Abstract
O objetivo deste estudo é o de estudar em pormenor os efeitos redistributivos das pensões, outras transferências socias e impostos em Portugal no período 2008‑17, incluindo a crise de 2010‑13 e a recuperação económica pós ‑2014. As sucessivas distribuições do rendimento e respetivas transições do rendimento de Mercado ao Disponível são analisadas. As pensões são objeto de atenção individual dada a sua importância crescente e serem elas que dão a maior contribuição para o decréscimo da desigualdade. A subida da dimensão, eficácia e progressividade dos impostos explica a relativa estabilidade do Gini durante a crise. Depois de 2014, a desigualdade do rendimento Disponível diminuiu significativamente devido à recuperação económica, quebra do desemprego e à alteração das políticas públicas.
Highlights
More than 20 years after Atkinson’s 1996 presidential address to the Royal Economic Society entitled “Bringing income distribution in from the cold”, the study of income inequality and its reduction through the redistributive effects of public policy instruments, benefits and taxes is at the centre of the public debate
The Disposable income of the poorer households increased by 20.2% in real terms between 2014‐17, 4.2 times the rate of growth of that of the 20% wealthiest households (4.9%)
This study furthers the understanding of the evolution of income inequality in Portugal, in 2008‐17, and the role played by the redistribution policies
Summary
More than 20 years after Atkinson’s 1996 presidential address to the Royal Economic Society entitled “Bringing income distribution in from the cold”, the study of income inequality and its reduction through the redistributive effects of public policy instruments, benefits and taxes is at the centre of the public debate It features in both academic research and political discussions across the ideological divide, and enjoys widespread media attention. A new approach emerged focussing on the analysis of the defining characteristics of the different types of welfare state and how these shape redistribution, as discussed in, for example, Esping‐Andersen (1990), Castles and Mitchell (1992), and in Esping‐Andersen and Myles (2009) Their comparison of the different types of welfare state was still mainly based on macroenomic indicators, such as the weight of taxes and social transfers in GDP. The availability of microdata, sourced from either administrative data or direct household surveys, has comprehensively transformed this topic by creating a more microeconomic approach based on the analysis of household income and the microsimulation of the impact of social and fiscal policies on inequality and social well‐being
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
