We analyze how sexual orientation is related to household financial decisions using 2000 US Census data, and find that lesbian couples pay higher annual mortgages relative to house value than do heterosexual or gay couples. We also estimate that cohabiting heterosexuals pay more than their married counterparts. We link this homosexual-specific differential to homeowners’ propensity to save. This differential reflects the gender composition of same-sex households, and their very low fertility, in addition to the precautionary motives increasing cohabiting couples’ propensity to save relative to married ones. Evidence from retirement and social security income of older couples exhibits the same pattern of differentials by sexual orientation and cohabiting status.
This is a preview of subscription content,to check access.
Access this article
Similar content being viewed by others
For instance, Lin et al. (2000) estimate that including the mortgage payment into the savings measure increases the average total savings rate from 18.53 to 24.94%, using micro data from Taiwan.
In the case of lesbians, the 5.5 coefficient represents 8.7 percent of the average annual mortgage payment of married couples: 5.5 × 184,040/1000/11,649 = 8.7%. By the same token, the coefficient for homosexuals of 2.6 also corresponds to 4 percent more than the average annual mortgage payment of married couples.
While we do not report the coefficients on education squared for brevity, the corresponding marginal effect of education of head is—1.59.
Results not reported for brevity, available upon request from authors.
The working paper version of our study, Negrusa and Oreffice (2010), develops a simple two-period model of household savings decisions, based on Browning et al. (2011). We expand the model to describe the impact of relationship status and fertility on savings behavior rather than focusing only on gender differences in life expectancy.
Children may also represent a potential source of care-giving when parents are old. We note that this source would generate a further incentive for the household to save less, as additional income would be available later in life.
Moreover, data by individual age, race and gender on the expected number of years left to live in the year 2000 is merged to our samples from the National Vital Statistics Reports (CDC, 2002). We then use the absolute value difference of the expected years of the head and the partner (spouse) as additional robustness check control to account for the number of years that a couple can expect to spend together. This measure may play a role for homosexual couples, since they share the same gender and thus tend to face more time together ahead of them, ceteris paribus. However, being married to an opposite-sex spouse may also affect the incentives underlying the accumulation of retirement income, as spouses are entitled to survivor benefits and male retirement income is higher on average.
Additional estimates of the homosexual differential for older households, using the same specification as in Table 5 but also controlling for the absolute life-expectancy difference between head and partner, or narrowing the focus to never-married homosexuals, show consistent patterns of results. The estimated coefficients for the dummy variables identifying same-sex households and gays and lesbians remain positive and significant, with a similar magnitude to the corresponding ones estimated in Table 5. Results not reported for brevity.
Aura, S. (2005). Does the balance of power within a family matter? The case of the retirement equity act. Journal of Public Economics, 89(9), 1699–1717.
Becker, G. (1991). A treatise on the family. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Black, D. A., Gates, G., Sanders, S. G., & Taylor, L. J. (2002). Why do gay men live in San Francisco? Journal of Urban Economics, 51, 54–76.
Black, D. A., Gates, G., Sanders, S. G., & Taylor, L. J. (2006). The measurement of same-sex unmarried partner couples in the 2000 US Census. Mimeo.
Black, D. A., Sanders, S. G., & Taylor, L. J. (2007). The economics of lesbian and gay families. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21, 53–70.
Blandford, J. M. (2003). The nexus of sexual orientation and gender in the determination of earnings. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 56, 622–642.
Browning, M., & Ejrnaes, A. (2009). Consumption and children. Review of Economics and Statistics, 91, 93–111.
Browning, M., & Lusardi, A. (1996). Household saving: micro theory and micro facts. Journal of Economic Literature, 34, 1797–1855.
Browning, M., Chiappori, P. -A., & Weiss, Y. (2011). Family economics. Cambridge University Press (forthcoming).
Carpenter, C. (2008). Sexual orientation, income, and non-pecuniary economic outcomes: New evidence from young lesbians in Australia. Review of Economics of the Household, 6(4), 391–408.
