IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ijm/journl/v9y2016i3p5-34.html

Evaluating The Quality Of Gross Incomes In SILC: Compare Them With Fiscal Data And Re-calibrate Them Using EUROMOD

Author

Listed:
  • Dieter Vandelannoote

    (Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy, University of Antwerp, Sint-Jacobstraat 2, 2000 Antwerp, Belgium)

  • André Decoster

    (Research Centre of Public Economics, KU Leuven, Naamsestraat 69, 3000 Leuven, Belgium)

  • Toon Vanheukelom

    (Research Centre of Public Economics, KU Leuven, Naamsestraat 69, 3000 Leuven, Belgium)

  • Gerlinde Verbist

    (Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy, University of Antwerp, Sint-Jacobstraat 2, 2000 Antwerp, Belgium)

Abstract

In this paper, we shed light on the quality of the gross incomes as reported in the Survey on Income and Living Conditions (SILC). This is done in three steps. First, as both net and gross incomes are reported in SILC, implicit tax rates are calculated and evaluated. In a second step, gross incomes from SILC are compared with gross incomes reported on the fiscal form for the same individuals. Finally, we make use of EUROMOD to re-calibrate SILC gross incomes in order to make them consistent with the reported net ones. We find that, on average, fiscally reported gross incomes exceed gross incomes in the SILC survey. It is not clear however whether the re-calibration method (whereby we use an iterative method to construct adjusted SILC gross incomes starting from the observed net ones) is a genuine improvement upon the reported gross income distribution.

Suggested Citation

  • Dieter Vandelannoote & André Decoster & Toon Vanheukelom & Gerlinde Verbist, 2016. "Evaluating The Quality Of Gross Incomes In SILC: Compare Them With Fiscal Data And Re-calibrate Them Using EUROMOD," International Journal of Microsimulation, International Microsimulation Association, vol. 9(3), pages 5-34.
    • Handle: RePEc:ijm:journl:v:9:y:2016:i:3:p:5-34
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.microsimulation.org/IJM/V9_3/1_IJM_2015_22_Vandelannoote_edit_final.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Arie Kapteyn & Jelmer Y. Ypma, 2007. "Measurement Error and Misclassification: A Comparison of Survey and Administrative Data," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 25(3), pages 513-551.
    2. Bruce D. Meyer & Wallace K. C. Mok & James X. Sullivan, 2015. "Household Surveys in Crisis," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 29(4), pages 199-226, Fall.
    3. John M. Abowd & Martha H. Stinson, 2013. "Estimating Measurement Error in Annual Job Earnings: A Comparison of Survey and Administrative Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 95(5), pages 1451-1467, December.
    4. O'Donoghue, Cathal & Immervoll, Herwig, 2001. "Imputation of gross amounts from net incomes in household surveys: an application using EUROMOD," EUROMOD Working Papers EM1/01, EUROMOD at the Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    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. Ha Trong Nguyen & Huong Thu Le & Luke Connelly & Francis Mitrou, 2023. "Accuracy of self‐reported private health insurance coverage," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(12), pages 2709-2729, December.
    2. Bruce D. Meyer & Nikolas Mittag, 2015. "Using Linked Survey and Administrative Data to Better Measure Income: Implications for Poverty, Program Effectiveness and Holes in the Safety Net," NBER Working Papers 21676, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Meyer, Bruce D. & Mittag, Nikolas, 2017. "Using Linked Survey and Administrative Data to Better Measure Income: Implications for Poverty, Program Effectiveness and Holes in the Safety Net," IZA Discussion Papers 10943, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Katy Bergstrom & William Dodds & Nicholas Lacoste & Juan Rios, 2025. "Estimating the Welfare Cost of Labor Supply Frictions," Working Papers 2503, Tulane University, Department of Economics.
    5. Bruce Meyer & Nikolas Mittag, 2017. "Using Linked Survey and Administrative Data to Better Measure Income: Implications for Poverty, Program Effectiveness and Holes in the Safety Net," Working Papers 2017-075, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    6. Ferreira, Francisco H. G. & Brunori, Paolo, 2024. "Inherited inequality, meritocracy, and the purpose of economic growth," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 126263, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Zachary H. Seeskin, 2016. "Evaluating the Use of Commercial Data to Improve Survey Estimates of Property Taxes," CARRA Working Papers 2016-06, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    8. Bhashkar Mazumder, 2018. "Intergenerational Mobility in the United States: What We Have Learned from the PSID," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 680(1), pages 213-234, November.
    9. Michele Lalla & Patrizio Frederic & Daniela Mantovani, 2022. "The inextricable association of measurement errors and tax evasion as examined through a microanalysis of survey data matched with fiscal data: a case study," Statistical Methods & Applications, Springer;Società Italiana di Statistica, vol. 31(5), pages 1375-1401, December.
    10. Quinn Moore & Irma Perez-Johnson & Robert Santillano, 2018. "Decomposing Differences in Impacts on Survey- and Administrative-Measured Earnings From a Job Training Voucher Experiment," Evaluation Review, , vol. 42(5-6), pages 515-549, October.
    11. Michele Lalla & Maddalena Cavicchioli, 2020. "Nonresponse and measurement errors in income: matching individual survey data with administrative tax data," Department of Economics 0170, University of Modena and Reggio E., Faculty of Economics "Marco Biagi".
    12. van Bergeijk, P.A.G., 2017. "Measurement error of global production," ISS Working Papers - General Series 632, International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University Rotterdam (ISS), The Hague.
    13. Jenkins, Stephen P. & Rios-Avila, Fernando, 2021. "Reconciling Reports: Modelling Employment Earnings and Measurement Errors Using Linked Survey and Administrative Data," IZA Discussion Papers 14405, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Daniela Puggioni & Mariana Calderón & Alfonso Cebreros Zurita & León Fernández Bujanda & José Antonio Inguanzo González & David Jaume, 2022. "Inequality, income dynamics, and worker transitions: The case of Mexico," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 13(4), pages 1669-1705, November.
    15. Puggioni Daniela & Calderón Mariana & Cebreros Alfonso & Fernández León & Inguanzo José A. & Jaume David, 2022. "Inequality, Income Dynamics, and Transitions of Mexican Workers," Working Papers 2022-14, Banco de México.
    16. Mohitosh Kejriwal & Xiaoxiao Li & Evan Totty, 2020. "Multidimensional skills and the returns to schooling: Evidence from an interactive fixed‐effects approach and a linked survey‐administrative data set," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 35(5), pages 548-566, August.
    17. Stefan Angel & Richard Heuberger & Nadja Lamei, 2018. "Differences Between Household Income from Surveys and Registers and How These Affect the Poverty Headcount: Evidence from the Austrian SILC," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 138(2), pages 575-603, July.
    18. Jenkins, Stephen P. & Rios-Avila, Fernando, 2020. "Modelling errors in survey and administrative data on employment earnings: Sensitivity to the fraction assumed to have error-free earnings," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    19. Hyslop, Dean R. & Townsend, Wilbur, 2017. "Employment misclassification in survey and administrative reports," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 19-23.
    20. Whitaker, Stephan D., 2018. "Big Data versus a survey," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 285-296.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C15 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Statistical Simulation Methods: General
    • D30 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - General

    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:ijm:journl:v:9:y:2016:i:3:p:5-34. 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: Jinjing Li (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.microsimulation.pub .

    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.