1997Unpublished venueOpen access

Unemployment Insurance Policy in New England: Background and Issues

Robert Tannenwald, Christopher J. O’Leary

Open full text 10 citations

Abstract

Most states have exhausted their unemployment insurance (UI) trust fund and borrowed from the federal government at least once during the past 35 years. Under such circumstances, states are required by law to raise UI taxes to replenish their trust funds and to pay off their debts to the federal government. Since higher UI taxes increase employer costs, replenishment forces states into a trade-off between economic competitiveness and trust fund adequacy. Competitive pressures have raised questions about prevailing standards of adequacy and the speed at which they should be attained. Consequently, several states are contemplating tax reductions despite low reserves. This article provides background information and analysis intended to clarify issues underlying the UI policies of New England in general and a tax reduction under consideration in Massachusetts in particular. The main point is that alternative UI policies should not be judged solely by the yardsticks of economic competitiveness and trust fund adequacy. Allocative neutrality and economic stabilization are also relevant concerns. UI systems necessarily force some industries to subsidize others, thereby distorting the allocation of resources in favor of subsidized firms. Yet, many of the same features responsible for these allocative distortions affect economic stability. Every UI alternative entails trade-offs among these rival concerns.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Most states have exhausted their unemployment insurance (UI) trust fund and borrowed from the federal government at least once during the past 35 years. Under such circumstances, states are required by law to raise UI taxes to replenish their trust funds and to pay off their debts to the federal government. Since higher UI taxes increase employer costs, replenishment forces states into a trade-off between economic competitiveness and trust fund adequacy. Competitive pressures have raised questions about prevailing standards of adequacy and the speed at which they should be attained. Consequently, several states are contemplating tax reductions despite low reserves. This article provides background information and analysis intended to clarify issues underlying the UI policies of New England in general and a tax reduction under consideration in Massachusetts in particular. The main point is that alternative UI policies should not be judged solely by the yardsticks of economic competitiveness and trust fund adequacy. Allocative neutrality and economic stabilization are also relevant concerns. UI systems necessarily force some industries to subsidize others, thereby distorting the allocation of resources in favor of subsidized firms. Yet, many of the same features responsible for these allocative distortions affect economic stability. Every UI alternative entails trade-offs among these rival concerns.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 10 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Most states have exhausted their unemployment insurance (UI) trust fund and borrowed from the federal government at least once during the past 35 years. Under such circumstances, states are required by law to raise UI taxes to replenish their trust funds and to pay off their debts to the federal government. Since higher UI taxes increase employer costs, replenishment forces states into a trade-off between economic competitiveness and trust fund adequacy. Competitive pressures have raised questions about prevailing standards of adequacy and the speed at which they should be attained. Consequently, several states are contemplating tax reductions despite low reserves. This article provides background information and analysis intended to clarify issues underlying the UI policies of New England in general and a tax reduction under consideration in Massachusetts in particular. The main point is that alternative UI policies should not be judged solely by the yardsticks of economic competitiveness and trust fund adequacy. Allocative neutrality and economic stabilization are also relevant concerns. UI systems necessarily force some industries to subsidize others, thereby distorting the allocation of resources in favor of subsidized firms. Yet, many of the same features responsible for these allocative distortions affect economic stability. Every UI alternative entails trade-offs among these rival concerns.

Key concepts: Allocative efficiency, Economics, Subsidy, Unemployment, Public economics, Government (linguistics), Balanced budget, Neutrality

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Unemployment Insurance Policy in New England: Background and Issues — Research Paper | ScholarLens