IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/red/sed017/1033.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

"Permanent Income" Inequality

Author

Listed:
  • Giovanni Gallipoli

    (UBC)

  • Brant Abbott

    (Queen's University)

Abstract

We estimate the degree of inequality of ``permanent income'', as well as trends over time. Our notion of permanent income is related to Friedman's (1957) original idea, but does not assume linear-quadratic utility. We account for financial and real wealth, as well as the certainty equivalent value of a household's potential future earnings, thus providing a monetary statistic directly related to economic welfare, which is not true of income or wealth alone. We combine publicly available consumption and income data from the PSID with net worth data from the SCF to produce our estimates. Our method imposes no restrictions on the dynamics of observed income processes and features state-dependent stochastic discount factors, as opposed to the risk-free discount factors commonly used to estimate the present value of lifetime earnings. We show that stochastic discount factors depend on many sources of risk beyond income risk, e.g. marital uncertainty. We use our estimates of permanent income to study how inequality in the U.S. evolved between 1989 and 2013, and how the human component of wealth varies over the life cycle of different households. Our findings suggest that accounting for human wealth significantly changes the assessment of aggregate inequality and of its evolution. Specifically, we find that: (i) top $10\%$ and top $1\% $ shares of permanent income are substantially smaller (roughly 1/2) than the corresponding shares of net worth typically reported in the literature; (ii) however, top shares of permanent income have grown much faster over the 1989-2013 period than top shares of net worth, suggesting that actual inequality has increased more than previously thought. For instance, the share of financial wealth owned by the top $10\%$ of the wealth distribution grew over that period by 8 percentage points while the share of permanent income attributable to that same group grew by 14 percentage points. Finally, we find that the share of households who sit at the top of both the net worth and human wealth distributions has actually decreased between 1989 and 2013, indicating that increased concentration of permanent income is not due to a small set of households holding increasing shares of all types of wealth. Instead, increasing concentration of permanent income is mostly due to the growing importance of real/financial wealth as a share of total wealth.

