Brazil is one of the most unequal countries in terms of income in Latin America. In 2022, it was estimated that almost 57 percent of the income generated in Brazil was held by the richest 20 percent of its population. Among the Latin American countries with available data included in this graph, Colombia came in first, as the wealthiest 20 percent of the Colombian population held over 59 percent of the country's total income.
South Africa had the highest inequality in income distribution in 2024, with a Gini score of **. Its South African neighbor, Namibia, followed in second. The Gini coefficient measures the deviation of income (or consumption) distribution among individuals or households within a country from a perfectly equal distribution. A value of 0 represents absolute equality, and a value of 100 represents absolute inequality. All the 20 most unequal countries in the world were either located in Africa or Latin America & The Caribbean.
Based on the degree of inequality in income distribution measured by the Gini coefficient, Colombia was the most unequal country in Latin America as of 2022. Colombia's Gini coefficient amounted to 54.8. The Dominican Republic recorded the lowest Gini coefficient at 37, even below Uruguay and Chile, which are some of the countries with the highest human development indexes in Latin America. The Gini coefficient explained The Gini coefficient measures the deviation of the distribution of income among individuals or households in a given country from a perfectly equal distribution. A value of 0 represents absolute equality, whereas 100 would be the highest possible degree of inequality. This measurement reflects the degree of wealth inequality at a certain moment in time, though it may fail to capture how average levels of income improve or worsen over time. What affects the Gini coefficient in Latin America? Latin America, as other developing regions in the world, generally records high rates of inequality, with a Gini coefficient ranging between 37 and 55 points according to the latest available data from the reporting period 2010-2023. According to the Human Development Report, wealth redistribution by means of tax transfers improves Latin America's Gini coefficient to a lesser degree than it does in advanced economies. Wider access to education and health services, on the other hand, have been proven to have a greater direct effect in improving Gini coefficient measurements in the region.
As of 2023, the countries in Europe with the greatest share of national wealth taken by the top one percent of wealthy people were Russia, Turkey, and Hungary, with over two-thirds of wealth in Russia being owned by the wealthiest decile. On the other hand, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Slovakia were the countries with the smallest share of national wealth going to the top one percent, with more than half of wealth in the Netherlands going to the bottom 90 percent.
New York was the state with the greatest gap between rich and poor, with a Gini coefficient score of 0.52 in 2023. Although not a state, District of Columbia was among the highest Gini coefficients in the United States that year.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/legal/#copyright-public-domainhttps://fred.stlouisfed.org/legal/#copyright-public-domain
Graph and download economic data for Share of Net Worth Held by the Top 1% (99th to 100th Wealth Percentiles) (WFRBST01134) from Q3 1989 to Q1 2025 about net worth, wealth, percentile, Net, and USA.
Cross-national research on the causes and consequences of income inequality has been hindered by the limitations of existing inequality datasets: greater coverage across countries and over time is available from these sources only at the cost of significantly reduced comparability across observations. The goal of the Standardized World Income Inequality Database (SWIID) is to overcome these limitations. A custom missing-data algorithm was used to standardize the United Nations University's World Income Inequality Database and data from other sources; data collected by the Luxembourg Income Study served as the standard. The SWIID provides comparable Gini indices of gross and net income inequality for 192 countries for as many years as possible from 1960 to the present along with estimates of uncertainty in these statistics. By maximizing comparability for the largest possible sample of countries and years, the SWIID is better suited to broadly cross-national research on income inequality than previously available sources: it offers coverage double that of the next largest income inequality dataset, and its record of comparability is three to eight times better than those of alternate datasets.
In the first quarter of 2024, almost two-thirds percent of the total wealth in the United States was owned by the top 10 percent of earners. In comparison, the lowest 50 percent of earners only owned 2.5 percent of the total wealth. Income inequality in the U.S. Despite the idea that the United States is a country where hard work and pulling yourself up by your bootstraps will inevitably lead to success, this is often not the case. In 2023, 7.4 percent of U.S. households had an annual income under 15,000 U.S. dollars. With such a small percentage of people in the United States owning such a vast majority of the country’s wealth, the gap between the rich and poor in America remains stark. The top one percent The United States follows closely behind China as the country with the most billionaires in the world. Elon Musk alone held around 219 billion U.S. dollars in 2022. Over the past 50 years, the CEO-to-worker compensation ratio has exploded, causing the gap between rich and poor to grow, with some economists theorizing that this gap is the largest it has been since right before the Great Depression.
