Missing Top Income Recipients

M. Ravallion
{"title":"Missing Top Income Recipients","authors":"M. Ravallion","doi":"10.3386/W28890","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Low response rates among rich households are thought to be a serious problem in many applications using household surveys. The paper discusses the various ways the problem can be dealt with, and makes some recommendations for practice, including in developing countries. Under certain conditions, income-selective non-compliance with an initially randomized assignment can be corrected by reweighting the data. This requires that the surveys pick up at least some top incomes. If not, then income tax records can help, including in estimating distributional national accounts. However, tax data come with their own concerns including tax avoidance/evasion, weak coverage of informal sectors and illicit incomes, and concerns about construct validity, given the limitations of taxable income as a basis for inter-personal comparisons of economic welfare. An appropriately weighted survey-based distribution of an acceptable measure of economic welfare need not be less reliable for most purposes of distributional analysis than income-tax records, including in combination with surveys. The choice will depend on the question to be addressed, and country-specific circumstances. These measurement issues warrant further research across multiple settings.","PeriodicalId":284513,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Economic Inequality","volume":"145 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Economic Inequality","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3386/W28890","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Low response rates among rich households are thought to be a serious problem in many applications using household surveys. The paper discusses the various ways the problem can be dealt with, and makes some recommendations for practice, including in developing countries. Under certain conditions, income-selective non-compliance with an initially randomized assignment can be corrected by reweighting the data. This requires that the surveys pick up at least some top incomes. If not, then income tax records can help, including in estimating distributional national accounts. However, tax data come with their own concerns including tax avoidance/evasion, weak coverage of informal sectors and illicit incomes, and concerns about construct validity, given the limitations of taxable income as a basis for inter-personal comparisons of economic welfare. An appropriately weighted survey-based distribution of an acceptable measure of economic welfare need not be less reliable for most purposes of distributional analysis than income-tax records, including in combination with surveys. The choice will depend on the question to be addressed, and country-specific circumstances. These measurement issues warrant further research across multiple settings.
缺少高收入受助人
在许多使用家庭调查的应用程序中,富裕家庭的低回复率被认为是一个严重的问题。本文讨论了处理这一问题的各种方法,并为实践提出了一些建议,包括在发展中国家。在某些条件下,收入选择性不遵守最初的随机分配可以通过重新加权数据来纠正。这就要求调查至少包括一些高收入人群。如果没有,那么所得税记录可以提供帮助,包括估算分配国民账户。然而,税收数据也有其自身的问题,包括避税/逃税,对非正规部门和非法收入的覆盖不足,以及考虑到应税收入作为个人间经济福利比较基础的局限性,对结构有效性的担忧。就分配分析的大多数目的而言,对可接受的经济福利衡量标准进行适当加权的、基于调查的分配并不一定比所得税记录(包括与调查相结合)更不可靠。选择将取决于要解决的问题和各国的具体情况。这些测量问题需要在多种环境下进行进一步的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信