% Control Group Mean = 19.2% % of Refund Saved 0.7% 2.6% -1.2% Anchor 25% Anchor 50%* Anchor 75%** Anchor $100 or $250 n = 4,833

35 Probability of Access to $2K in an Emergency 6 Months after Tax Time 60% 56% 50% 44% 48% 50% 51% % of Respondents 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Control Anchor 25% Anchor 50% Anchor 75% Anchor $100 or $250

36 Key Questions 1. Can behavioral economics techniques increase deposits to savings at tax time? 2. Does R2S increase savings 6 months later? 3. What factors are associated with saving?

37 Factors Associated with Saving Financial shocks Debt Use of alternative financial services Asset limits

38 Financial Shocks 66% experienced at least one of the following: Trip to hospital Major vehicle repair Period of unemployment Legal fees/expenses n = 5,552

39 Saving 6 Months by Financial Shock % of Participants Who Saved Refund n = 5,556

40 Saving 6 Months by Type of Debt % of Participants Who Saved Refund n = 8,126

41 Saving 6 Months by Alternative Financial Services Use % of Participants Who Saved Refund Check casher Non-bank money order Non-bank wire transfer Payday loan Rent-to-own Payroll card Auto title loan n = 5,825

42 Asset Limits Percentage of Refund Saved 6 Months % of Refund Saved If I saved more, I would lose government benefits. n = 8,300

43 Summary R2S increased both the number and amount of deposits to savings Impact observed 6 months after tax filing Anchors more effective than prompts Financial shocks, debt, use of AFS, and asset limits associated with less saving

44 Thank You Intuit Inc. Ford Foundation Annie E. Casey Foundation University of North Carolina Anonymous funder

45 Encouraging Low- and Moderate- Income Tax Filers to Save Implementation and Interim Impact Findings from the SaveUSA Evaluation Gayle Hamilton On behalf of Gilda Azurdia, Stephen Freedman, Gayle Hamilton, and Caroline Schultz MDRC Behavioral Economics at Tax Time Webinar Hosted by SSRC & Asset Policy Project at CAP April 30, 2014

46 SaveUSA Overview SaveUSA encourages low- and moderateincome tax filers to deposit a portion of their tax refund directly into a match-eligible savings account. Funds in the account can later be used to pay for unexpected or emergency expenses or for any other purpose. 46

47 Funders Corporation for National and Community Service, Social Innovation Fund Bloomberg Philanthropies Open Society Foundations The Rockefeller Foundation The Annie E. Casey Foundation The Ford Foundation George Kaiser Family Foundation Met-Life Foundation Tulsa Community Foundation United Way of San Antonio and Bexar County 47

48 SaveUSA Partners Program Operations: Food Bank for New York City; Ariva (NYC); CAP Tulsa; United Way of San Antonio and Bexar County; Newark Now Financial Partners: 2 major national banks; 1 regional bank; 2 community banks; 1 credit union Management: NYC Office of Financial Empowerment; NYC Center for Economic Opportunity; Mayor s Fund to Advance New York City Evaluation: MDRC 48

49 SaveUSA Savings Opportunity Offers low- and moderate-income tax filers: The chance to deposit from $200 to $1,000 of their tax refund directly into a special savings account A 50 percent matching payment if they leave those savings untouched for about a year Opportunity to deposit again in subsequent tax return filing years 49

50 SaveUSA Eligibility and Enrollment Eligible if: at least 18 years old met income requirements ($50,000 or less for filers with dependent children and generally $25,000 or less for filers without dependents) had a refund of at least $200 Recruitment and enrollment process 17 Volunteer Income Tax Assistance (VITA) sites across four cities (NYC, Tulsa, Newark, and San Antonio) Offered to new and returning enrollees (and into 2014 in some cities) 50

51 Use of Behavioral Economics Principles in SaveUSA Simplified options to save A separate account for savings Electronic deposit into account Incentives to maintain savings Disincentives to remove even small amounts of savings 51

52 Comprehensive Evaluation of SaveUSA Implementation study in all 4 cities Impact study using randomized control trial (RCT) in 2 of 4 cities (NYC and Tulsa) Tax filers were randomly assigned to one of two research groups: SaveUSA group: Eligible to open a SaveUSA account and receive the savings match Regular Tax Filers group: Not eligible to open a SaveUSA account but could deposit tax refund dollars in other savings products 52

53 SaveUSA Implementation Research Questions How was the program marketed and operated? How do enrollees differ from tax filers who did not enroll? What proportion of participants received the match? How do participants who get the savings match differ from participants who did not? What are SaveUSA account savings and withdrawal patterns? 53

54 SaveUSA Impact Research Questions Impacts or added value of SaveUSA will be the differences in average outcomes between the SaveUSA and the Regular Tax Filers groups during an 18- to 36/42-month follow-up period. To what extent did SaveUSA increase eligible tax filers accumulated savings and other financial assets, financial well-being, ability to maintain control over family finances, or ability to weather financial emergencies? To what extent did SaveUSA decrease eligible tax filers total debt, reliance on high-interest credits and loans, and material hardship? Did any effects vary by city or for certain subgroups of tax filers? 54

55 Data Sources and Sample Sizes Baseline data (from tax returns, MDRC random assignment module, and VITA intake survey) SaveUSA account activity and match payment data from financial institutions Tax return data Follow-up surveys at 18 months (80% response rate) and months after enrollment Sample sizes vary, depending on the analysis: Demographics and account use patterns: over 2,300 Impacts on direct savings deposits: over 1,500 (100% of those randomly assigned) Impacts on survey-based outcomes: over 1,200 (80% of those randomly assigned) 55

