Global Economic Intersection
Advertisement
  • Home
  • Economics
  • Finance
  • Politics
  • Investments
    • Invest in Amazon $250
  • Cryptocurrency
    • Best Bitcoin Accounts
    • Bitcoin Robot
      • Quantum AI
      • Bitcoin Era
      • Bitcoin Aussie System
      • Bitcoin Profit
      • Bitcoin Code
      • eKrona Cryptocurrency
      • Bitcoin Up
      • Bitcoin Prime
      • Yuan Pay Group
      • Immediate Profit
      • BitQH
      • Bitcoin Loophole
      • Crypto Boom
      • Bitcoin Treasure
      • Bitcoin Lucro
      • Bitcoin System
      • Oil Profit
      • The News Spy
      • Bitcoin Buyer
      • Bitcoin Inform
      • Immediate Edge
      • Bitcoin Evolution
      • Cryptohopper
      • Ethereum Trader
      • BitQL
      • Quantum Code
      • Bitcoin Revolution
      • British Trade Platform
      • British Bitcoin Profit
    • Bitcoin Reddit
    • Celebrities
      • Dr. Chris Brown Bitcoin
      • Teeka Tiwari Bitcoin
      • Russell Brand Bitcoin
      • Holly Willoughby Bitcoin
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Economics
  • Finance
  • Politics
  • Investments
    • Invest in Amazon $250
  • Cryptocurrency
    • Best Bitcoin Accounts
    • Bitcoin Robot
      • Quantum AI
      • Bitcoin Era
      • Bitcoin Aussie System
      • Bitcoin Profit
      • Bitcoin Code
      • eKrona Cryptocurrency
      • Bitcoin Up
      • Bitcoin Prime
      • Yuan Pay Group
      • Immediate Profit
      • BitQH
      • Bitcoin Loophole
      • Crypto Boom
      • Bitcoin Treasure
      • Bitcoin Lucro
      • Bitcoin System
      • Oil Profit
      • The News Spy
      • Bitcoin Buyer
      • Bitcoin Inform
      • Immediate Edge
      • Bitcoin Evolution
      • Cryptohopper
      • Ethereum Trader
      • BitQL
      • Quantum Code
      • Bitcoin Revolution
      • British Trade Platform
      • British Bitcoin Profit
    • Bitcoin Reddit
    • Celebrities
      • Dr. Chris Brown Bitcoin
      • Teeka Tiwari Bitcoin
      • Russell Brand Bitcoin
      • Holly Willoughby Bitcoin
No Result
View All Result
Global Economic Intersection
No Result
View All Result

NBER Paper: What Causes Large Wealth Inequality?

admin by admin
May 29, 2013
in Uncategorized
0
0
SHARES
9
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Econintersect:  Four researchers have a working paper at NBER (National Bureau of Economic Research) which discusses the historical perspective of wealth distribution in the U.S. and compares that to the rest of the developed world.  The title of the paper (still a working paper) is “The Top 1% in International and Historical Perspective“.  The authors find correlations of wealth distribution with tax policy and the relative returns to capital vs. labor (capital income vs. earned income).

Click on graph for larger image with legend.
wealth-inequality-tax-rates-2013-Alvaredo-wo-legend

The authors are Facundo Alvaredo (Oxford), Anthony B. Atkinson (Oxford), Thomas Piketty (Paris School of Economics) and Emmanuel Saez (University of California, Berkeley).

Here is the paper abstract (emphasis is the original):

The top 1 percent income share has more than doubled in the United States over the last thirty years, drawing much public attention in recent years. While other English speaking countries have also experienced sharp increases in the top 1 percent income share, many high-income countries such as Japan, France, or Germany have seen much less increase in top income shares. Hence, the explanation cannot rely solely on forces common to advanced countries, such as the impact of new technologies and globalization on the supply and demand for skills. Moreover, the explanations have to accommodate the falls in top income shares earlier in the twentieth century experienced in virtually all high-income countries.

