Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 28 items for :

  • "market income Gini Coefficients" x
Clear All
Charles Vellutini and Juan Carlos Benitez
This paper presents a novel technique to measure and compare the redistributive capacity of observed tax (or transfer) policies. The technique is based on income distribution simulations and controls for differences in pre-tax income distributions. It assumes that the only information on the pre-tax distribution available in each country-year is the Gini coefficient and the mean (GDP per capita). We illustrate the technique with an application to the personal income tax, using a dataset of 108 countries over the 2007-2018 period.
International Monetary Fund. African Dept.

Concentration on Interest Rate Under Hypothetical Concentration Levels TABLE 1. Regression Results FISCAL POLICY AND INCLUSIVE GROWTH IN MOZAMBIQUE A. Introduction B. Some Facts about Income Inequality C. Three Key Policy priorities D. PFM and Public Investment Management E. Priority Spending FIGURES 1. Selected Regions: Gini Index of Net Income Inequality, 1980-2011 2. Market-Income Gini Coefficient 1/(Points) 3. Net Gini Coefficient 1/(Points) 4. Poverty Headcount by Posto Administrativo (Fixed Intervals) 5. Composition of Fiscal Tax

Charles Vellutini and Juan Carlos Benitez

. A Simplified Step-by-Step Recapitulation IV. AN APPLICATION: REDISTRIBUTE CAPACITY OF THE PIT AROUND THE WORLD A . Objective and Caveats B . Data C . Results V. CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES FIGURES 1. Taxation of Capital Gains 2. Special Tax Regimes for Unincorporated Business Income 3. Distribution of Market Income Gini Coefficients 4. Features of the PIT 5. PIT Transplant-and-Compare Indices, Simplified vs Microdata 6. PIT Redistributive Capacity as a Function of Progressive Capacity and the Aggregate Tax Rate 7. Average PIT Progressive and

B. A Closer Look at Inequality Across Canadian Provinces C. Does Inequality Reduce Growth in Canada? D. Why Has Inequality Risen Across Canada? E. Summary and Policy Conclusions References FIGURES 1. Gini Coefficient 2. Inequality and Poverty Rates 3. Inequality Across the OECD and^Te^ 4. Provincial Inequality 5. Lorenz Curves (Mark^om7) 6. Contributions to Market Income Gini Coefficient by Quintile 7. Redistribution’s Impact on Improvements in Gini Coefficients 8. Decompositions of Redistribution 9. Transfers: Average Rate 10

International Monetary Fund. African Dept.

-income inequality and the net Gini coefficient are worse in the 2000s than in the 1990s. 4 Figure 2. Market-Income Gini Coefficient 1/ (Points) Sources: Standarized World Income Inequality Database and author’s calculations. 1/ Unweighted average by years. Figure 3. Net Gini Coefficient 1/ (Points) Sources: Standarized World Income Inequality Database and author’s calculations. 1/ Unweighted average by years. The increase in the Gini coefficient from 0.44, on average, in the 1990s to 0.47 in the 2000s contrasts with Mozambique’s strong and

International Monetary Fund. Asia and Pacific Dept

:// ). 3 For details on such a model tailored to Japan, see McGrattan et al. (2018 ) and Hong, Lizarazo Ruiz, Peralta-Alva and Yao (forthcoming) . 4 The sectorial structure assumed for this model is similar to Lizarazo Ruiz et al. (2017) . 5 According to the OECD, Japan’s last observed (2015) market income Gini coefficient was 50.4—almost identical to the market Gini coefficient for the United States in 2015 (50.6). 6 According to the OECD, Japan’s disposable income Gini was 33.9 in 2015.

International Monetary Fund. Western Hemisphere Dept.

Fiscal Policy Impact on Income Inequality 9. Fiscal policy only moderately reduces income inequality, mainly because of direct taxes and in-kind transfers . At 47.6 percent, the market income Gini coefficient is one of the highest in Latin America. The Gini coefficient for net income decreases by 0.7 percentage points, as a consequence of direct taxation ( Figure 5 ). Government transfers and indirect taxes have a comparatively smaller reduction effect on inequality, lowering the index by only 0.2 and 0.1 percentage points respectively. The Gini coefficient falls by

Mr. Ke-young Chu, Mr. Hamid R Davoodi, and Mr. Sanjeev Gupta

dispersed. The before-tax Gini coefficients for the 9 developing countries in Table 1 average 38 percent, compared with the average of 44 percent for the before-tax and before-transfer “market-incomeGini coefficients for 11 industrial countries in Table 2 . 6 The before-tax Gini coefficients for developing countries range between 25 percent and 52 percent, whereas the market-income Gini coefficients for industrial countries range between 34 percent and 54 percent. However, tax (and transfer) policies in industrial countries reduce their Gini coefficients much more

Mr. Ke-young Chu, Mr. Hamid R Davoodi, and Mr. Sanjeev Gupta
This paper reviews income distribution in developing (and transition) countries in recent decades. On average, before-tax income distribution in developing countries is less unequal than in industrial countries. However, unlike industrial countries, developing countries in general have not been able to use tax and transfer policies effectively to reduce income inequality. During the 1980s and 1990s, many developing countries experienced an increase in income inequality. The government health care and primary and secondary education programs in developing countries are not well targeted, but their incidence tends to be progressive.
Frederic Lambert and Hyunmin Park
We analyze microdata from Mexico's survey on household income and expenditures (ENIGH) to study the evolution of income inequality in Mexico over 2004-16, identify its sources, and investigate how it was affected by government social policy. We find evidence of only a small decline in inequality over this period. The observed decline may be attributed to government transfers, notably targeted cash transfers (Prospera) and non-contributory pensions. In 2016, those two programs accounted for more than two thirds of the reduction in the Gini coefficient due to government transfers. Other transfer programs such as farmland subsidies (Proagro), government scholarships, and non-monetary transfers for medical expenditures have not been as effective.