English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

When it comes to the neutralisation of child-rearing burdens by the state, many experts support the introduction of pensions dependent on the number of children (or dependent on child-rearing) instead of family allowance (and tax allowance) (cf. Kovács ed., 2012). The critical review by Banyár (2019) joins this trend. Leaving external criticism aside, I assess Banyár’s plan of reduced pension of childless people and the remaining family allowance in the simplest possible optimisation model. The relative child consumption plays a key role. My main findings: a) in case of a critical relative value (when the total child consumption of the family equals the parents’ consumption), both pension of the childless and family allowance are dispensable; b) in case of a lower child relative value, the reduced pension of the childless is positive, and family allowance is dispensable; c) in case of a higher relative value, the pension of the childless is zero, but family allowance is indispensable.1

pénzügyi szemle/public finance quarterly

Family Allowance and Pension Dependent on the Number of Children: Optimality and Neutrality : Reaction to „The Inherent Faults of the State Pension System and the Main Direction of its Improvement” by József Banyár