Reduction in inequality due to the social security and income tax systems
This tracks the impact of the income support and income tax systems on household income inequality in Australia, using the Gini Coefficient. The bottom lines show the impact on inequality of the social security system – the difference between private income and gross income. The top lines show the impact on inequality of the income tax system – the difference between gross income and disposable income. Social security payments have a greater overall impact on inequality (ranging from a 9.4% to 11.6% reduction in the Gini for weekly income) than income tax does (ranging from a 4.3% to 5.8% reduction). The impact of social security on inequality decreased in the years before 2008 (represented by the rise in the bottom row), increased shortly afterwards (represented by the fall in the bottom row), then declined after 2011. The impact of social security on inequality is influenced by three main factors: (1) Changes in the share of recipients in the overall population This is shown here.…
Level of income inequality in OECD countries
These graphs compare overall income inequality in OECD countries, using the Gini coefficient, for which a higher score represents greater inequality. 2017-18: The graph shows that income inequality in Australia in 2018 - the latest date for which comparative data is available - was close to the average level for wealthy nations. 2015-16: It shows that income inequality in Australia in 2015 – the latest date for which comparative data is available – was higher than the OECD average. Australia sits between other English-speaking countries, above Canada but below the United States and the United Kingdom; and alongside some countries with lower income levels, like Greece and Portugal. Most European countries had much lower income inequality than Australia.
Household wealth distribution in OECD nations
In 2014, wealth was less unequally distributed in Australia than on average throughout the OECD, with 46% of household wealth in Australia held by the top 10% of households ranked by wealth. In contrast, income inequality is greater in Australia than in most OECD nations.
Trends in average weekly disposable income since 1999-00
This shows how average household incomes grew in ‘real terms’ (after inflation) for the lowest, middle and highest 20% income groups in Australia, as well as the highest 5%. It shows that income growth was very uneven during the boom from 1999-00 to 2007-08. The average income of the lowest 20% grew by 5.6% per year in real terms, compared with 5.9% for the middle 20%, 7.2% for the highest 20%, and 10.3% for the highest 5%. After the Global Financial Crisis, from 2007-08 to 2015-16, household incomes grew much more slowly and less unequally. The average household incomes of the lowest 20% grew by 2.5% per year (aided by a large pension increase in 2009), compared with 0.3% for the middle 20%, 0.8% for the highest 20%, and a decline of 0.6% for the highest 5% (likely due to falls in returns from investments.
Average income tax paid by households
This shows the average (not marginal) tax rates paid by households (not individuals) in different income groups. Personal income taxes are progressive, so average tax rates increase with income. Households in the lowest 20% pay only 4% of their overall income in income taxes on average (including the Medicare Levy) compared with 15% for the middle 20% and 26% for the highest 20%. However, the progressive impact of income taxes is largely offset by the regressive impact of other taxes such as the Goods and Services Tax and Stamp Duties. Find out more.
Trends in wealth inequality by asset type
This graph shows the contribution of each asset class to overall wealth inequality, and how this changed over time. The sum of these contributions is the Gini coefficient for each year, which rose from 0.57 in 2003-04 to 0.62 in 2017-18. It also shows the contribution of different components of household wealth (asset classes) to overall wealth inequality. The three asset classes making the greatest contributions to wealth inequality at the end of the period in 2015-16 (when the Gini coefficient was 0.62) were owner-occupied housing (contributing 0.22, reflecting its high overall weight among household assets), shares and business income (contributing 0.15, reflecting its high concentration in high-wealth households), and superannuation (contributing 0.12, reflecting its high overall weight among household assets). The main contributors to growth in wealth inequality from 2003-04 to 2017-18 were superannuation (whose contribution to the Gini coefficient for wealth rose by 0.04) and…
Comparison of household disposable incomes
This table compares the minimum and average household incomes of the lowest 40% income group, the highest 5% and the highest 1%. In 2015-16, the average household income of the highest 1% was $11,682 per week, over ten times the average disposable income of the lowest 40% , which was $1,022 per week. Their incomes were almost twice that of the highest 5% and almost six times the overall average household disposable income ($2,033). The incomes of the highest 1% of households also increased more rapidly. Between 1999-00 and 2015-16, their average incomes rose 15% faster than the incomes of households in the highest 5%; and 42% faster than the lowest 40%.
Components of Australia’s wealth
Ths graph shows the parts of Australia's wealth. 2017-18: 39% of household wealth is held in owner-occupied housing, 12% in investment property, 21% in superannuation another 20% in shares and other financial assets (such as bonds and bank accounts), and 9% in other non-financial assets such as cars. 2015-16: A large component of Australia’s household wealth (39%) is held in the family home, followed by 20% in superannuation , and 19% in financial assets such as shares and business assets. Around 12% is held in other real estate – investment properties - and 10% in other non‑financial assets such as vehicles and home contents.
Shares of wealth across wealth groups by asset type
This graph shows how different types of wealth holdings are distributed across wealth groups. It shows that ownership of shares, investment real estate and superannuation is highly concentrated. 2017-18: The wealthiest 20% group holds 81% of shares and other financial investments; and 83% of investment property. Superannuation is also shared unequally, with 61% by value held by the highest 20%, and 20% held by the next highest wealth group. Owner-occupied housing is more equally distributed, with 55% by value held by the highest 20%, and 27% by the second-highest wealth group. 2015-16: The highest 20% of the wealth distribution owns over 80% of all wealth in investment properties and shares and over 60% of all superannuation assets. Household wealth in the residential home is more evenly distributed, though the highest 20% still holds 54% of all wealth in this form. The most evenly distributed asset type is ‘other non‑financial assets’ (e.g. vehicles and home contents), since…