The OECD Income Distribution database (IDD) has been developed to benchmark and monitor countries' performance in the field of income inequality and poverty. It contains a number of standardised indicators based on the central concept of "equivalised household disposable income", i.e. the total income received by the households less the current taxes and transfers they pay, adjusted for household size with an equivalence scale. While household income is only one of the factors shaping people's economic well-being, it is also the one for which comparable data for all OECD countries are most common. Income distribution has a long-standing tradition among household-level statistics, with regular data collections going back to the 1980s (and sometimes earlier) in many OECD countries.
Achieving comparability in this field is a challenge, as national practices differ widely in terms of concepts, measures, and statistical sources. In order to maximise international comparability as well as inter-temporal consistency of data, the IDD data collection and compilation process is based on a common set of statistical conventions (e.g. on income concepts and components). The information obtained by the OECD through a network of national data providers, via a standardized questionnaire, is based on national sources that are deemed to be most representative for each country.
Small changes in estimates between years should be treated with caution as they may not be statistically significant.
Fore more details, please refer to: https://www.oecd.org/els/soc/IDD-Metadata.pdf and https://www.oecd.org/social/income-distribution-database.htm
The World Top Incomes Database provides statistical information on the shares of top income groups for 30 countries. The construction of this database was possible thanks to the research of over thirty contributing authors. There has been a marked revival of interest in the study of the distribution of top incomes using tax data. Beginning with the research by Thomas Piketty of the long-run distribution of top incomes in France, a succession of studies has constructed top income share time series over the long-run for more than twenty countries to date. These projects have generated a large volume of data, which are intended as a research resource for further analysis. In using data from income tax records, these studies use similar sources and methods as the pioneering work by Kuznets for the United States.The findings of recent research are of added interest, since the new data provide estimates covering nearly all of the twentieth century -a length of time series unusual in economics. In contrast to existing international databases, generally restricted to the post-1970 or post-1980 period, the top income data cover a much longer period, which is important because structural changes in income and wealth distributions often span several decades. The data series is fairly homogenous across countries, annual, long-run, and broken down by income source for several cases. Users should be aware also about their limitations. Firstly, the series measure only top income shares and hence are silent on how inequality evolves elsewhere in the distribution. Secondly, the series are largely concerned with gross incomes before tax. Thirdly, the definition of income and the unit of observation (the individual vs. the family) vary across countries making comparability of levels across countries more difficult. Even within a country, there are breaks in comparability that arise because of changes in tax legislation affecting the definition of income, although most studies try to correct for such changes to create homogenous series. Finally and perhaps most important, the series might be biased because of tax avoidance and tax evasion. The first theme of the research programme is the assembly and analysis of historical evidence from fiscal records on the long-run development of economic inequality. “Long run” is a relative term, and here it means evidence dating back before the Second World War, and extending where possible back into the nineteenth century. The time span is determined by the sources used, which are based on taxes on incomes, earnings, wealth and estates. Perspective on current concerns is provided by the past, but also by comparison with other countries. The second theme of the research programme is that of cross-country comparisons. The research is not limited to OECD countries and will draw on evidence globally. In order to understand the drivers of inequality, it is necessary to consider the sources of economic advantage. The third theme is the analysis of the sources of income, considering separately the roles of earned incomes and property income, and examining the historical and comparative evolution of earned and property income, and their joint distribution. The fourth theme is the long-run trend in the distribution of wealth and its transmission through inheritance. Here again there are rich fiscal data on the passing of estates at death. The top income share series are constructed, in most of the cases presented in this database, using tax statistics (China is an exception; for the time being the estimates come from households surveys). The use of tax data is often regarded by economists with considerable disbelief. These doubts are well justified for at least two reasons. The first is that tax data are collected as part of an administrative process, which is not tailored to the scientists' needs, so that the definition of income, income unit, etc., are not necessarily those that we would