Income Inequality, Mobility, and Turnover at the Top in the US, 1987–2010

Auten, Gerald; Gee, Geoffrey; Turner, Nicholas

doi:10.1257/aer.103.3.168

Cited by 61 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Research on income mobility of top incomes is comparatively scarce, as panel data on high incomes are rare and often hard to obtain. On the intragenerational level, top income mobility has been analyzed for Canada, the U.S., France, and Norway (Saez and Veall, , ; Landais, ; Auten and Gee, ; Aaberge et al ., ; Auten et al ., ). All analyses use micro‐level panel data of income tax returns.…”

Section: Literaturementioning

confidence: 97%

Mobility of Top Incomes inGermany

Jenderny

2015

Review of Income and Wealth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may Mobility of Top Incomes in GermanyKatharina Jenderny † * May 2013Abstract Mobility of top incomes matters for both the openness of the income elite and the share of total income that this group receives. It is thus an important complement information to the growing snapshot literature on top income concentration. I use microlevel panel data of German income tax files that is highly representative for top income households. Top income mobility is assessed in four dimensions: (i) its stability over time, (ii) the degree of mobility between top income fractiles, (iii) the degree of mobility between equally sized groups and mobility in ranks, both of which do not depend on fractile sizes, and (iv) mobility's impact on distributional results.Mobility in terms of annual fractile changes is high between the richest top income fractiles, which is primarily due to tiny fractile sizes. When the fractiles' sizes are controlled for, top income recipients' mobility is lower than that of lower income tax units.

show abstract

Section: Literaturementioning

confidence: 97%

Mobility of Top Incomes inGermany

Jenderny

2015

Review of Income and Wealth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Van Kerm (2004), in a comparison of Belgium, Germany and the United States showed that most of this mobility involved a change in rank order in the distribution. Inequality will not be persistent if families' positions in the income distribution are not stable (Auten, Gee and Turner 2013) and for this reason inequality in a given year-or even rising inequality over several years-may be of less concern if it is offset by income mobility (Krugman 1992;Carroll 2010;Bradbury and Katz 2011). This implies that we should consider inequality and volatility or individual mobility, simultaneously, but for this we require data on the incomes of specific households followed over an extended period of time rather than the cross-sectional information usually used in studies of inequality.…”

Section: Education and Income Inequality In The Unites Statesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Income Inequality and Education

Breen¹,

Chung²

2015

SocScience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many commentators have seen the growing gap in earnings and income between those with a college education and those without as a major cause of increasing inequality in the United States and elsewhere. In this article we investigate the extent to which increasing the educational attainment of the US population might ameliorate inequality. We use data from NLSY79 and carry out a three-level decomposition of total inequality into within-person, between-person and betweeneducation parts. We find that the between-education contribution to inequality is small, even when we consider only adjusted inequality that omits the within-person component. We carry out a number of simulations to gauge the likely impact on inequality of changes in the distribution of education and of a narrowing of the differences in average incomes between those with different levels of education. We find that any feasible educational policy is likely to have only a minor impact on income inequality.

show abstract

“…The CNLSY sample currently ranges in age from under five to over thirty-five and these parameters are closer to the current generation than are those in the NLSY. The oldest of the CNLSY’s economic mobility sample can be traditionally measured in about five to ten years, when their incomes and earnings are best observed (Auten, Gee, and Turner 2013). The data in table 1 refer to the NLSY parents and their experiences growing up because it is summarizing adult outcomes of the IGM process.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiple Barriers to Economic Opportunity for the “Truly” Disadvantaged and Vulnerable

Smeeding¹

2016

RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article answers several questions: Which subgroups of the U.S. population—designated by race, ethnicity, family structure, educational status, income, wealth, consumption, or other characteristics—appear to be particularly vulnerable to a lack of economic opportunity based on household characteristics of the family and its children? To what degree does poor access to economic advancement appear to reflect low income or wealth, or do additional barriers contribute substantially to some subgroups’ limited opportunities? Similarly, what advantages accrue to high-income and other privileged groups, such as those born into a well-established married family? What does current research tell us about the mechanisms through which barriers operate and policies that might be effective in reducing them?

show abstract

Income Inequality, Mobility, and Turnover at the Top in the US, 1987–2010

Cited by 61 publications

References 2 publications

Mobility of Top Incomes inGermany

Mobility of Top Incomes inGermany

Income Inequality and Education

Multiple Barriers to Economic Opportunity for the “Truly” Disadvantaged and Vulnerable

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About