Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Source documents If12143 Covid Ui Benefits Impact

If12143 Covid Ui Benefits Impact

Summary

A Congressional Research Service product, IF12143, dated June 24, 2022, titled How Did COVID-19 Unemployment Insurance Benefits Impact Consumer Spending and Employment? It describes the pandemic unemployment insurance measures Congress enacted: Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation (FPUC), Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation (PEUC) and Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA). It reports that FPUC payments totaled $442.3 billion and PUA payments totaled $131.2 billion. The report reviews research finding that the benefits supported household consumption and that their disincentive effects on work were smaller than expected. It closes with a list of references and is prepared by two CRS specialists in income security.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Full text

                                                                                                             June 24, 2022
How Did COVID-19 Unemployment Insurance Benefits Impact
Consumer Spending and Employment?
The COVID-19 pandemic dramatically disrupted the                PUA uniquely expanded the population eligible for UI
economy with mass layoffs and business closures. The              to include the self-employed, gig workers, and others
economy was shocked with stay-at-home and shutdown                not previously eligible for UI or those unable to work
orders designed to limit person-to-person contact. These          for certain COVID-19-related reasons. PUA payments
restrictions on the flow of labor and commerce reduced            totaled $131.2 billion.
economic demand. They also increased the number of
workers unable to work. Additionally, the increased            Research on the COVID-19 UI Benefits
workplace hazards created by the COVID-19 pandemic             An emerging research literature leverages new and rich
further limited certain jobseekers’ options for employment,    sources of data to examine both (1) the role that COVID-19
creating unusual shifts in the labor market. Congress          UI benefits—particularly FPUC and PUA—played in
recognized the potential threat that such massive earnings     boosting spending and consumption in U.S. households that
losses posed to the national and global economy and            experienced unemployment and (2) whether the
responded by augmenting the joint federal-state                supplemental UI benefits decreased the likelihood that
Unemployment Insurance (UI) system to maintain the             unemployed workers found work.
economy, among many other measures that provided
income support. Recent studies have examined the impact        A strength of recent studies is their use of new sources of
of these UI expansions on consumer spending and                data to evaluate UI impacts, particularly on personal
employment.                                                    consumption patterns. Measuring the personal consumption
                                                               response to government programs is traditionally
UI Benefits During the Pandemic                                challenging. Data on consumption are scarce and often
Congress enacted key changes in the UI system in response      contain significant measurement error, which makes
to the high levels of unemployment resulting from the          statistical inference difficult and imprecise. The research
COVID-19 pandemic and recession (February 2020 through         discussed below, however, benefits from new proprietary
March 2020). Typically, the UI system provides income          data sources that harness anonymized bank account and
support to unemployed workers through weekly benefit           lending data to provide weekly information on income,
payments. UI payments help (1) provide temporary partial       spending, and employment. Additionally, the research uses
wage replacement to involuntarily unemployed workers and       another new source of household level data: the Household
(2) stabilize the economy during recessions. Permanent-law     Pulse Survey, an experimental weekly survey conducted by
UI programs—Unemployment Compensation (UC) and                 the Census Bureau in collaboration with several federal
Extended Benefits (EB)—automatically respond to layoffs        agencies that includes information on individuals’
and business closures. However, unprecedented job loss         employment status, spending patterns, food security,
during the COVID-19 pandemic prompted Congress to              housing, physical and mental health, access to health care,
enact a series of extraordinary measures: Federal Pandemic     and application for and receipt of benefits. Some studies of
Unemployment Compensation (FPUC), Pandemic                     employment effects are also strengthened by the ability to
Emergency Unemployment Compensation (PEUC), and                analyze job applications to an online jobs platform.
Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA).
                                                               However, research findings related to the impact of the
These UI measures helped to maintain consumer spending         COVID-19 UI benefits may not be generalizable to other
and stabilize the economy during this period. PEUC was         periods or labor market conditions. The COVID-19
similar to congressional actions taken in previous             recession was created by an abrupt, exogenous shock
recessions as it extended the availability of regular UC       attributed to public health and safety concerns rather than a
benefits (available for up to 26 weeks) for up to an           series of economic stresses, which are associated with a
additional 49 weeks. However, two of these interventions,      more typical recession. Additionally, the federal response to
FPUC and PUA, were unprecedented when compared to              the pandemic included several other forms of assistance to
responses during previous recessions.                          employers and employees—such as the Payment Protection
                                                               Program, the Employee Retention Tax Credit, and
 FPUC provided a weekly supplement on top of all UI           Economic Impact Payments to households—that may also
   benefits. FPUC provided a $600 weekly supplement
                                                               have affected personal consumption and the incentives for
   between April and July 2020 and was reauthorized at         employment. COVID-19-specific factors, such as the
   $300 weekly from January 2021 through the beginning         availability (or scarcity) of vaccines, childcare, and in-
   of September 2021. FPUC payments from April 2020
                                                               person school, may have also contributed to unusual
   through September 6, 2021, totaled $442.3 billion.
                                                               patterns in returning to work during this period.

                                              https://crsreports.congress.gov
                       How Did COVID-19 Unemployment Insurance Benefits Impact Consumer Spending and Employment?

