Search results

The last 60 years have seen Australia and the United Kingdom diverge, both socially and economically. This paper considers how the widening social gap between the two countries is reflected by their respective redistributive systems. The analysis is based upon two microsimulation procedures – one static and the other dynamic – both of which are used to consider the probable distributional effects that would arise if elements of the Australian and UK tax and benefits systems were exchanged. The static microsimulation analysis presented suggests that comparisons based purely upon cross-sectional survey data are affected by population heterogeneity, which tend to overstate the redistributive effect of the Australian transfer system relative to the UK. Nevertheless, the dynamic microsimulations suggest that, on balance, the Australian transfer system is more redistributive than the UK system, and reflects a greater concern for redistribution between households. The UK system, in contrast, reflects a greater concern for redistribution through the life course.

The present study investigates the role of fiscal illusion on income inequality in 46 selected countries in terms of income and development levels from 2002 to 2017.

The effect of fiscal illusion on income inequality is tested using the two-step system generalized method of moment (SYS-GMM) estimator.

The findings reveal the negative effect of fiscal illusion on income inequality, which means increasing fiscal illusion decreases income inequality in 46 selected countries. As in other countries, income inequality declines when fiscal illusion increases in high-income and developed countries, although the redistributive effect of fiscal illusion is more in high-income and developed countries than in other countries. In addition, the results demonstrate the positive effect of unemployment, urbanization and inflation as well as the negative effect of trade openness on income inequality in all three models.

Previous studies have examined the role of government in controlling income inequality from different perspectives; however, no study has detected the role of government in income distribution regarding fiscal illusion.

The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/IJSE-05-2022-0311.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the adjustment of government redistributive policies in Scandinavian and Mediterranean countries following changes in income inequality over the period 1980–2021.

The authors first modelled the time-varying dynamics between income inequality and redistribution and then used a non-linear framework to test for the existence of asymmetries and cointegration in their long-run relationship. The authors used two complementary measures of inequality – the share of total income accruing to top percentile income holders and the ratio of the share of total income accruing to top decile income holders divided by that accumulated by the bottom 50% – and computed redistribution as the difference between the two inequality indicators before and after taxes and transfers.

The authors found that the sign of the relationship between income inequality and redistribution is mostly positive and time-varying. Overall, the authors also found evidence that the impact of increases in inequality on redistributive measures is higher than that of decreases. Finally, the authors obtained a significant long-run relationship between both variables in all countries except Denmark and Spain. These results hold for both Scandinavian and Mediterranean countries.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first paper to account for the potential existence of non-linearities and to examine the asymmetries in the adjustment of redistributive policies to increases in income inequality using alternative income inequality metrics.

Brazil, a large developing economy whose main exports consist of primary commodities, benefited greatly from the boom in commodity prices during the first decade of the current century. However, with a large share of its population with low and very low incomes, there is a potential for some adverse redistributive effects. The purpose of this paper is to address this issue by simulating the ex ante effects using a mixed endogenous–exogenous social accounting matrix (SAM) price model.

The methodology consists of two parts. First, using a mixed endogenous–exogenous SAM price model, the authors obtain the elasticities of domestic prices (goods, services and factors) in response to the increase in international prices of three types of commodities: agricultural, oil/gas and minerals. Second, the authors run micro-simulations at the household level on welfare effects, as well as on some distributive indices. Analysis at the regional level is also carried out.

Following increases in the international prices of primary commodities, the responses of internal prices (goods, services and factors) mean a welfare loss all over the entire distribution of household per capita expenditure; the least affected are those households at the low end and around the median of the distribution. However, the differences among households are not very important. Moreover, once we take into account government transfers and payments from social security, the magnitude of the effects reduces even further. Also, inequality indices and poverty rates show little responsiveness to the simulated shocks. Finally, poorer regions are the most likely to be affected, but also the distribution of effects across households shows differences between regions.

Economies with comparative advantages in the production of primary commodities can benefit at a macro-level from the increase in the international prices of such commodities. However, when a large part of the population spends a high proportion of its income on goods whose prices may be affected by the increase in commodity prices, there is a room for some undesirable effects from a redistributive standpoint. This study provides valuable results about such potential effects for Brazil, a large developing economy.