Carpenter, C., & Gates, A. J. (2008). Gay and lesbian partnership: Evidence from California. Demography, 45, 573–590.
Coulibaly, B., & Li, G. (2006). Do homeowners increase consumption after the last mortgage payment? An alternative test of the permanent income hypothesis. Review of Economics and Statistics, 88(1), 10–19.
Deaton, A., & Paxson, C. (1994). Saving, growth, and aging in Taiwan. Studies in the economics of aging (pp. 331–362). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Engelhardt, G. V. (1996). Consumption, down payments, and liquidity constraints. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 28(2), 255–271.
Graham, J. W., & Barr, J. (2008). Assessing the geographic distribution of same sex and opposite sex couples across the United States: implications for claims of causality between traditional marriage and same sex unions. Review of Economics of the Household, 6(4), 347–367.
Grossbard, S., & Jepsen, L. (2008). The economics of gay and lesbian couples: Introduction to a special issue on gay and lesbian households. Review of Economics of the Household, 6(4), 311–325.
Hungerford, T., Rassette, M., Iams, H., & Koenig, M. (2001/2002). Trends in the economics status of the elderly, 1976–2000. Social Security Bulletin 64(3), 1–16.
Jepsen, L. (2007). Comparing the earnings of cohabiting lesbians, cohabiting heterosexual women, and married women: evidence from the 2000 Census. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 26, 233–255.
Jepsen, L., & Jepsen, C. (2002). An empirical analysis of the matching patterns of same-sex and opposite-sex couples. Demography, 39(3), 435–453.
Jepsen, L., & Jepsen, C. (2009). Does homeownership vary by sexual orientation? Regional Science and Urban Economics, 39, 307–315.
Klawitter, M. (2008). The effects of sexual orientation and marital status on how couples hold their money. Review of Economics of the Household, 6(4), 423–446.
Kurdek, L. A. (1998). Relationship outcomes and their predictors: Longitudinal evidence from heterosexual married, gay cohabiting, and lesbian cohabiting couples. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 60(3), 553–568.
Lazear, E. P. (1986). Retirement from the labor force. In: O. Ashenfelter & R. Layard (eds.) Handbook of labor economics (pp. 305–355). North-Holland, Amsterdam.
Leppel, K. (2007). Married and unmarried, opposite and same-sex couples: a decomposition approach. Journal of Housing Research, 16(1), 61–81.
Lillard, L. A., & Weiss, Y. (1997). Uncertain health and survival: Effect on end-of-life consumption. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 15(2), 254–268.
Lin, C., & Lai, Y. (2003). Housing Prices, mortgage payments and savings behavior in Taiwan: A time series analysis. Asian Economic Journal, 17(4), 407–425.
Lin, C., Chen, C., & Lin, S. (2000). Life cycle, mortgage payment, and forced savings. International real estate review, 3(1), 109–141.
Negrusa, B., & Oreffice, S. (2010). Sexual orientation and household savings: do homosexual couples save more? IZA discussion paper 4961. Germany: Bonn.
Oreffice, S. (2011). Sexual orientation and household decision making. Same-sex couples’ balance of power and labor supply choices. Labour Economics, 18(2), 145–158.
Scholz, J. K., & Seshadri, A. (2007). Children and household wealth. SSRN working paper no. 1083829.
Tachibanaki, T. (1994). Housing and savings in Japan, housing markets in the US and Japan. In: Y., Noguchi, & J., Poterba (eds.) (pp. 161–189). University of Chicago Press.
Sonia Oreffice acknowledges financial support from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation (ECO 2008-05721/ECON). We thank Pierre-André Chiappori, Lola Collado, Erik Hurst, Sebastian Negrusa, Climent Quintana-Domeque, the Editor Shoshana Grossbard, two anonymous referees, and participants at the Spanish Economic Symposium 2010 for helpful comments and suggestions. Any errors are ours.
About this article
Cite this article
Negrusa, B., Oreffice, S. Sexual orientation and household financial decisions: evidence from couples in the United States. Rev Econ Household 9, 445–463 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11150-011-9122-9