The long-term effects of employer-sponsored pension plans on non-workplace returns on investments
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract What is the effect of having an employer-sponsored pension plan (EPP) on financial performance in non-workplace investments? This paper offers new insight into this unresolved empirical issue using administrative data on more than 345,000 tax filers from Canada. The paper makes two key contributions. First, an approach for inferring relative returns on investments is developed based on a longitudinal analysis of saving flow-of-funds and wealth data related to the use of the tax-free savings account (TFSA). The analysis shows that there is substantial heterogeneity in asset balances across individuals with equivalent saving histories. Second, having an EPP is shown to raise the average return on investment in other tax-preferred saving plans, albeit by a modest amount of approximately 0.50–1.25% over 5 years since the TFSA was introduced. This result is robust to augmenting the analysis to an instrumental variables approach, exploiting variation in the availability of EPPs across cohorts by sex and industry of employment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it