Purpose – The concept of equality of opportunity (EOp) goes back to Roemer (1993, 1998) who argues that a society should guarantee its members equal access to advantage regardless of their circumstances, while holding them responsible for turning that access into actual advantage by the application of effort. First, this chapter investigates how family background influences income acquisition in 17 European countries. Second, it particularly scrutinizes how governments affect EOp through redistributive policies.

Methodology – We apply two different methods in order to measure EOp: the Gini opportunity index defined by Lefranc et al. (2008) and a parametric estimation method. Effective redistribution is measured via income concepts at different stages of the tax-and-transfer schemes.

Findings – We find clear country clustering in terms of EOp for Nordic, Continental European, and Anglo-Saxon countries. For Eastern Europe our results are less definitive. By examining the impact of redistributive policies in the countries under analysis, it can be concluded that both taxes and transfers reduce inequality of opportunity (IOp), with social benefits typically playing a key role. Furthermore, the equalizing impacts of the tax-benefit system on IOp differ substantially from the ones observed in the traditional notion of inequality of outcomes.

Originality – We systematically compare two approaches used to identify the extent of EOp. Our results reveal that both methods yield rather robust country rankings for various circumstance sets. Furthermore, the impact of tax-benefit policies on EOp is rarely addressed in the existing literature. We contribute by focusing on effective redistribution directly related to different income concepts.

The secondary analysis of the European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions (EU-SILC) is used to examine inequality in the United Kingdom compared with other European Union (EU) countries and to analyse how inequality has changed over the period from the start of the great financial crisis in 2008–2015. The analysis compares inequality in market income, gross income and disposable incomes, and measured inequality using the Gini coefficient, 80/20 and 90/10 ratios. It includes an analysis of the impact of cash benefits and direct taxes on market income and how the composition of households in different parts of the income distribution has changed over time. In addition, inequality within the EU is explored. The chapter concludes with a discussion of what contribution the EU itself through its own institutions and policies plays in mitigating market inequalities. We find that the distribution of market income in the United Kingdom is comparatively unequal, but the UK’s relative position on disposable income is greatly improved, due to an effective system of direct taxes and transfers. The conclusions remain broadly similar for all the inequality indices that are considered. There is evidence that households with children have moved down the distribution between 2008 and 2014 and aged households have moved up the distribution in most EU countries including the United Kingdom. The chapter concludes that EU policies have relatively little impact on inequality and that inequalities can really only be tackled using national redistributive policies.

Few issues in business ethics are as polarizing as the practice of risk classification and underwriting in the insurance industry. Theorists who approach the issue from a background in economics often start from the assumption that policy-holders should be charged a rate that reflects the expected loss that they bring to the insurance scheme. Yet theorists who approach the question from a background in philosophy or civil rights law often begin with a presumption against so-called “actuarially fair” premiums and in favor of “community rating,” in which everyone is charged the same price. This paper begins by examining and rejecting the three primary arguments that have been given to show that actuarially fair premiums are unjust. It then considers the two primary arguments that have been offered by those who wish to defend the practice of risk classification. These arguments overshoot their target, by requiring a “freedom to underwrite” that is much greater than the level of freedom enjoyed in most other commercial transactions. The paper concludes by presenting a defense of a more limited right to underwrite, one that grants the legitimacy of the central principle of risk classification, but permits specific deviations from that ideal when other important social goods are at stake.

This paper produces a comprehensive assessment of income redistribution to the working-age population, covering OECD countries over the last two decades. Redistribution is quantified as the relative reduction in market income inequality achieved by personal income taxes (PIT), employees’ social security contributions, and cash transfers, based on household-level micro-data. A detailed decomposition analysis uncovers the respective roles of size, tax progressivity, and transfer targeting for overall redistribution, the respective role of various categories of transfers for transfer redistribution; as well as redistribution for various income groups. The paper shows a widespread decline in redistribution across the OECD, both on average and in the majority of countries for which data going back to the mid-1990s are available. This was primarily associated with a decline in cash transfer redistribution while PIT played a less important and more heterogeneous role across countries. In turn, the decline in the redistributive effect of cash transfers reflected a decline in their size and in particular by less redistributive insurance transfers. In some countries, this was mitigated by more redistributive assistance transfers but the resulting increase in the targeting of total transfers was not sufficient to prevent transfer redistribution from declining.