IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/22032.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

U.S. Inequality and Fiscal Progressivity: An Intragenerational Accounting

Author

Listed:
  • Alan J. Auerbach
  • Laurence J. Kotlikoff
  • Darryl R. Koehler

Abstract

Economic inequality is fundamentally about differences in spending power, i.e., the ability to engage in current and future consumption. The literature, though, has focused largely on wealth and income inequality, both of which can differ markedly from spending power-inequality due to government redistribution. This study measures inequality in spending power within specific age cohorts, holding constant household behavior. Segregating by cohort controls for growth and life-cycle effects, while assuming uniform household behavior controls for endogenous responses to the tax-transfer system as well as differences in preferences. We also study fiscal progressivity via a new measure – the lifetime net tax rate. We calculate spending power by running the 2016 Survey of Consumer Finances data plus imputed variables through the Fiscal Analyzer (TFA), a life-cycle, consumption-smoothing program that includes hard borrowing constraints and all major federal and state tax/transfer programs, whether cash or in-kind. Our findings are striking. First, inequality in income and, especially, wealth dramatically overstates inequality in spending power. For example, the richest 1 percent of 40-49 year-olds own 29.1 percent of their cohort’s net wealth, but account for only 11.8 percent of its remaining lifetime spending power (LSP). This cohort’s poorest quintile owns just 0.4 percent of the cohort’s wealth, but has 6.6 percent of cohort LSP. Among 20-29 year olds, whose expected human wealth is less dispersed, these discrepancies are even more dramatic. The richest 1 percent have 68.2 of the wealth, but only 9.7 percent of the spending power. The bottom quintile has slightly negative wealth, but 8.3 percent of spending power. Second, inequality in current-spending-power (CSP) – spending in the current year arising under the household’s possibly constrained consumption smoothing plan – differs from LSP, sometimes importantly, due to credit constraints, in-kind government benefits, and other factors. Third, the U.S. fiscal system is highly progressive once cohorts are old enough to have highly dispersed human wealth. Consider the bottom quintile of 40-49 year-olds. Their lifetime net tax rate (lifetime net taxes divided by lifetime resources) is substantially negative, -44.4 percent, while that of the top 1 percent in the same cohort is 34.7. Fourth, households’ rankings based on current income can differ substantially from their ranking based on lifetime resources. Fifth, current-year net tax rates substantially understate fiscal progressivity and, as our analysis of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act shows, can significantly misstate a fiscal reform’s fairness.

