Abstract
Can simply changing the public definition of a normal retirement age impact retirement, without any associated financial incentive changes? We study a reformulation of the retirement system in Finland that relabeled retirement ages with only modest and continuous changes in financial incentives. We find that relabeling matters: both graphical evidence and estimated hazard models reveal an enormous change in retirement when individuals face a newly defined “normal retirement” age. We also find evidence consistent with increased retirement “regret,” as the marginal workers induced to retire by relabeling are more likely to return to work.