Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9
-
ItemMEASURING HEALTH INSURANCE BENEFITS: THE CASE OF PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES(WILEY, 2017-07)Since 2012, the Congressional Budget Office has included an estimate of the market value of government‐provided health insurance coverage in its measures of household income. We follow this practice for both public and private health insurance to capture the impact of greater access to government‐provided health insurance for working‐age people with disabilities, whose market value rose in 2010 dollars from $11.7 billion in 1980 to $114.3 billion in 2012. We then consider the more general implications of incorporating estimates of the market price of insurance, equivalent to that provided by the government, into policy analyses in a post‐Affordable Care Act world. (JEL D31, H24, I18, J31)
-
ItemRegulating electronic cigarettes(Wiley, 2016-03-01)
-
ItemTransitioning from an Historical to a Contemporary Use of Tax Record Data for Measuring Top Incomes in Australia(WILEY, 2018-06)A major literature using tax data measures the share of income captured by the top of the income distribution. We correct existing Australian estimates by removing employers’ social contributions from the denominator and explain the limitations of using public record tax tables to capture the numerator. We show that Australian Tax Office unit record sample data are only able to accurately measure incomes of top income groups below the top 1 per cent. We conclude that greater access to the entire unit tax record population will be necessary to bring Australian research in this area up to that in the United States and United Kingdom.
-
ItemMinimum Cash Wages, Tipped Restaurant Workers, and Poverty(Wiley, 2018-10)This is the first study to examine the effect of increases in the tipped minimum cash wage—the wage employers must pay to tipped employees—on poverty. Using March Current Population Survey data (1988–2014), we find that tipped minimum cash wage increases are associated with declines in the risk of a tipped restaurant worker living in a poor family (elasticities around –0.2). However, we find little evidence of poverty‐alleviating effects when using the household rather than the family as the sharing unit. This result is consistent with evidence that a substantial share of tipped workers who live in a poor family live in a nonpoor household with persons unrelated by blood, marriage, or adoption who contribute to the household's income. Furthermore, we find that tipped minimum cash wage hikes are associated with increases in the risk of a younger, less‐educated individual living in a poor family or household. Adverse labor demand effects that redistribute income among low‐skilled individuals drive these results. We conclude that raising the tipped minimum cash wage is a poorly targeted policy to deliver income to poor restaurant workers.
-
ItemWhat accounts for the rising share of women in the top 1%?(Melbourne Institute: Applied Economic & Social Research, 2020-06-01)The share of women in the top 1% of the UK’s income distribution has been growing over the last two decades (as in several other countries). Our first contribution is to account for this secular change using regressions of the probability of being in the top 1%, fitted separately for men and women, in order to contrast between the sexes the role of changes in characteristics and changes in returns to characteristics. We show that the rise of women in the top 1% is primarily accounted for by their greater increases (relative to men) in the number of years spent in full-time education. Although most top income analysis uses tax return data, we derive our findings taking advantage of the much more extensive information about personal characteristics that is available in survey data. Our use of survey data requires justification given survey under-coverage of top incomes. Providing this justification is our second contribution.
-
ItemSurvey under-coverage of top incomes and estimation of inequality: what is the role of the UK’s SPI adjustment?(Wiley, 2018-06)Survey under-coverage of top incomes leads to bias in survey-based estimates of overall income inequality. Using income tax record data in combination with survey data is a potential approach to address the problem; we consider here the UK’s pioneering ‘SPI adjustment’ method that implements this idea. Since 1992, the principal income distribution series (reported annually in Households Below Average Income) has been based on household survey data in which the incomes of a small number of ‘very rich’ individuals are adjusted using information from ‘very rich’ individuals in personal income tax return data. We explain what the procedure involves, reveal the extent to which it addresses survey under- coverage of top incomes, and show how it affects estimates of overall income inequality. More generally, we assess whether the SPI adjustment is fit for purpose and consider whether variants of it could be employed by other countries.
-
ItemTop incomes and inequality in the UK: reconciling estimates from household survey and tax return data(Oxford University Press, 2018-04-01)We provide the first systematic comparison of UK inequality estimates derived from tax data (World Wealth and Income Database) and household survey data (the Households Below Average Income [HBAI] subfile of the Family Resources Survey). We document by how much existing survey data underestimate top income shares relative to tax data. Exploiting the flexibility that access to unit-record survey data provides, we then derive new top-income-adjusted data. These data enable us to: better track tax-data-estimated top income shares; change the definitions of income, income-sharing unit, and unit of analysis used and thereby undertake more comparable cross-national comparisons (we provide a UK-US illustration); and examine UK inequality levels and trends using four summary indices. Our estimates reveal a greater rise in the inequality of equivalized gross household income among all persons between the mid-1990s and late 2000s than shown by the corresponding HBAI series, especially between 2004/05 and 2007/08.undertake more comparable cross-national comparisons (we provide a UK-US illustration); and examine UK inequality levels and trends using four summary indices. Our estimates reveal a greater rise in the inequality of equivalized gross household income among all persons between the mid-1990s and late-2000s than shown by the corresponding HBAI series, especially between 2004/05 and 2007/08.
-
ItemSurvey Under-Coverage of Top Incomes and Estimation of Inequality: What Is the Role of the UK’s SPI Adjustment?(Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, 2017)Survey under-coverage of top incomes leads to bias in survey-based estimates of overall income inequality. Using income tax record data in combination with survey data is a potential approach to address the problem; we consider here the UK’s pioneering ‘SPI adjustment’ method that implements this idea. Since 1992, the principal income distribution series (reported annually in Households Below Average Income) has been based on household survey data in which the incomes of a small number of ‘very rich’ individuals are adjusted using information from ‘very rich’ individuals in personal income tax return data. We explain what the procedure involves, reveal the extent to which it addresses survey under-coverage of top incomes, and show how it affects estimates of overall income inequality. More generally, we assess whether the SPI adjustment is fit for purpose and consider whether variants of it could be employed by other countries.
-
ItemWhat Has Been Happening to UK Income Inequality Since the Mid-1990s? Answers from Reconciled and Combined Household Survey and Tax Return Data(Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, 2016)