The 1996 US welfare reform introduced time limits on welfare receipt. We use quasi-experimental evidence and a lifecycle model of marriage, divorce, program participation, labor supply and savings to understand the impact of time limits on behavior and well-being. Time limits cause women to defer claiming in anticipation of future needs, an effect that depends on the probabilities of marriage and divorce. Time limits cost women 0.5% of life-time consumption, net of revenue savings redistributed by reduced taxation, with some groups affected much more. Expectations over future marital status are important determinants of the value of the social safety net.
We specify an equilibrium model of car ownership with private information where individuals sell and purchase new and second-hand cars over their life-cycle. This private information introduces a transaction cost, distorts the market and reduces the value of a car as a savings instrument. We estimate the model using Danish linked registry data on car ownership, income and wealth. The transaction cost, which we term the lemons penalty, is estimated to be 18% of the price in the first year of ownership, declining with the length of ownership. It leads to large reductions in the turnover of cars and in the probability of downgrading in the event of an adverse income shock. The size of the lemons penalty declines when uncertainty in the economy increases, as in recessions: large income shocks induce individuals to sell their cars, even if of good quality, and this reduces the lemons problem.
The 1996 US welfare reform introduced limits on years of welfare receipt. We show that this reduced program participation, raised employment for single mothers, and reduced divorce. A limited commitment, lifecycle model of labor supply, marriage and divorce, estimated on pre-reform data, replicates these effects. A large part of the responses occur in anticipation of benefit exhaustion, impacting primarily women with low potential earnings. The reform reduces lifetime utility of women, even allowing for the government savings, but has negligible effects on men. The expectation of marriage attenuates the losses for women and an increased probability of single-motherhood raises them.