have chosen. This causes particular difficulties for comparisons across countries, but also for time-series analysis where there have been substantial changes in the tax system, such as the moves to and from the joint taxation of couples. Secondly, it is obvious that those paying tax have a financial incentive to present their affairs in a way that reduces tax liabilities. There is tax avoidance and tax evasion. The rich, in particular, have a strong incentive to understate their taxable incomes. Those with wealth take steps to ensure that the return comes in the form of asset appreciation, typically taxed at lower rates or not at all. Those with high salaries seek to ensure that part of their remuneration comes in forms, such as fringe benefits or stock-options which receive favorable tax treatment. Both groups may make use of tax havens that allow income to be moved beyond the reach of the national tax net. These shortcomings limit what can be said from tax data, but this does not mean that the data are worthless. Like all economic data, they measure with error the 'true' variable in which we are interested. References Atkinson, Anthony B. and Thomas Piketty (2007). Top Incomes over the Twentieth Century: A Contrast between Continental European and English-Speaking Countries (Volume 1). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 585 pp. Atkinson, Anthony B. and Thomas Piketty (2010). Top Incomes over the Twentieth Century: A Global Perspective (Volume 2). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 776 pp. Atkinson, Anthony B., Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez (2011). Top Incomes in the Long Run of History, Journal of Economic Literature, 49(1), pp. 3-71. Kuznets, Simon (1953). Shares of Upper Income Groups in Income and Savings. New York: National Bureau of Economic Research, 707 pp. Piketty, Thomas (2001). Les Hauts Revenus en France au 20ème siècle. Paris: Grasset, 807 pp. Piketty, Thomas (2003). Income Inequality in France, 1901-1998, Journal of Political Economy, 111(5), pp. 1004-42.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Analysis of ‘GapMinder - Income Inequality’ provided by Analyst-2 (analyst-2.ai), based on source dataset retrieved from https://www.kaggle.com/psterk/income-inequality on 28 January 2022.
--- Dataset description provided by original source is as follows ---
This analysis focuses on income inequailty as measured by the Gini Index* and its association with economic metrics such as GDP per capita, investments as a % of GDP, and tax revenue as a % of GDP. One polical metric, EIU democracy index, is also included.
The data is for years 2006 - 2016
This investigation can be considered a starting point for complex questions such as:
This analysis uses the gapminder dataset from the Gapminder Foundation. The Gapminder Foundation is a non-profit venture registered in Stockholm, Sweden, that promotes sustainable global development and achievement of the United Nations Millennium Development Goals by increased use and understanding of statistics and other information about social, economic and environmental development at local, national and global levels.
*The Gini Index is a measure of statistical dispersion intended to represent the income or wealth distribution of a nation's residents, and is the most commonly used measurement of inequality. It was developed by the Italian statistician and sociologist Corrado Gini and published in his 1912 paper Variability and Mutability.
The dataset contains data from the following GapMinder datasets:
"This democracy index is using the data from the Economist Inteligence Unit to express the quality of democracies as a number between 0 and 100. It's based on 60 different aspects of societies that are relevant to democracy universal suffrage for all adults, voter participation, perception of human rights protection and freedom to form organizations and parties. The democracy index is calculated from the 60 indicators, divided into five ""sub indexes"", which are:
The sub-indexes are based on the sum of scores on roughly 12 indicators per sub-index, converted into a score between 0 and 100. (The Economist publishes the index with a scale from 0 to 10, but Gapminder has converted it to 0 to 100 to make it easier to communicate as a percentage.)" https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1d0noZrwAWxNBTDSfDgG06_aLGWUz4R6fgDhRaUZbDzE/edit#gid=935776888
GDP per capita measures the value of everything produced in a country during a year, divided by the number of people. The unit is in international dollars, fixed 2011 prices. The data is adjusted for inflation and differences in the cost of living between countries, so-called PPP dollars. The end of the time series, between 1990 and 2016, uses the latest GDP per capita data from the World Bank, from their World Development Indicators. To go back in time before the World Bank series starts in 1990, we have used several sources, such as Angus Maddison. https://www.gapminder.org/data/documentation/gd001/
Capital formation is a term used to describe the net capital accumulation during an accounting period for a particular country. The term refers to additions of capital goods, such as equipment, tools, transportation assets, and electricity. Countries need capital goods to replace the older ones that are used to produce goods and services. If a country cannot replace capital goods as they reach the end of their useful lives, production declines. Generally, the higher the capital formation of an economy, the faster an economy can grow its aggregate income.
