Skip to main content

Table 3 Estimated effects of EITC on low-skilled, childless individuals, aged 21–34, 1997–2006

From: Policy levers to increase jobs and increase income from work after the Great Recession

  (1) (2) (3)
Low-skilled treatment group Less-educated individuals Less-educated, black or Hispanic Less-educated single, black or Hispanic men
Log wages    
 EITC × low-skill −.10 (.09) −.11 (.08) −.13 (.09)
 EITC .08 (.07) .06 (.10) .08 (.11)
N 131,181 79,362 67,399
Employment    
 EITC × low-skill −.05 (.05) −.12 (.05) −.16 (.05)
 EITC .02 (.04) .03 (.03) .01 (.03)
N 150,486 90,408 74,913
Log earnings    
 EITC × low-skill −.58 (.49) −1.32 (.44) −1.75 (.56)
 EITC .35 (.38) .40 (.37) .35 (.29)
N 150,486 90,408 74,913
  1. Notes: Most notes from Table 2 apply, except those pertaining to variables measuring the number of children. The log wage regressions condition on positive earnings and hours of work in the previous year. “Less-educated” means that the individual has a high-school degree at most. The low-skilled treatment group is defined in the column heading. The control group does not change across columns and always includes all those with at least some college (regardless of race, ethnicity, or marital status). The estimated coefficients of the EITC-low-skill interactions are robust to including state-specific linear trends, or state-year interactions
  2. Source: Neumark and Wascher (2011), using CPS Annual Demographic Files