IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fer/resrep/p52.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Essays on income inequality, poverty and the evolution of top income shares

Author

Listed:
  • Riihelä, Marja

Abstract

This dissertation on income inequality in Finland consists of an introduction and four self-contained essays on trends in the share of top incomes, economic poverty, regional income inequality and tax progressivity. In all these essays the distribution of economic wellbeing is considered empirically over a forty-year period using Finnish Income Distribution Surveys and Consumption Surveys produced by Statistics Finland. Over this period the development of disposable income has been quite different that seen previously. The period of equalization from the mid 1960s to the mid 1990s has been reversed, coinciding with the economic recovery starting in late 1990s. In the first essay it is shown that the share of top incomes has increased over the last ten years and that the increase in disposable income was concentrated within the top one per cent. The main factor that has driven up the shares of top incomes in Finland since the mid 1990s is an unprecedented increase in the share of capital income. The 1993 Finnish tax reform is one of the key factors responsible for this trend. The differential taxation of labour and capital income created a situation where the share of top capital income increased and progressivity declined. The relative poverty rate has increased over the same period whilst top incomes have soared. The second essay considers economic poverty. Poverty rates increased from the mid 1990s to 2006 regardless of the poverty line. The composition of the poor has changed significantly and the biggest change is the major deterioration in the position of unemployed households. Another vulnerable group is families with small children. The third essay examines regional convergence between regions and inequality within regions. There was substantial regional convergence in relative income levels from 1966 to the mid 1980s. Since then relative regional disparities have remained constant. The inequality within regions follows the same U-shaped pattern over the period as inequality in the whole country. The relative differences between regions have diminished and income inequality between people has become the dominant feature of the overall income distribution. The fourth essay considers tax progressivity more closely and introduces the decomposition of the progressivity measure. The decomposition of the progressivity measure by income deciles focuses on changes in the tax treatment of income deciles from the mid 1990s to 2004. The changes in the decile shares of before-tax and after-tax income among those in the highest before-tax income deciles are the main factors that lie behind the recent decrease in tax progressivity, and play an important role in explaining the recent surge in inequality.

