Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte.
Terms of use:
Documents in
AbstractWe revisit the alleged retirement consumption puzzle. According to the life-cycle theory, foreseeable income reductions such as those around retirement should not affect consumption. However, we first recall that given higher leisure endowments after retirement, the theory does predict a fall of total market consumption expenditures. In order not to mistake this predicted drop for a puzzle we focus on housing consumption which can be plausibly regarded as complementary to leisure, and we control for the leisure change in our empirical specifications, using micro data for Germany (SOEP), where housing expenditures are observable as rents for the majority (60%), as well as dwelling relocations. We still find significant negative impacts of the retirement status on housing consumption, which is hard to reconcile with the life-cycle theory. For retirees we also find significant effects of the income reduction at retirement on housing. However, the effects are small in quantitative terms, given the lock-in nature of past housing decisions. Keywords: consumption smoothing, retirement-consumption puzzle, SOEP JEL codes: D91 (Intertemporal Consumer Choice; Life Cycle Models and Saving), E21 (Consumption; Saving; Wealth) * We thank Aunt Ingrid for (unknowingly) inspiring this paper. We also thank seminar participants at the IMK, Free University Berlin, the MEA SAVE conference, the Econometric Society World Congress, University Magdeburg, University Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, and the European Economic Association meeting for helpful comments, especially Viktor Steiner and Michael Hurd.† Beblo: University of Hamburg, miriam.beblo@wiso.uni-hamburg.de; Schreiber (corresponding author): Macroeconomic Policy Institute Düsseldorf (IMK) at Hans Boeckler Foundation, and Free University Berlin, svetosch@gmx.net, fax +49-211-7778-4596.‡ Earlier versions of this paper have been circulated already in 2010 under a different title, but given the rare-event nature of our study in the restricted relevant SOEP sample we had to wait for more panel waves to appear. The theoretical section has also been sharpened, and the overall role of leisure has been made explicit.