Consumer Spending and COVID-19 UI Payments                       While the recent research studies did find that the expanded
One of the primary objectives of UI is to alleviate the          UI benefits had disincentive effects on working, the impact
hardships that result from loss of wages during                  was smaller than expected when compared to estimates
unemployment. Typically, UI benefits replace up to 50% of        based upon models from prior recessions and non-
previous earnings, temporarily supporting workers’ basic         recessionary periods. Marinescu et al. (2021) reported that
needs, but UI benefit recipients’ expenditures are often         although the weekly $600 FPUC substantially decreased
lower than when they were employed. Without UI, the              applications to an online jobs platform, labor demand was
unemployed are more likely to report that they are               unusually depressed, and thus FPUC had little impact on
experiencing food and housing insecurity and are more            employment levels. Similarly, Ganong et al. (2021), using
likely to exhaust personal savings, sell assets, draw upon       bank account data, found a smaller negative impact on
retirement savings, and further reduce expenditures. Using       employment than expected. They observed that a high level
a range of data sources, recent studies indicate that COVID-     of employees being recalled to work by their former
19 UI payments played a key role in supporting                   employers helped reduce the disincentive effects of the
consumption and general economic security of households.         $600 FPUC payment on employment. Furthermore, they
                                                                 found that after the $600 payments ended, most individuals
Using Household Pulse Survey data, Carey et al. (2021)           did not exit unemployment despite a precipitous drop in
found that unemployed individuals who did not receive UI         their weekly income, suggesting that other factors were
benefits were more likely (than those who received UI) to        impeding employment. Coombs et al. (2021) found that it
report food insecurity, housing insecurity, and difficulty in    was the termination of the underlying UI benefit rather than
meeting household expenses. A working paper by Ganong            the loss of the $300 FPUC payment that increased the
et al. (2021) using bank account data found that once            likelihood of reemployment. Greig et al. (2021) found that
COVID-19 UI payments were deposited into workers’                PUA recipients were younger, had lower income, and were
accounts, spending immediately rebounded at or above pre-        more likely to have worked in non-traditional jobs or self-
unemployment levels (a result that is in contrast to             employment but had similar reemployment responses to
generally suppressed consumption patterns in previous            those receiving regular UC benefits.
recessions). Holzer et al. (2021) found that, in states that
terminated FPUC and PUA early, the unemployed were               References
five percentage points more likely to report difficulty          CRS Report R46687, Unemployment Insurance (UI)
paying for expenses than in states that continued the            Benefits: Permanent-Law Programs and the COVID-19
benefits. Similarly, Coombs et al. (2021) used payday loan       Pandemic Response.
data to examine consumption patterns of low-income               Carey, Patrick et al. “Applying for and Receiving
individuals who were receiving COVID-19 UI benefits
                                                                 Unemployment Insurance Benefits During the Coronavirus
immediately before early state terminations of these             Pandemic.” Monthly Labor Review (September 2021).
benefits. These researchers found that the loss of benefits
led to an average 20% reduction in consumption.                  Coombs, Kyle et al. “Early Withdrawal of Pandemic
                                                                 Unemployment Insurance: Effects on Earnings,
UI and Disincentives to Work                                     Employment and Consumption.” Harvard Business School,
The timing, generosity, and duration of UI benefits can          Working Paper (August 2021).
influence job search behavior of the unemployed. There is        Ganong, Peter et al. “Spending and Job Search Impacts of
existing evidence that higher benefit levels and lower           Expanded Unemployment Benefits: Evidence from
thresholds for benefit eligibility can cause recipients to be    Administrative Micro Data.” Becker Friedman Institute,
less willing to accept a job (and thus increase spells of        Working Paper (February 2021).
unemployment). However, previous economic research               Ganong, Peter et al. “US Unemployment Insurance
generally found that the employment disincentive effect of       Replacement Rates During the Pandemic.” Journal of
UI during recessionary periods is relatively small, as job       Public Economics, vol. 191, no. 104273 (September 2020).
openings are limited; thus, UI income is not a particularly
large contributor to high unemployment rates.                    Greig, Fiona et al. “When Unemployment Insurance
                                                                 Benefits are Rolled Back: Impacts on Job Finding and the
During the COVID-19 pandemic response, weekly UI                 Recipients of the Pandemic Unemployment Assistance
benefits often provided significantly higher levels of           Program.” JPMorgan Chase & Co. Institute (July 2021).
income replacement compared to previous recessions.              Holzer, Harry J. et al. “Did Pandemic Unemployment
Ganong et al. (2020) estimated that from April to July 2020,     Benefits Reduce Unemployment? Evidence From Early
the combination of the $600 weekly FPUC supplement plus          State-Level Expirations in June 2021.” NBER, Working
the regular UI payment replaced more than 100% of pre-           Paper no. 29575, December 2021.
pandemic earnings for more than 75% of UI beneficiaries.         Marinescu, Ioana et al. “The Impact of the Federal
The estimated replacement rate for workers receiving the         Pandemic Unemployment Compensation on Job Search and
$600 FPUC varied significantly, with a median replacement        Vacancy Creation.” NBER, Working Paper no. 28567,
rate of 145% and a median replacement rate of over 300%          March 2021.
for UI beneficiaries with the lowest 10% of earnings. These
changes (if implemented during a typical recession) would        Julie M. Whittaker, Specialist in Income Security
have been expected to substantially dampen the incentive         Katelin P. Isaacs, Specialist in Income Security
for workers to find employment.
                                                                                                                     IF12143


                                                https://crsreports.congress.gov
                      How Did COVID-19 Unemployment Insurance Benefits Impact Consumer Spending and Employment?




Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.




                              https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF12143 · VERSION 1 · NEW


File and source

File
IF12143-covid-ui-benefits-impact.pdf
Size
547,846 bytes
SHA-256
4a4b38d7976f16bbc162c3ba8890618686fd1108d8d5c3d2acf233025498068a
Our copy
IF12143-covid-ui-benefits-impact.pdf
Original
No public link identified.
Back to top