Suggested Citation

  • Riihelä, Marja, 2009. "Essays on income inequality, poverty and the evolution of top income shares," Research Reports P52, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:fer:resrep:p52
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.doria.fi/handle/10024/148887
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shorrocks, A F, 1980. "The Class of Additively Decomposable Inequality Measures," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(3), pages 613-625, April.
    2. Jukka Pirttilä & Håkan Selin, 2006. "How Successful is the Dual Income Tax? Evidence from the Finnish Tax Reform of 1993," Working Papers 223, Työn ja talouden tutkimus LABORE, The Labour Institute for Economic Research LABORE.
    3. Anthony B. Atkinson, 2000. "The Changing Distribution of Income: Evidence and Explanations," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 1(1), pages 3-18, February.
    4. Atkinson, A B, 1997. "Bringing Income Distribution in from the Cold," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 107(441), pages 297-321, March.
    5. A. B. Atkinson, 2003. "Income Inequality in OECD Countries: Data and Explanations," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo, vol. 49(4), pages 479-513.
    6. Kakwani, Nanok C, 1977. "Measurement of Tax Progressivity: An International Comparison," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 87(345), pages 71-80, March.
    7. Anthony Atkinson & Thomas Piketty, 2007. "Top incomes over the twentieth century: A contrast between continental european and english-speaking countries," Post-Print halshs-00754859, HAL.
    8. Shorrocks, A F, 1982. "Inequality Decomposition by Factor Components," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(1), pages 193-211, January.
    9. Jenkins, Stephen P, 1995. "Accounting for Inequality Trends: Decomposition Analyses for the UK, 1971-86," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 62(245), pages 29-63, February.
    10. Johnson, Paul, 1996. "The Assessment: Inequality," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 12(1), pages 1-14, Spring.
    11. Atkinson, Anthony B., 1970. "On the measurement of inequality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 244-263, September.
    12. Atkinson, A. B. & Piketty, Thomas (ed.), 2007. "Top Incomes Over the Twentieth Century: A Contrast Between Continental European and English-Speaking Countries," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199286881, Decembrie.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ilpo Suoniemi & Marja Riihelä & Risto Sullström, 2008. "Tax progressivity and recent evolution of the Finnish income inequality," Working Papers 246, Työn ja talouden tutkimus LABORE, The Labour Institute for Economic Research LABORE.
    2. Riihelä, Marja, 2009. "Essays on income inequality, poverty and the evolution of top income shares," Research Reports 52, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    3. Ilpo Suoniemi & Juha Rantala, 2010. "Income mobility, persistent inequality and age, recent experiences from Finland," Working Papers 263, Työn ja talouden tutkimus LABORE, The Labour Institute for Economic Research LABORE.
    4. Stephen P. Jenkins & John Micklewright, 2007. "New Directions in the Analysis of Inequality and Poverty," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 700, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    5. Cecilia García-Peñalosa & Elsa Orgiazzi, 2013. "Factor Components of Inequality: A Cross-Country Study," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 59(4), pages 689-727, December.
    6. Salverda, Wiemer & Checchi, Daniele, 2014. "Labour-Market Institutions and the Dispersion of Wage Earnings," IZA Discussion Papers 8220, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Marco Ranaldi, 2016. "On the Measurement of Functional Income Distribution," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 16051, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    8. Koen Caminada & Chen Wang, 2011. "Disentangling Income Inequality and the Redistributive Effect of Social Transfers and Taxes in 36 LIS Countries," LIS Working papers 567, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    9. Rolf Aaberge & François Bourguignon & Andrea Brandolini & Francisco H. G. Ferreira & Janet C. Gornick & John Hills & Markus Jäntti & Stephen P. Jenkins & Eric Marlier & John Micklewright & Brian Nolan, 2017. "Tony Atkinson and his Legacy," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 63(3), pages 411-444, September.
    10. Frank A. Cowell, 2008. "Income Distribution and Inequality," Chapters, in: John B. Davis & Wilfred Dolfsma (ed.), The Elgar Companion to Social Economics, chapter 13, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Marco Ranaldi, 2018. "On the Measurement of Functional Income Distribution," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-01379229, HAL.
    12. Wolf Rogowski & Wolfram Elsner, 2021. "How economics can help mitigate climate change - a critical review and conceptual analysis of economic paradigms," Bremen Papers on Economics & Innovation 2106, University of Bremen, Faculty of Business Studies and Economics.
    13. Heshmati, Almas, 2004. "A Review of Decomposition of Income Inequality," IZA Discussion Papers 1221, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Christos Koutsampelas & Panos Tsakloglou, 2013. "The distribution of full income in Greece," International Journal of Social Economics, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 40(4), pages 311-330, March.
    15. Francois, Joseph & Rojas-Romagosa, Hugo, 2005. "The Construction and Interpretation of Combined Cross-Section and Time-Series Inequality Datasets," CEPR Discussion Papers 5214, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    16. Teixidó Figueras, Jordi & Duro Moreno, Juan Antonio, 2012. "Ecological Footprint Inequality: A methodological review and some results," Working Papers 2072/203168, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Department of Economics.
    17. Walter Bossert & Conchita D’Ambrosio & Kohei Kamaga, 2021. "Extreme Values, Means, and Inequality Measurement," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 67(3), pages 564-590, September.
    18. Koen Caminada & Kees Goudswaard & Chen Wang & Jinxian Wang, 2019. "Income Inequality and Fiscal Redistribution in 31 Countries After the Crisis," Comparative Economic Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Association for Comparative Economic Studies, vol. 61(1), pages 119-148, March.
    19. Marcus C. Berliant & Robert P. Strauss, 1993. "State and federal tax equity: Estimates before and after the Tax Reform Act of 1986," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(1), pages 9-43.
    20. Vanda Almeida, 2020. "Income Inequality and Redistribution in the Aftermath of the 2007-2008 Crisis: The U.S. Case," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 73(1), pages 77-114, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fer:resrep:p52. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Anita Niskanen (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vatttfi.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.