refers to compulsory transfers to the central governement for public purposes. Does not include social security. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/GC.TAX.TOTL.GD.ZS
Gapminder is an independent Swedish foundation with no political, religious or economic affiliations. Gapminder is a fact tank, not a think tank. Gapminder fights devastating misconceptions about global development. Gapminder produces free teaching resources making the world understandable based on reliable statistics. Gapminder promotes a fact-based worldview everyone can understand. Gapminder collaborates with universities, UN, public agencies and non-governmental organizations. All Gapminder activities are governed by the board. We do not award grants. Gapminder Foundation is registered at Stockholm County Administration Board. Our constitution can be found here.
Thanks to gapminder.org for organizing the above datasets.
Below are some research questions associated with the data and some initial conclusions:
Research Question 1 - Is Income Inequality Getting Worse or Better in the Last 10 Years?
Answer:
Yes, it is getting better, improving from 38.7 to 37.3
On a continent basis, all were either declining or mostly flat, except for Africa.
Research Question 2 - What Top 10 Countries Have the Lowest and Highest Income Inequality?
Answer:
Lowest: Slovenia, Ukraine, Czech Republic, Norway, Slovak Republic, Denmark, Kazakhstan, Finland, Belarus,Kyrgyz Republic
Highest: Colombia, Lesotho, Honduras, Bolivia, Central African Republic, Zambia, Suriname, Namibia, Botswana, South Africa
Research Question 3 Is a higher tax revenue as a % of GDP associated with less income inequality?
Answer: No
Research Question 4 - Is Higher Income Per Person - GDP Per Capita associated with less income inequality?
Answer: No, but weak negative correlation.
Research Question 5 - Is Higher Investment as % GDP associated with less income inequality?
Answer: No
Research Question 6 - Is Higher EIU Democracy Index associated with less income inequality?
Answer: No, but weak negative correlation.
The above results suggest that there are other drivers for the overall reduction in income inequality. Futher analysis of additional factors should be undertaken.
--- Original source retains full ownership of the source dataset ---
CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedicationhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
License information was derived automatically
Worldwide, income and wealth inequality have increased in many countries. Such inequalities yield various social ills, including the decline of social cohesion, a pattern visible amidst recent crises and global political upheavals. Nevertheless, scholars of social and political disaffection have focused primarily on income inequality in OECD countries. This article’s contribution is to expand that focus by: (1) examining the impact of wealth inequality, which no study has done before; (2) extending the link between inequality and social trust to political trust; and (3) taking a global approach. The authors produce an original dataset, combining a novel wealth-inequality measure with 60 waves of Barometers and Values surveys across 309 country-year units and other relevant indicators. Results show that income inequality undermines social trust, but reveal no significant effect for wealth inequality. The effects of income and wealth inequality on political trust are moderated by democracy levels and country wealth, respectively.
https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
this graphs is ourdataworld :
https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F16731800%2F00b0f9cc2bd8326c60fd0ea3b5dbe4b7%2Finequality.png?generation=1710013947537354&alt=media" alt="">
https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F16731800%2F1978511abe249d3081a3a95bae2ef7d5%2Fincome-share-top-1-before-tax-wid-extrapolations.png?generation=1710013977201099&alt=media" alt="">
https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F16731800%2F2a5a54725f65801ba75b6ab07bc5cb9f%2Fincome-share-top-1-before-tax-wid-extrapolations%20(1).png?generation=1710013994341360&alt=media" alt="">
How are incomes and wealth distributed between people? Both within countries and across the world as a whole?
On this page, you can find all our data, visualizations, and writing relating to economic inequality.
This evidence demonstrates that inequality in many countries is substantial and, in numerous instances, has been escalating. Global economic inequality is extensive and exacerbated by intersecting disparities in health, education, and various other dimensions.
However, economic inequality is not uniformly increasing. In many countries, it has declined or remained steady. Furthermore, global inequality – following two centuries of ascent – is presently decreasing as well.
