Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Saving for Children’s College Education: An Empirical Analysis of the Trade-off Between the Quality and Quantity of Children

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Family and Economic Issues Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper examines the effect of children’s college expenses on household savings. The theoretical model introduces life-cycle savings into the quality–quantity model of fertility and derives predictions for the impact of expected expenses on parents’ savings. Using the actual amount of parents’ financial support reported in the Survey of Consumer Finances, the empirical model estimates the expected expenditures on children’s college education and investigates the effect of expected expenditures on parents’ savings. The results show that parents’ support for each of their children’s college expenses decreases with the number of children. The results are consistent with the predictions of the life-cycle theory of saving and consumption that households save in advance for expected expenses to smooth their consumption.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Net worth in each year is the total value of household’s assets minus its total liabilities. Total assets is the sum of financial assets and nonfinancial assets, where the former includes liquid assets (checking assets, money market deposit accounts, saving accounts, call accounts, certificates of deposit and saving accounts), stocks, bonds, mutual funds, individual retirement accounts, Keogh accounts, trusts, cash value of life insurance and the latter includes residential property, other real estate, business equity, vehicles and other real assets like art and precious metals. Total liabilities include mortgage debt, home equity loans, other loans for property, credit card debt, automobile loans, balances outstanding on lines of credit, and loans for consumer durables.

  2. All dollar values are reported in 1986 dollars.

References

  • Babiarz, P., & Yilmazer, T. (2007). The impact of college financial aid rules on household portfolio choice. (Working Paper. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University). Retrieved November 12, 2007, from http://web.ics.purdue.edu/~yilmazer/financial_aid_and_portfolio_choice.pdf.

  • Becker, G. S., & Lewis, H. G. (1973). On the interaction between the quantity and quality of children. Journal of Political Economy, 81, S279–S288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Browning, M., & Lusardi, A. (1996). Household saving: Micro theories and micro facts. Journal of Economic Literature, 34, 1797–1855.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cha, K. W., Weagley, R. O., & Reynolds, L. (2005). Parental borrowing for dependent children’s higher education. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 26, 299–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choy, S. P., & Henke, R. R. (1992). Parental financial support for undergraduate education. National Postsecondary Student Aid Study, Research and Development Report. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved November 12, 2007, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/24/0b/5c.pdf.

  • Churaman, C. V. (1992). Financing of college education by single-parent and two-parent families. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 13, 95–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • College Board. (2004). Trends in College Pricing 2004. New York: College Entrance Examination Board. Retrieved November 12, 2007, from http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/press/cost04/041264TrendsPricing2004_FINAL.pdf.

  • Dick, A. W., & Edlin, A. S. (1997). The implicit taxes from college financial aid. Journal of Public Economics, 65, 295–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edlin, A. S. (1993). Is college financial aid equitable and efficient? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 7, 143–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feldstein, M. (1995). College scholarship rules and private saving. American Economic Review, 85, 552–566.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finke, M. S., Huston, S. J., & Sharpe, D. L. (2006). Balance sheets of early boomers: Are they different from pre-boomers? Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 27, 542–561.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gale, W. G., & Scholz, J. K. (1994). Intergenerational transfers and the accumulation of wealth. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8, 145–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatcher, C. B. (2002). Wealth, reservation wealth, and the decision to retire. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 23, 167–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hong, G. S., & Kao, Y. E. (1997). Emergency fund adequacy of Asian Americans. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 18, 127–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horioka, C. Y., & Watanabe, W. (1997). Why do people save? A micro-analysis of motives for household saving in Japan. Economic Journal, 107, 537–552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Long, M. (2004). The impact of asset-tested college financial aid on household savings. Journal of Public Economics, 88, 63–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ma, J. (2005). College savings options and the impact of savings on financial aid. TIAA-CREF Institute Research Dialogue, 83. Retrieved November 12, 2007 from http://www.tiaa-crefinstitute.org/research/dialogue/83.html.

  • Mauldin, T., Mimura, Y., & Lino, M. (2001). Parental expenditures on children’s education. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 22, 221–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Presley, J. B., & Clery, S. B. (2001). Middle income undergraduates: Where they enroll and how they pay for their education. (Statistical Analysis Report. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics). Retrieved November 12, 2007, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/19/34/76.pdf.