Suggested Citation

  • Alan J. Auerbach & Laurence J. Kotlikoff & Darryl R. Koehler, 2016. "U.S. Inequality and Fiscal Progressivity: An Intragenerational Accounting," NBER Working Papers 22032, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:22032
    Note: AG PE
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w22032.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Poterba, James M, 1989. "Lifetime Incidence and the Distributional Burden of Excise Taxes," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(2), pages 325-330, May.
    2. Alan J. Auerbach & Kerwin K. Charles & Courtney C. Coile & William Gale & Dana Goldman & Ronald Lee & Charles M. Lucas & Peter R. Orszag & Louise M. Sheiner & Bryan Tysinger & David N. Weil & Justin W, 2017. "How the Growing Gap in Life Expectancy May Affect Retirement Benefits and Reforms," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 42(3), pages 475-499, July.
    3. Alan J. Auerbach & Jagadeesh Gokhale & Laurence J. Kotlikoff, 1991. "Generational Accounts: A Meaningful Alternative to Deficit Accounting," NBER Chapters, in: Tax Policy and the Economy, Volume 5, pages 55-110, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Arnold C. Harberger, 1962. "The Incidence of the Corporation Income Tax," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 70, pages 215-215.
    5. Thomas Piketty & Emmanuel Saez & Gabriel Zucman, 2018. "Distributional National Accounts: Methods and Estimates for the United States," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 133(2), pages 553-609.
    6. Congressional Budget Office, 2014. "The Distribution of Household Income and Federal Taxes, 2011," Reports 49440, Congressional Budget Office.
    7. Auerbach, Alan J & Kotlikoff, Laurence J, 1987. "Evaluating Fiscal Policy with a Dynamic Simulation Model," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(2), pages 49-55, May.
    8. Meghir, Costas & Pistaferri, Luigi, 2011. "Earnings, Consumption and Life Cycle Choices," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 9, pages 773-854, Elsevier.
    9. E. S. Phelps & R. A. Pollak, 1968. "On Second-Best National Saving and Game-Equilibrium Growth," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 35(2), pages 185-199.
    10. Niklas Bengtsson & Bertil Holmlund & Daniel Waldenström, 2016. "Lifetime versus Annual Tax-and-Transfer Progressivity: Sweden, 1968–2009," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 118(4), pages 619-645, October.
    11. Feldstein, Martin S, 1974. "Social Security, Induced Retirement, and Aggregate Capital Accumulation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 82(5), pages 905-926, Sept./Oct.
    12. Acemoglu, Daron & Autor, David, 2011. "Skills, Tasks and Technologies: Implications for Employment and Earnings," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 12, pages 1043-1171, Elsevier.
    13. Diamond, Peter A, 1998. "Optimal Income Taxation: An Example with a U-Shaped Pattern of Optimal Marginal Tax Rates," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(1), pages 83-95, March.
    14. Congressional Budget Office, 2016. "Trends in Family Wealth, 1989 to 2013," Reports 51846, Congressional Budget Office.
    15. repec:cbo:report:518461 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Congressional Budget Office, 2014. "The Distribution of Household Income and Federal Taxes, 2011," Reports 49440, Congressional Budget Office.
    17. Congressional Budget Office, 2014. "The Distribution of Household Income and Federal Taxes, 2011," Reports 49440, Congressional Budget Office.
    18. Congressional Budget Office, 2014. "The Distribution of Household Income and Federal Taxes, 2011," Reports 49440, Congressional Budget Office.
    19. David Laibson, 1997. "Golden Eggs and Hyperbolic Discounting," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(2), pages 443-478.
    20. Jagadeesh Gokhale & Laurence J. Kotlikoff, 2002. "Simulating the Transmission of Wealth Inequality," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(2), pages 265-269, May.
    21. Wojciech Kopczuk & Emmanuel Saez & Jae Song, 2010. "Earnings Inequality and Mobility in the United States: Evidence from Social Security Data Since 1937," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 125(1), pages 91-128.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. David Altig & Alan J. Auerbach & Laurence J. Kotlikoff & Elias Ilin & Victor Ye, 2020. "The Marginal Net Taxation of Americans’ Labor Supply," NBER Working Papers 27164, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Auerbach, Alan & Kueng, Lorenz & Lee, Ronald & Yatsynovich, Yury, 2018. "Propagation and smoothing of shocks in alternative social security systems," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 91-105.
    3. Oguzhan Akgun & Boris Cournède & Jean-Marc Fournier, 2017. "The effects of the tax mix on inequality and growth," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1447, OECD Publishing.
    4. Elias Ilin & Laurence J. Kotlikoff & Melinda Pitts, 2022. "Is Our Fiscal System Discouraging Marriage? A New Look at the Marriage Tax," NBER Working Papers 30159, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Elias Ilin & Laurence J. Kotlikoff & M. Melinda Pitts, 2022. "Pink and Poverty Taxes on Marriage," Policy Hub, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, vol. 2022(12), October.
    6. Alan J. Auerbach & Laurence J. Kotlikoff & Darryl Koehler & Manni Yu, 2017. "Is Uncle Sam Inducing the Elderly to Retire?," Tax Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 31(1), pages 1-42.

