create an 'Expanded Income' measure

[MattHJensen]

Our distributional tables currently use AGI as the tab variable. Instead they should use an "expanded income" measure that more accurately reflects economic well being.

Our first step should be to get close to JCT's measure of expanded income. We should be able to get the data from the source listed in the parenthesis.

Expanded income = Adjusted gross income (puf)

• tax-exempt interest (puf)
• workers' compensation (cps)
• nontaxable social security benefits (puf: gross-taxable)
• excluded income of U.S. citizens living abroad (?)
• value of Medicare benfits in excess of premiums paid (?)
• minimum tax preferences (puf or OTA paper)
• employer contributions for health plans (aligned MEPS + CPS)
• employer contributions to life insurance (?)
• employer share of payroll taxes (puf)

The main outstanding items are

• [x] Aggregate all of the items from the puf
• [ ] Impute minimum tax preferences from OTA paper
• [ ] Impute employer contributions for health plans
• [ ] Find and exploit sources for the ?s

Useful docs:

• JCT: Overview of the definition of income used by the staff of the joint committee on taxation in distributional analyses
• TPC: Measuring income for distributional analysis

[MattHJensen]

I learned from Dan that Gruber might be a source of imputation coefficients that we can use employer contributions for health plans.

[feenberg]

Attached is the information I used several years ago. It gives the probability of have employer sponsored health insurance by income class marital status and presence of children, and shows the average value of the insurance. It doesn't have a distribution about the mean, though, and I don't know if I can get an updated set of figures.

dan

On Mon, 27 Jun 2016, Matt Jensen wrote:

I learned from Dan that Gruber might be a source of imputation coefficients that we can use employer contributions for health plans.

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.[AHvQVayDl-hcZuLhfU9_aECimz_Ezo-Zks5qQEVAgaJpZM4D7PaU.gif]

1 1 0 19.8 3777 669 1 1 1 10.7 8060 2743 1 2 0 21.7 7717 2528 1 2 1 11.6 8705 2269 2 1 0 40.4 3632 690 2 1 1 32.6 7167 2595 2 2 0 36.6 7244 2790 2 2 1 25.3 7412 2723 3 1 0 69.6 4321 804 3 1 1 68.9 8838 3199 3 2 0 73.7 7720 3001 3 2 1 62.4 8347 3172 4 1 0 81.5 4947 919 4 1 1 79.8 10584 3951 4 2 0 87.9 8409 2690 4 2 1 85.2 9698 3628 5 1 0 85.5 5223 942 5 1 1 91.2 11464 3554 5 2 0 92.6 8514 2789 5 2 1 91.5 10404 3651 6 1 0 83.8 5370 1048 6 1 1 90.0 10139 4769 6 2 0 93.4 9070 2609 6 2 1 94.7 11162 3886 7 1 0 87.3 5645 1049 7 1 1 88.0 13786 3552 7 2 0 91.0 9619 2783 7 2 1 91.5 11784 4249 Income MARS Kids ESI Odds Avrg Employer Spending Avrg Household Spending

[MattHJensen]

Attached is the information I used several years ago. It gives the probability of have employer sponsored health insurance by income class marital status and presence of children, and shows the average value of the insurance. It doesn't have a distribution about the mean, though, and I don't know if I can get an updated set of figures.

@feenberg, is there a paper that described Gruber's methodology for this?

[MattHJensen]

Closing and reopening in TaxData: https://github.com/open-source-economics/taxdata/issues/35

[feenberg]

On Tue, 9 Aug 2016, Matt Jensen wrote:

  Attached is the information I used several years ago. It gives the
  probability of have employer sponsored health insurance by income class
  marital status and presence of children, and shows the average value of
  the insurance. It doesn't have a distribution about the mean, though, and
  I don't know if I can get an updated set of figures.

@feenberg, is there a paper that described Gruber's methodology for this?

No paper, but this description was provided by Jon:

Professor Gruber divided the Current Population Survey into cells by income, marital status and whether or not the household had children. Using the Medical Expenditure Panel Study data, he calculated for each household the probability that that household had employer based insurance and, conditional on having such insurance the average expenditure for that insurance by employers and by the individuals themselves. These data include, where applicable, the separate insurance of husbands and wives. A portion of employee expenditures for health insurance was treated as made through tax-favored flexible fringe accounts.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.[AHvQVVJjN4sbpATbZw7ZbuNYLqwBZ6KHks5qeP8WgaJpZM4D7PaU.gif]