  • Souleles, N. S. (2000). College tuition and household savings and consumption. Journal of Public Economics, 77, 185–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steelman, L. C., & Powell, B. (1989). Acquiring capital for college: The constraints of family configuration. American Sociological Review, 54, 844–855.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tomes, N. (1981a). A model of fertility and children’s schooling. Economic Inquiry, 19, 209–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tomes, N. (1981b). The family, inheritance and the intergenerational transmission of inequality. Journal of Political Economy, 89, 928–958.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wakita, S., Fitzsimmons, V. S., & Liao, T. F. (2000). Wealth: Determinants of savings net worth and housing net worth of pre-retired households. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 21, 387–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willis, R. J. (1973). A new approach to the economic theory of fertility behavior. Journal of Political Economy, 81, S14–S64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank two anonymous referees and the editor, Jing Jian Xiao, for their detailed and insightful comments. I would also like to thank Jacqueline Angel, Don Fullerton, Angela C. Lyons, Daniel T. Slesnick, Max Stinchcombe and Peter Wilcoxen for their helpful suggestions. Patryk Babiarz provided exceptional research assistance.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tansel Yilmazer.

Appendices

Appendix A

Definition of variables

Name

Description

Number of children

Number of children of either the respondent or spouse

Completed fertility

Predicted number of children when the household head is 55 years old

College expenditures

Amount of parental support for college expenses of each child

Expected college expenditures

Predicted amount of parents’ support for children’s college expenses

Has a child in college

=1 if the household has a child attending college between 1983 and 86; =0 otherwise

Savings_1

(Net worth in 1986 minus net worth in 1983)/3

Savings_2

(Net worth in 1986 excluding the capital gains on primary residence minus net worth in 1983)/3

Net worth

Household net worth in 1983

Permanent income

Exponential of predicted log of 1985 household income

Transitory income

Difference between total household income in 1985 and permanent income

Age

Age of the household head in 1983

Age2

Age-squared of the household head in 1983

High school

=1 if the household head has a high school degree; =0 otherwise

College

=1 if the household head has a college degree; =0 otherwise

Black

=1 if the household head is African-American; =0 otherwise

Couple

=1 if the household head has a partner; =0 otherwise

Female

=1 if the household head is a single female; =0 otherwise

All right to borrow for education

=1 if the household head thinks it is all right to borrow for education; =0 otherwise

Windfall

=1 if the household received a windfall greater than $3,000 between 1983 and 86; =0 otherwise

Risky

=1 if the household head is willing to undertake risky investments; =0 otherwise

Non-SMSA

=1 if the place of residence is not in a SMSA; =0 otherwise

# of children in college

The number of children attending college between 1983 and 86

High school_spouse

=1 if the female partner has a high school degree; =0 otherwise

College_spouse

= 1 if the female partner has a college degree; =0 otherwise

Work_spouse

= 1 if the female partner has a full-time job in 1983; =0 otherwise

Retirement

=1 if retirement is the most important reason for saving; =0 otherwise

Emergencies

=1 if emergencies is the most important reason for saving; =0 otherwise

Children’s education

=1 if children’s education is the most important reason for saving; =0 otherwise

Home purchase

=1 if saving to buy a home is the most important reason for saving; =0 otherwise

Other saving motives

=1 if the household cited another reason as the most important reason to save; =0 otherwise

Net worth_25

=1 if the household is in the bottom 25 percentile of the wealth distribution in 1983; =0 otherwise

Net worth_75

=1 if the household is in the top 25 percentile of the wealth distribution in 1983; =0 otherwise

Never married

=1 if the household head has never been married; =0 otherwise

Widow

=1 if the household head is a widow or widower; =0 otherwise

Divorced

=1 if the household head is divorced; =0 otherwise

Education (years)

The number of years the household head attended school

Appendix B

Estimates of OLS regression for the log of 1985 household income

 

Coeff

Std. Error

Constant

7.899

0.227**

Age

0.044

0.008**

Age2

0.000

0.000**

Black

−0.787

0.952

Black × Age

0.019

0.043

Black × Age2

−0.0002

0.000

Never married

−0.191

0.134

Widow

−0.101

0.149

Divorced

−0.090

0.129

Female

−0.190

0.093**

High school

0.111

0.070

College

0.150

0.125

Education (years)

0.086

0.015**

High school_spouse

0.280

0.079**

College_spouse

0.327

0.084**

Work_spouse

0.186

0.041**

N

1,699

 

Mean of log of income

10.132

 

R 2

0.352

 
  1. Note: The data source is the 1983–86 Survey of Consumer Finances Variables are defined in Appendix A
  2. p < .1; ** p < .05

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Yilmazer, T. Saving for Children’s College Education: An Empirical Analysis of the Trade-off Between the Quality and Quantity of Children. J Fam Econ Iss 29, 307–324 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10834-008-9105-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10834-008-9105-z

Keywords

Navigation