We highlight four main factors. The first is the impact of tax policy, which has varied over time and differs across countries. Top tax rates have moved in the opposite direction from top income shares.  The effects of top rate cuts can operate in conjunction with other mechanisms. The second factor is indeed a richer view of the labor market, where we contrast the standard supply-side model with one where pay is determined by bargaining and the reactions to top rate cuts may lead simply to a redistribution of surplus. Indeed, top rate cuts may lead managerial energies to be diverted to increasing their remuneration at the expense of enterprise growth and employment. The third factor is capital income. Overall, private wealth (relative to income) has followed a U-shaped path over time, particularly in Europe, where inherited wealth is, in Europe if not in the United States, making a return. The fourth, little investigated, element is the correlation between earned income and capital income, which has substantially increased in recent decades in the United States.

The critical correlations are illustrated in the following graphs (as well as the graph at the beginning of the article).

Click on any graph for larger images.wealth-inequality-US-2013-Alvaredo

wealth-inequality-incomeenglish-speaking-2013-Alvaredowealth-inequality-income-non-english-speaking-2013-Alvaredo

wealth-inequality-top-tax-US-UK-France-Germany-2013-Alvaredo

Discussion by Econintersect

The correlations between higher top marginal tax rates and less wealth inequality is quite clear.  But correlation does not prove causation.

One control on the causation hypothesis comes from the variation wealth distributions over time for countries with different tax policies.  That can serve to reduce the likelihood that some other global economic function was involved since all countries are operating in one global economy.

The other question regarding causation is the timeline for the factors being measured.

The top tax brackets for the US and the UK moved above 60% in the early 1930s (1932 and 1931, respectively).  The top 1% income shares in the US peaked in 1928 and dropped sharply until 1931, before the top bracket moved from 26% in 1931 to 63% in 1932.  That might imply that there was no causation effect from the top tax rate, except that the US experienced a calamitous stock market crash and fell into the Great Depression during those years.  That could well have been the dominant factor.

As the top tax bracket in the US was raised further during the 1930s into the early 1940s the income share for the top 1% remained at the relatively elevated 15-19% level until the top bracket hit 88% in 1942.  At that point there was a sharp drop in in the income share to the top 1% (down to 13% from 16% in 1941) and the top 1%  stayed between 9% and 13% share until 1986.

The top tax bracket was lowered from 70% to 50% in 1982.  For the first time since the early 1930s share of income to the top 1% rose four years in a row (1983-1986).  Here the possibility of cause and effect is present.

In the years 1986 to 2010 the variation of the top tax bracket between 28% and 39.6% does not seem to be correlated with any particular change in top 1% income distribution.  In general, all those tax rates seem to be associated with a rising concentration of income for the top 1%, interrupted by three recessions (1990-91, 2000  and 2007-09) and the stock market crash of 1987.

So, timeline conclusions can be drawn:

  • Continuing to raise the top tax bracket through the 1930s was associated with income share maintained by the top 1% at the level that resulted after the crash 1929-32.  The question here is how much the continuing dislocation of the Great Depression was responsible for the failure of the top 1% to rise back into the 20%+ share of income and how much was a consequence of the higher tax brackets.
  • Income share of the top 1% dropped into a new lower band (9% to 13%) once the top tax brakets reached and exceeded the high 80% level and then remained above 80% for the next 20 years.  Of course, the severe economic dislocation of WW II is also a factor that probably served to hold down the top incomes relative to the middle and lower income groups.
  • With the top bracket set at 70% for most of the years from the mid 1960s to the early 1980s, income share for the top 1% remained in the 9-11% range, showing the lowest volatility of any time period for the history displayed.
  • When the top bracket was lowered to 50% in 1982, the income share for the top 1% increased to 12% in 1983 and just kept  on moving higher (with the dislocations mentioned previously).  It had been 35 years since the top 1% had received 12% of the personal income.

The question of cause and effect is complicated by the overlay of war, stock market crashes and recessions.  But the tendencies discussed in the timeline above are most strongly reinforced by the comparison of income distributions in countries where top tax rates have remained more stable over the last 40-50 years between 40% and 60% (France, Germany, etc.) than in the US and the UK where the top brackets have been  cut into the 28% to 40% range.  And the US, which has cut more that the UK, has a bigger inequality situation.

