IFS - The tax system reduces inequality – but benefits do most of the heavy lifting
New IFS analysis, funded by the Economic and Social Research Council, finds that though benefits do much of the work in reducing income inequality, taxes also redistribute from rich to poor, and are responsible for at least a fifth of the total redistribution the tax and benefit system achieves.
On the 30th May, the ONS will publish its annual report on the effects of taxes and benefits on UK household income. Last year’s report concluded that “overall, taxes had a negligible effect on income inequality”, a result that received considerable attention. However new IFS analysis improves on the ONS’s methodology and finds that the tax system is in fact progressive.
Our key results include:
- The system of direct taxes (income tax, NICs and council tax) and benefits reduces inequality. Before redistribution the highest-income fifth of individuals on average have an income that is 12 times as large as that of the poorest fifth. After adding on cash benefits and deducting direct taxes this ratio falls to 5.
- While taxes are progressive, benefits are considerably more so. The poorest fifth receives 16 times more in benefits as a share of their net income than the highest-income fifth does. Conversely, the highest-income fifth pays just 2.7 times as much direct tax as a share of income as the poorest fifth. Measuring benefits and taxes as a share of net income is the right way of thinking about their progressivity, though of course in cash terms the highest-income fifth does pay a much larger amount of tax (13.7 times as much) than the poorest fifth does.
- Across the whole population and at any point in time, 30% of individuals are in households that receive more in cash benefits than they pay in direct and indirect taxes. This is true of 27% of those in working-age households with children; 13% of those in working-age households without children; and 66% of those in households with at least one pensioner.
Different taxes have different distributional effects:
- Income tax and NICs, taken together, are clearly progressive. The highest income fifth pays about 4 times as much direct tax as a share of income as the poorest fifth and 20 times as much in cash terms.
- But council tax is regressive. Even after accounting for council tax support (which reduces council tax liabilities for low income families), the poorest tenth of the population pay 8% of their income in council tax, while the next 50% pay 4-5% and the richest 40% pay 2-3%.
- Indirect taxes (VAT and excise duties) measured as a share of expenditure are distributionally neutral. Overall, 15% of people’s expenditure is accounted for by indirect tax (around two thirds of which is VAT), with little variation across rich and poor households.
The ONS is right in saying that benefits significantly reduce inequality. The strong claim that taxes make a “negligible” difference, though, is not robust to different (possibly preferable) ways of measuring their effects.
Household surveys under-represent people with very high incomes. We correct for this, which means we better capture the fact that the rich pay a large share of tax. We also treat employer National Insurance contributions (NICs) as a direct tax just like employee NICs. Employer NICs are progressive, so this change also increases our estimate of the progressivity of the tax system.
The biggest choice is over how to account for indirect taxes. If you measure their effect as a share of expenditure they look broadly distributionally neutral. If you measure them as a share of income, as the ONS does, they look regressive. But this is driven by households with high spending relative to their income at a point in time – these households are disproportionately likely to be on a low income only temporarily or to have had their incomes under-recorded in the survey.
All this of course ignores other taxes like capital gains tax, corporation tax and inheritance tax whose impact are much harder to measure but which are likely to be paid disproportionately by the better off.
Pascale Bourquin, an author of the briefing note and a Research Economist at IFS said:
“The tax and benefit system significantly reduces the gap between rich and poor, with benefits playing a particularly big role. However, contrary to the ONS’s claim, taxes do also reduce inequality. Within that, council tax is clearly regressive, income tax and NICs are significantly progressive, and we should probably think of indirect taxes as being broadly distributionally neutral. But the bigger picture is that what matters for income inequality is the progressivity of the tax and benefit system as a whole, and not a specific part of it. The government should achieve its desired amount of redistribution using those parts of the tax and benefit system best suited to that particular job.”
Latest News from
Healthy meals, healthy planet – IPPR calls for food system shake up to fight climate crisis and food poverty07/05/2021 11:25:00
Think tank calls for expansion of free school meals, healthy food voucher scheme and end to environmentally harmful foods
King's Fund - New analysis shows ‘widespread decline’ in adult social care06/05/2021 15:05:00
New figures reveal the dire state of England's social care sector before the pandemic, with more people requesting support but fewer getting the help they needed. The data puts further pressure on the government to commit to reform of social care in next week’s Queen’s Speech.
“Excellent news”: IEA Fellow comments on UK-India trade and investment deals05/05/2021 12:15:00
IEA Fellow and Competere CEO Shanker Singham responded to the Prime Minister’s announcement of new trade and investment deals with India
IEA - No need for “emergency measures” to manage national debt, says new research04/05/2021 10:35:00
New IEA research paper ‘UK Debt in Perspective’, authored by Professors Forrest Capie and Geoffrey Wood, gives historical context to the current UK debt figures, which currently stand at around 100 per cent of national income.
Adam Smith Inst - UK Gov will miss Brexit chance to make 2030 smoke free04/05/2021 09:30:00
In the UK, around 78,000 people die every year as a consequence of smoking with and many more live with the misery of debilitating smoking-related diseases. While the number of smokers has fallen in recent years the Government is not on track to meet its target of being ‘smoke-free by 2030’, which means having an adult smoking prevalence of 5% or less.
Proposed ban on zero-hours contracts “completely the wrong move”, says IEA expert03/05/2021 09:15:00
Professor Len Shackleton, Editorial and Research Fellow at free market think tank the Institute of Economic Affairs, responded to the TUC’s demands for the government to ban zero-hours contracts
JRF hails High Court bid to end discrimination against legacy benefit claimants30/04/2021 09:15:00
The High Court has granted claimants of Employment Support Allowance permission to challenge the Department for Work and Pensions’ decision not to increase their benefit in line with Universal Credit.
Modern Monetary Theory cannot deliver long-term growth, says new IEA research29/04/2021 14:25:00
New IEA research, authored by the Director of the Institute of International Monetary Research Juan E. Castañeda, highlights shortcomings of Modern Monetary Theory (MMT).
IFG - Spending more is no guarantee of success – the impact of 20 years of devolution on public services across the UK29/04/2021 13:25:00
With just one week to go before Scottish and Welsh elections, a new Institute for Government report, published today, has revealed big differences in the performance of public services across England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland over the last two decades.