Inequality and Mobility Using IRS and SSA Administrative Records
Paper Session
Friday, Jan. 6, 2017 7:30 PM – 9:30 PM
Swissotel Chicago, Zurich E
- Chair: David Johnson, University of Michigan
Sorting and Geographic Variation in Intergenerational Mobility
Abstract
Where children grow up matters for their long-term outcomes. However, sorting, or differences in parent characteristics across locations, biases the best causal estimates of mobility in the literature. I improve on these by estimating sorting-adjusted causal effects of place in the United States. I show that much of the variation across regions is due to sorting. Controlling for sorting reduces the variance across Census regions, divisions, and states by 74, 50, and 39 percent respectively.Measuring Life-Cycle Mobility of Children and Their Parents
Abstract
Separate literatures consider the life-cycle of income, inter- and intra-generational income mobility, income volatility and income inequality. This paper merges these literatures using a new dataset based on the income tax records of a large sample of individuals over a 25-year period. This dataset allows us to examine the life-cycle income mobility of children of different income groups and also the income mobility of their parents over a long time period. The income position of children is measured by the income of the parents in 1987, and then by their own income over the next 25 years. The income position of their parents is also followed over this period. Individuals are tracked separately, even if they change households or marry a different person. Data from individual income tax returns is supplemented by information returns (including W-2’s, 1099’s, K-1’s and other similar information returns) to measure the income of non-filers. The use of information returns allows us to address attrition problems associated with non-filers. Income is adjusted for family size so that relative economic welfare is comparable as family status changes over time. The analysis examines both the typical inter-generational rank-rank relationship and the dispersion of mobility outcomes. Given the life cycle of income and income volatility, we might expect that many more than 20 percent of individuals are in the top or bottom 20 percent of the distribution. This paper investigates the extent to which that is true. In addition, the analysis considers how mobility is affected by family status, age, occupation and other factors that may have implications for public policy.The Sensitivity of United States Top Income Shares in Tax Record Data to More Comprehensive Measures of Income
Abstract
Access to Internal Revenue Service (IRS) tax records improve researchers’ ability to track U.S. income and inequality, especially at the very top of the distribution not directly observable with survey-based data. However income measures on tax forms were designed to satisfy IRS administrative objectives, and are not always comparable with the income definitions economic researchers prefer. Using IRS tax record data since 1989 that we statistically match to Survey of Consumer Finances and Census data for income sources not available in tax data, we explore the robustness of levels and trends in inequality using the taxable market income definition often used in the top income literature to alternative income definitions that consider income more comprehensively. Additionally, we illustrate the importance of the choice of capital gains measures – demonstrating that focusing on taxable realized capital gains distorts the level and trend in top incomes relative to an accrued capital gains measure that is more consistent with the Haig-Simons income definition. This is particularly important during the Great Recession, where the exemption of housing capital gains and losses from taxation meant that the substantial losses incurred by middle-income families were not reported on tax forms. As a result, while researchers incorporating only taxable realized capital gains observed a decline in top income shares in the initial years of the Great Recession, we observe that the top income shares actually rose sharply once fully including accrued capital gains and losses including those from housing.Discussant(s)
David Johnson
, University of Michigan
Nathaniel Hendren
, Harvard University
Jacob A. Mortenson
, Joint Committee on Taxation
Jonathan Fisher
, Stanford University
JEL Classifications
- D3 - Distribution
- H0 - General