Suggested Citation

  • Giovanni Gallipoli & Brant Abbott, 2017. ""Permanent Income" Inequality," 2017 Meeting Papers 1033, Society for Economic Dynamics.
  • Handle: RePEc:red:sed017:1033
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://economicdynamics.org/meetpapers/2017/paper_1033.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mariacristina De Nardi & Giulio Fella & Gonzalo Paz-Pardo, 2020. "Nonlinear Household Earnings Dynamics, Self-Insurance, and Welfare," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 18(2), pages 890-926.
    2. Juan Carlos Escanciano & Stefan Hoderlein & Arthur Lewbel & Oliver Linton & Sorawoot Srisuma, 2010. "Nonparametric Euler Equation Identification and Estimation," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 757, Boston College Department of Economics, revised 15 Mar 2020.
    3. Jonathan Heathcote & Fabrizio Perri & Giovanni L. Violante, 2010. "Unequal We Stand: An Empirical Analysis of Economic Inequality in the United States: 1967-2006," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 13(1), pages 15-51, January.
    4. Giovanni Gallipoli & Laura Turner, 2009. "Household Responses to Individual Shocks: Disability and Labor Supply," Working Paper series 04_09, Rimini Centre for Economic Analysis.
    5. Julio Dávila & Jay H. Hong & Per Krusell & José‐Víctor Ríos‐Rull, 2012. "Constrained Efficiency in the Neoclassical Growth Model With Uninsurable Idiosyncratic Shocks," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 80(6), pages 2431-2467, November.
    6. Jesus Fernández-Villaverde & Dirk Krueger, 2007. "Consumption over the Life Cycle: Facts from Consumer Expenditure Survey Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 89(3), pages 552-565, August.
    7. DiNardo, John & Fortin, Nicole M & Lemieux, Thomas, 1996. "Labor Market Institutions and the Distribution of Wages, 1973-1992: A Semiparametric Approach," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(5), pages 1001-1044, September.
    8. Matthias Doepke & Fabrizio Zilibotti, 2017. "Parenting With Style: Altruism and Paternalism in Intergenerational Preference Transmission," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 1331-1371, September.
    9. Thibaut Lamadon & Elena Manresa & Stephane Bonhomme, 2016. "Discretizing Unobserved Heterogeneity," 2016 Meeting Papers 1536, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    10. Huggett, Mark & Ventura, Gustavo, 2000. "Understanding why high income households save more than low income households," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 361-397, April.
    11. Epstein, Larry G & Zin, Stanley E, 1989. "Substitution, Risk Aversion, and the Temporal Behavior of Consumption and Asset Returns: A Theoretical Framework," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(4), pages 937-969, July.
    12. Andreas Fagereng & Luigi Guiso & Davide Malacrino & Luigi Pistaferri, 2020. "Heterogeneity and Persistence in Returns to Wealth," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(1), pages 115-170, January.
    13. Lucas, Robert E, Jr, 1978. "Asset Prices in an Exchange Economy," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(6), pages 1429-1445, November.
    14. Narayana R. Kocherlakota, 2010. "The New Dynamic Public Finance," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 9222.
    15. Claudia Goldin & Lawrence F. Katz, 2007. "The Race between Education and Technology: The Evolution of U.S. Educational Wage Differentials, 1890 to 2005," NBER Working Papers 12984, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Kartik B. Athreya & Felicia Ionescu & Urvi Neelakantan, 2017. "College or the Stock Market, or College and the Stock Market?," FEDS Notes 2017-01-06, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    17. Levy, Frank & Murnane, Richard J, 1992. "U.S. Earnings Levels and Earnings Inequality: A Review of Recent Trends and Proposed Explanations," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 30(3), pages 1333-1381, September.
    18. Mariacristina De Nardi & Giulio Fella & Gonzalo Paz Pardo, 2016. "The Implications of Richer Earnings Dynamics for Consumption and Wealth," NBER Working Papers 21917, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Brant Abbott & Giovanni Gallipoli, 2018. "Human Capital Inequality: Empirical Evidence," Working Papers 2018-085, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    20. Saez, Emmanuel & Zucman, Gabriel, 2014. "Wealth Inequality in the United States since 1913: Evidence from Capitalized Income Tax Data," CEPR Discussion Papers 10227, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    21. Moritz Kuhn & Jose-Victor Rios-Rull, 2016. "2013 Update on the U.S. Earnings, Income, and Wealth Distributional Facts: A View from Macroeconomics," Quarterly Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, issue April, pages 1-75.
    22. Michael P. Keane, 2011. "Labor Supply and Taxes: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 49(4), pages 961-1075, December.
    23. Greg Kaplan & Giovanni L. Violante, 2014. "A Model of the Consumption Response to Fiscal Stimulus Payments," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82(4), pages 1199-1239, July.
    24. 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.
    25. Christian Bayer & Ralph Luetticke & Lien Pham‐Dao & Volker Tjaden, 2019. "Precautionary Savings, Illiquid Assets, and the Aggregate Consequences of Shocks to Household Income Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 87(1), pages 255-290, January.
    26. Andreas Fuster & Greg Kaplan & Basit Zafar, 2018. "What would you do with $500? Spending responses to gains, losses, news, and loans," Staff Reports 843, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
    27. Fatih Guvenen & Greg Kaplan & Jae Song & Justin Weidner, 2017. "Lifetime Incomes in the United States over Six Decades," NBER Working Papers 23371, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    28. Carl Sanders & Christopher Taber, 2012. "Life-Cycle Wage Growth and Heterogeneous Human Capital," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 4(1), pages 399-425, July.
    29. Kaymak, Barış & Poschke, Markus, 2016. "The evolution of wealth inequality over half a century: The role of taxes, transfers and technology," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 1-25.
    30. Robert H. Haveman & Andrew Bershadker & Jonathan A. Schwabish, 2003. "Human Capital in the United States from 1975 to 2000: Patterns of Growth and Utilization," Books from Upjohn Press, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, number hcus, December.
    31. Kopczuk, Wojciech & Saez, Emmanuel, 2004. "Top Wealth Shares in the United States, 1916-2000: Evidence From Estate Tax Returns," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 57(2), pages 445-487, June.
    32. Joao Alfredo Galindo da Fonseca & Giovanni Gallipoli & Yaniv Yedid-Levi, 2017. "Match Quality, Contractual Sorting and Wage Cyclicality," Working Papers 2017-076, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    33. Gallipoli, Giovanni & Turner, Laura, 2009. "Household Responses to Individual Shocks: Disability and Labour Supply," CLSSRN working papers clsrn_admin-2009-32, Vancouver School of Economics, revised 22 Jun 2009.
    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. Yunho Cho & Aarti Singh & James Morley, 2019. "Household Balance Sheets and Consumption Responses to Income Shocks," 2019 Meeting Papers 788, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    2. Brant Abbott & Giovanni Gallipoli, 2018. "Human Capital Inequality: Empirical Evidence," Working Papers 2018-085, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D31 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - Personal Income and Wealth Distribution
    • D6 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics
    • E2 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Consumption, Saving, Production, Employment, and Investment
    • E21 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Consumption, Saving, Production, Employment, and Investment - - - Consumption; Saving; Wealth
    • I24 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Education and Inequality
    • J17 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Value of Life; Foregone Income
    • J24 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Human Capital; Skills; Occupational Choice; Labor Productivity

    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:red:sed017:1033. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Christian Zimmermann). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/sedddea.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.