Abstract
AbstractThis paper proposes a methodological framework to better incorporate non-labour income into existing top adjusted indicators of economic inequality. Surveys are known to miss the rich, receiving disproportionate amounts of capital income. There has been a surge in top harmonisation methodologies, which complement survey-based estimates of inequality with information from the rich reported in tax administrative sources. These harmonisation methods are found to have a significant upward effect on inequality indicators. This analysis uses the Family Resources Survey (household survey) and the Survey of Personal Incomes (tax data) to explore the extent to which existing UK harmonisation methodology corrects for capital income. First, this analysis finds that the FRS has experienced a significant decline in capital income measurement over the past 20 years (1997–2016), taking reported levels of capital income in the SPI as benchmark. Second, the top harmonisation methodology is found to only partially correct for this decline. Third, in response, the paper proposes a multi-step capital income correction to allocate the remaining capital income missing from top adjusted inequality indicators. The adjustment accounts for both under-coverage and under-estimation error of capital income across the income distribution. Poor measurement of capital incomes in household surveys has long been acknowledged but attempts to correct for this have remained few. This paper highlights the need for decomposable top adjusted indicators of inequality to give a better picture of the role of capital incomes in driving inequality. Surveys are traditionally used to produce inequality indicators used by governments, statistical offices and policy makers. The policy implication is that income missing from indicators structurally falls out of inequality debates, which has arguably been the case for capital incomes.
Funder
Scholarship funded by the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the University of Oxford and the Resolution Foundation
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
General Social Sciences,Sociology and Political Science,Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous),Developmental and Educational Psychology
Reference35 articles.
1. Advani A, Summers A. 2020. Capital Gains and UK Inequality. Wid.world Work. Pap. 2020/09(May).
2. A, Aitken., M, Weale. (2018) Imputation of pension accruals and investment income in survey data ESCoE discuss Pap 05.
3. A, Alstadsæter., M, Jacob., W, Kopczuk., K, Telle (2016) Accounting for Business Income in Measuring Top Income Shares Discuss. Pap. Stat. Norw. Res. Dep Integrated accrual approach using individual and firm data from Norway 837.
4. Alstadsaeter A, Johannesen N, Zucman G. (2017). Tax Evasion and Inequality.
5. Alvaredo, F. (2011). A note on the relationship between top income shares and the Gini coefficient. Economic Letter, 110(3), 274–77.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献