    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. Alan J. Auerbach & Laurence J. Kotlikoff & Darryl Koehler & Manni Yu, 2017. "Is Uncle Sam Inducing the Elderly to Retire?," Tax Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 31(1), pages 1-42.
    2. Peter Temin, 2016. "The American Dual Economy," International Journal of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(2), pages 85-123, April.
    3. Branko Milanovic, 2022. "After the Financial Crisis: The Evolution of the Global Income Distribution Between 2008 and 2013," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 68(1), pages 43-73, March.
    4. Hager, Sandy Brian, 2015. "Public Debt as Corporate Power: Mapping the New Aristocracy of Finance," Working Papers on Capital as Power 2015/01, Capital As Power - Toward a New Cosmology of Capitalism.
    5. Jeff Larrimore & Jacob Mortenson & David Splinter, 2021. "Household Incomes in Tax Data: Using Addresses to Move from Tax-Unit to Household Income Distributions," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 56(2), pages 600-631.
    6. Hager, Sandy Brian, 2015. "Corporate Ownership of the Public Debt: Mapping the New Aristocracy of Finance," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 13(3), pages 505-523.
    7. Periklis Gogas & Rangan Gupta & Stephen M. Miller & Theophilos Papadimitriou & Georgios Antonios Sarantitis, 2015. "Income Inequality: A State-by-State Complex Network Analysis," Working Papers 201534, University of Pretoria, Department of Economics.
    8. Jesse Bricker & Peter Hansen & Alice Henriques Volz, 2018. "How Much has Wealth Concentration Grown in the United States? A Re-Examination of Data from 2001-2013," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2018-024, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    9. Peter Temin, 2015. "The American Dual Economy: Race, Globalization, and the Politics of Exclusion," Working Papers Series 26, Institute for New Economic Thinking.
    10. John Komlos, 2016. "Growth of Income and Welfare in the U.S. 1979-2011," CESifo Working Paper Series 5880, CESifo.
    11. Marianne Bitler & Hilary Hoynes & Elira Kuka, 2017. "Child Poverty, the Great Recession, and the Social Safety Net in the United States," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(2), pages 358-389, March.
    12. Francois, Joseph & Nelson, Douglas & Rojas-Romagosa, Hugo, 2019. "Trade Wars and Trade Disputes: The Role of Equity and Political Support," Conference papers 333046, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    13. Rosalia Greco, 2016. "Redistribution, Polarization, and Ideology," EcoMod2016 9699, EcoMod.
    14. Jesse Bricker & Alice Henriques & Jacob Krimmel & John Sabelhaus, 2016. "Measuring Income and Wealth at the Top Using Administrative and Survey Data," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 47(1 (Spring), pages 261-331.
    15. Robert Grafstein, 2018. "The problem of polarization," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 176(1), pages 315-340, July.
    16. Alan J. Auerbach, 2017. "Tax Reform in an Era of Budget Stress, Inequality, and International Mobility," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics, Springer;Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics, vol. 153(2), pages 103-122, April.
    17. Jacob Funk Kirkegaard, 2015. "The True Levels of Government and Social Expenditures in Advanced Economies," Policy Briefs PB15-4, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
    18. Michael T. Owyang & Hannah Shell, 2016. "Taking Stock: Income Inequality and the Stock Market," Economic Synopses, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, issue 7, pages 1-2.
    19. Howarth, Richard B. & Kennedy, Kevin, 2016. "Economic growth, inequality, and well-being," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 231-236.
    20. Adam Looney & Kevin B. Moore, 2015. "Changes in the Distribution of After-Tax Wealth: Has Income Tax Policy Increased Wealth Inequality?," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2015-58, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • A1 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics
    • D31 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - Personal Income and Wealth Distribution
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • E25 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Consumption, Saving, Production, Employment, and Investment - - - Aggregate Factor Income Distribution
    • E62 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Macroeconomic Policy, Macroeconomic Aspects of Public Finance, and General Outlook - - - Fiscal Policy; Modern Monetary Theory
    • H20 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - General
    • H21 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Efficiency; Optimal Taxation
    • H22 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Incidence
    • H55 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Social Security and Public Pensions

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:nbr:nberwo:22032. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.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.