Econintersect has heard it argued that income distribution is one of the roles of personal income taxation.  Whether or not it is an intended role, the latest paper from Alvaredo et al strongly suggests it is a consequence.

John Lounsbury

Reference:

  • The Top 1% in International and Historical Perspective (Facundo Alvaredo, Anthony B. Atkinson, Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez, NBER Working Paper 19075, May 2013)
Previous Post

Understanding Gold: What’s Next?

Next Post

Yves Smith and David Cay Johnson Discuss Apple Tax Avoidance

Related Posts

Why Is The SEC Suing Binance?
Business

Why Is The SEC Suing Binance?

by John Wanguba
June 6, 2023
Bitcoin Has Been ‘Killed’ 474 Times But Its Still Alive And Kicking
Economics

Bitcoin Has Been ‘Killed’ 474 Times But Its Still Alive And Kicking

by John Wanguba
June 5, 2023
Japanese Regulators Issue Stern Warning To OpenAI For Data Collection
Business

Japanese Regulators Issue Stern Warning To OpenAI For Data Collection

by John Wanguba
June 5, 2023
What Are BRC-30 Tokens?
Econ Intersect News

What Are BRC-30 Tokens?

by John Wanguba
June 2, 2023
XRP Explosive Boom Results In Record-Breaking Address Activity
Economics

XRP’s Explosive Boom Results In Record-Breaking Address Activity

by John Wanguba
June 1, 2023
Next Post

Yves Smith and David Cay Johnson Discuss Apple Tax Avoidance

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Browse by Category

  • Business
  • Econ Intersect News
  • Economics
  • Finance
  • Politics
  • Uncategorized

Browse by Tags

adoption altcoins bank banking banks Binance Bitcoin Bitcoin adoption Bitcoin market blockchain BTC business China crypto crypto adoption cryptocurrency crypto exchange crypto market crypto regulation decentralized finance DeFi Elon Musk ETH Ethereum Europe Federal Reserve finance FTX inflation investment market analysis Metaverse NFT nonfungible tokens oil market price analysis recession regulation Russia stock market technology Tesla the UK the US Twitter

Archives

  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • August 2010
  • August 2009

Categories

  • Business
  • Econ Intersect News
  • Economics
  • Finance
  • Politics
  • Uncategorized
Global Economic Intersection

After nearly 11 years of 24/7/365 operation, Global Economic Intersection co-founders Steven Hansen and John Lounsbury are retiring. The new owner, a global media company in London, is in the process of completing the set-up of Global Economic Intersection files in their system and publishing platform. The official website ownership transfer took place on 24 August.

Categories

  • Business
  • Econ Intersect News
  • Economics
  • Finance
  • Politics
  • Uncategorized

Recent Posts

  • Why Is The SEC Suing Binance?
  • Bitcoin Has Been ‘Killed’ 474 Times But Its Still Alive And Kicking
  • Japanese Regulators Issue Stern Warning To OpenAI For Data Collection

© Copyright 2021 EconIntersect - Economic news, analysis and opinion.

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Contact Us
  • Bitcoin Robot
    • Bitcoin Profit
    • Bitcoin Code
    • Quantum AI
    • eKrona Cryptocurrency
    • Bitcoin Up
    • Bitcoin Prime
    • Yuan Pay Group
    • Immediate Profit
    • BitIQ
    • Bitcoin Loophole
    • Crypto Boom
    • Bitcoin Era
    • Bitcoin Treasure
    • Bitcoin Lucro
    • Bitcoin System
    • Oil Profit
    • The News Spy
    • British Bitcoin Profit
    • Bitcoin Trader
  • Bitcoin Reddit

© Copyright 2021 EconIntersect - Economic news, analysis and opinion.

en English
ar Arabicbg Bulgarianda Danishnl Dutchen Englishfi Finnishfr Frenchde Germanel Greekit Italianja Japaneselv Latvianno Norwegianpl Polishpt Portuguesero Romanianes Spanishsv Swedish