Vermögenskonzentration in Österreich: Ein Update auf Basis des HFCS 2017

Ines Heck, Jakob Kapeller and Rafael Wildauer

No 30683, Greenwich Papers in Political Economy from University of Greenwich, Greenwich Political Economy Research Centre

Abstract: This report uses the third wave of the Household Finance and Consumption Survey (HFCS) to analyse the distribution of household wealth in Austria. Special focus is given to the problem of differential nonresponse bias from which the Austrian survey data is most likely suffering. Taking Blanchet et al.’s (2017) and Blanchet et al.’s (2018) critique into account that reliance on type I Pareto distributions to correct the underreporting in the tail due to differential nonresponse relies on the restrictive assumption of scale invariance, this report presents a new approach. We fit a type II Pareto distribution to the data which allows for nonconstant concentration within the tail of the wealth distribution. We overcome the well known problems of fitting type II distributions to the data by adapting Castillo & Hadi’s (1997) elemental percentile method (EPM). Using this approach results in an increase of aggregate private net wealth in Austria from 985 billion to 1,249 billion Euro. Average household net wealth increases from 250,000 to 318,000 Euro and the top 1% share increases from 23 to 39 percent. Next we use the Pareto-tail-amended data to estimate the revenue potential of four different periodic net wealth tax designs, taking tax evasion into account. Linear model I yields revenues of 5 billion Euro (assuming no evasion), mildly progressive model II yields 8.8 billion Euro (including evasion effects) and progressive model III yields 13.1 billion Euros (assuming strong evasion effects). Model IV is inspired by Piketty (2013) and introduces a maximum wealth level at 1,000 times average wealth (i.e. 318 million Euro). We estimate the revenue potential of model IV to be 91.5 billion Euro in the first year, even when taking strong evasion reactions into account. Models I and II would only be able to slow down increases in wealth inequality, while model III might have the potential to stabilize current levels of inequality and model IV would have the potential to strongly reduce current levels of inequality.

Keywords: wealth distribution; Pareto distribution; wealth tax (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020-12-22
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://gala.gre.ac.uk/id/eprint/30683/7/30683_WILD ... 96sterreich_2020.pdf

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gpe:wpaper:30683

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Greenwich Papers in Political Economy from University of Greenwich, Greenwich Political Economy Research Centre Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Nadine Edwards ().