Social policy study unearths surprise
Although Working for Families has got more people into work and helped raise family incomes, it has failed to improve people’s health.
That result surprised researcher Frank Pega of the University of Otago Wellington.
Pega received a 2012 Fulbright Ministry of Science and Innovation graduate award to research the impact of family and in-work tax credits on the health of adults at Harvard University and at Otago School of Medicine, Wellington.
Researchers asked 6900 parents to rate their health on a range between ‘‘poor’’ and ‘‘excellent’’ after a period receiving the tax credit.
Self- rating had been shown to closely correlate to more objective measures of health, he said.
Changes to Working for Families to re-orient it into a scheme for getting people into work had lifted its annual cost to $1.5 billion a year nationally, Pega said.
‘‘Although it wasn’t designed to increase health, per se, as public health practitioners, we could expect it to improve health,’’ Pega said.
It was somewhat surprising, therefore, that the credits made no difference to parents’ health.
It had been possible that the results could go either way – more available money could mean more alcohol or tobacco consumption, but it had not, he said. It could also mean more ability to buy healthier food, or health services.
Pega also reviewed five studies in the United States for ‘‘ earnedincome’’ tax credit schemes.
‘‘There was no evidence that any of those tax credits had any effect on health,’’ he said.
One study found European Americans receiving the tax breaks were likely to reduce smoking, but African Americans were not.
Providing incentives for people to take up low- income employment might not necessarily improve health.
Encouraging parents into employment might move them away from their children or force them to use childcare, he said.
‘‘If people have moved into employment, that is not necessarily healthy.
‘‘It might produce unforeseen outcomes,’’ he said.