56 Implementation Findings 56

57 Selected Characteristics at Baseline of 2011 SaveUSA Evaluation Enrollees Characteristics NYC TULSA NEWARK SAN ANTONIO ALL CITIES AVERAGE AGE (YEARS) SINGLE TAX FILER (%) SINGLE TAX FILER WITH DEPENDENT CHILDREN (%) AVERAGE ADJUSTED GROSS INCOME ($) 16,353 18,497 18,659 20,504 18,034 AVERAGE TOTAL TAX REFUND ($) 4,198 3,646 3,862 3,637 3,894 SAMPLE SIZE ,338 SOURCE: MDRC calculations from study enrollment data. Includes individuals ages

58 Recruitment and Enrollment SaveUSA was strongly marketed, and its procedures were successfully integrated into the tax return preparation process in a variety of settings. Depending on the city, between 6 and 13 percent of SaveUSA-eligible tax filers were interested in SaveUSA and enrolled in the study in SaveUSA study enrollees, whose average income was about $18K, shared many characteristics with nonenrollees but seemed to be better positioned to save. 58

59 SaveUSA Account Activity for 2011 Enrollees, by Program Year Tulsa and New York San Antonio and Newark Year 1 Year 2 Year 1 Year 2 Average Initial Deposit $490 $329 $522 $255 Received Savings Match 58% 27% 74% 28% Average Amount of Match $169 $95 $214 $96 Average Match, for People Who Received It $294 $351 $289 $345 Source: MDRC calculations from financial institution data. Includes individuals ages

60 Interim (18-Month) Impact (Effectiveness) Findings 60

61 $1,400 SaveUSA Hypothetical Impacts on Total Savings Impact on Total Savings $1,200 $1,000 $800 $600 $400 $200 $ Month of Follow-Up Relative to Study Entry 61

62 SaveUSA Increased the Deposit of 2011 Tax Refunds Into Savings 15% Percent who directly deposited into savings: 93% *** Impact = 78 percentage points 0 % % Average amount directly deposited into savings: $226 $686 *** Impact = $460 $0 $100 $200 $300 $400 $500 $600 $700 $800 Regular Tax Filers SaveUSA Source: MDRC calculations from 2010 tax return records 62

63 SaveUSA Increased the Deposit of 2012 Tax Refunds Into Savings 35% Impact = 26 percentage points 61% *** 0 % % Regular Tax Filers SaveUSA Source: MDRC calculations from responses to the SaveUSA 18-Month Follow-Up Survey 63

64 SaveUSA Increased the Proportion with Savings and the Amount of Savings as of the 18-Month Follow-Up Point Percent with savings: 72% 79% *** Impact = 7 percentage points 0 % % Average amount of savings: $1,730 $2,241 * Impact = $512 $0 $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 Regular Tax Filers SaveUSA Source: MDRC calculations from responses to the SaveUSA 18-Month Follow-Up Survey 64

65 SaveUSA Increased Support for Savings as of the 18-Month Follow-Up Point Percent who reported having a savings goal: 69% 78% *** 0 % % Percent who reported thinking it very important to have money in a savings account: 76% 85% *** 0% % Regular Tax Filers SaveUSA Source: MDRC calculations from responses to the SaveUSA 18-Month Follow-Up Survey 65

66 SaveUSA Increased Support for Savings as of the 18-Month Follow-Up Point Percent who reported using more of their tax refund for savings: 16% 26% *** 0% % Percent who reported keeping money in savings longer: 22% 30% *** 0 % % Regular Tax Filers SaveUSA Source: MDRC calculations from responses to the SaveUSA 18-Month Follow-Up Survey 66

67 SaveUSA Had No Effect on Debt as of the 18-Month Follow-Up Point Average amount of non-housing debt: $9,276 $9,695 $0 $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000 $7,000 $8,000 $9,000 $10,000 Regular Tax Filers SaveUSA Source: MDRC calculations from responses to the SaveUSA 18-Month Follow-Up Survey 67

68 SaveUSA Had No Effect on Financial Hardship or Other Aspects of Financial Well-Being as of the 18-Month Follow-Up Point Percent who reported using high-cost credit since study entry: 20% 21% 0% % Percent who reported having a financial hardship since study entry: 63% 63% 0 % % Regular Tax Filers SaveUSA Source: MDRC calculations from responses to the SaveUSA 18-Month Follow-Up Survey 68

69 SaveUSA Effects Did Not Significantly Differ By City Part 1 Percent directly depositing all or some of 2012 tax refund into savings account: 38% 59% *** 0% % Tulsa Regular Tax Filers Tulsa SaveUSA 33% 62% *** 0% % New York City Regular Tax Filers New York City SaveUSA Source: MDRC calculations from responses to the SaveUSA 18-Month Follow-Up Survey 69

70 SaveUSA Effects Did Not Significantly Differ By City Part 2 Average amount of savings as of 18-month point: $1,638 $2,266 $0 $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 Tulsa Regular Tax Filers Tulsa SaveUSA $1,775 $2,246 $0 $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 New York City Regular Tax Filers New York City SaveUSA Source: MDRC calculations from responses to the SaveUSA 18-Month Follow-Up Survey 70

71 What s Next in the SaveUSA Study? Report from which this presentation is drawn can be found on the MDRC website: Administration of the 36-to-42-month follow-up survey will take place May through Dec Final SaveUSA evaluation report will be publicly available in late

72 For more information on the SaveUSA evaluation, contact: Gayle Hamilton Gilda Azurdia Caroline Schultz Stephen Freedman 72

73 Q&A Please submit questions via the Question and Answer feature on the bottom right side of your screen! If we run out of time, questions will be answered and the responses will be posted on the SSRC with other Webinar materials after the event. Thank you for participating in today s Webinar. 73