{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.013611615245009074, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0009074410163339383, 'mean_word_length': 5.339080459770115, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
What Can We Learn About the Average Treatment Effect of Retirement on Consumption?

We present a nonparametric bounds analysis of the Average Treatment Effect (ATE) of retirement on domestic expenditure. We consider identification under a wide catalogue of assumptions which restrict either the potential outcomes or the process of selection into treatment. We put forward new assumptions that exploit the longitudinal information in panels to refine existing results regarding the partial identification of ATEs. The tightest identification region suggest that retirement could lead to a drop of up to 7% in expenditure. However, the sign of the actual effect is not identified unless one restricts the variation in potential outcomes across households or one assumes that, on average, retirement is detrimental for consumption. The latter assumption might be suitable only in environments like the United States or the United Kingdom, where the pension replacement rate are low. We find that savings and education have mitigating effects on the magnitude of the maximum potential drop in expenditure.