The significant variations observed across countries and over time are pivotal. They indicate that high and rising inequality is not inevitable and that the current extent of inequality is subject to change.
About this data This data explorer offers various inequality indicators measured according to two distinct definitions of income sourced from different outlets.
Data from the World Inequality Database pertains to inequality prior to taxes and benefits. Data from the World Bank pertains to either income post taxes and benefits or consumption, contingent on the country and year. For additional details regarding the definitions and methodologies underlying this data, refer to the accompanying article below, where you can also delve into and juxtapose a broader spectrum of indicators from various sources.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
United States US: Income Share Held by Highest 10% data was reported at 30.600 % in 2016. This records an increase from the previous number of 30.100 % for 2013. United States US: Income Share Held by Highest 10% data is updated yearly, averaging 30.100 % from Dec 1979 (Median) to 2016, with 11 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 30.600 % in 2016 and a record low of 25.300 % in 1979. United States US: Income Share Held by Highest 10% data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.World Bank.WDI: Poverty. Percentage share of income or consumption is the share that accrues to subgroups of population indicated by deciles or quintiles.; ; World Bank, Development Research Group. Data are based on primary household survey data obtained from government statistical agencies and World Bank country departments. Data for high-income economies are from the Luxembourg Income Study database. For more information and methodology, please see PovcalNet (http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet/index.htm).; ; The World Bank’s internationally comparable poverty monitoring database now draws on income or detailed consumption data from more than one thousand six hundred household surveys across 164 countries in six regions and 25 other high income countries (industrialized economies). While income distribution data are published for all countries with data available, poverty data are published for low- and middle-income countries and countries eligible to receive loans from the World Bank (such as Chile) and recently graduated countries (such as Estonia) only. See PovcalNet (http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet/WhatIsNew.aspx) for definitions of geographical regions and industrialized countries.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Bolivia BO: Income Share Held by Lowest 20% data was reported at 5.300 % in 2021. This records an increase from the previous number of 4.700 % for 2020. Bolivia BO: Income Share Held by Lowest 20% data is updated yearly, averaging 3.500 % from Dec 1990 (Median) to 2021, with 24 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 5.600 % in 1990 and a record low of 1.100 % in 2000. Bolivia BO: Income Share Held by Lowest 20% data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Bolivia – Table BO.World Bank.WDI: Social: Poverty and Inequality. Percentage share of income or consumption is the share that accrues to subgroups of population indicated by deciles or quintiles. Percentage shares by quintile may not sum to 100 because of rounding.;World Bank, Poverty and Inequality Platform. Data are based on primary household survey data obtained from government statistical agencies and World Bank country departments. Data for high-income economies are mostly from the Luxembourg Income Study database. For more information and methodology, please see http://pip.worldbank.org.;;The World Bank’s internationally comparable poverty monitoring database now draws on income or detailed consumption data from more than 2000 household surveys across 169 countries. See the Poverty and Inequality Platform (PIP) for details (www.pip.worldbank.org).
A high number of the countries with the highest income distribution levels are located in Eastern and Central Europe, with Slovakia topping the list, with an index of ****. On the other end of the scale, South Africa was the country with the lowest income distribution.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Greece GR: Income Share Held by Highest 10% data was reported at 26.200 % in 2015. This records an increase from the previous number of 26.100 % for 2014. Greece GR: Income Share Held by Highest 10% data is updated yearly, averaging 26.000 % from Dec 2003 (Median) to 2015, with 13 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 26.700 % in 2006 and a record low of 24.600 % in 2003. Greece GR: Income Share Held by Highest 10% data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Greece – Table GR.World Bank.WDI: Poverty. Percentage share of income or consumption is the share that accrues to subgroups of population indicated by deciles or quintiles.; ; World Bank, Development Research Group. Data are based on primary household survey data obtained from government statistical agencies and World Bank country departments. Data for high-income economies are from the Luxembourg Income Study database. For more information and methodology, please see PovcalNet (http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet/index.htm).; ; The World Bank’s internationally comparable poverty monitoring database now draws on income or detailed consumption data from more than one thousand six hundred household surveys across 164 countries in six regions and 25 other high income countries (industrialized economies). While income distribution data are published for all countries with data available, poverty data are published for low- and middle-income countries and countries eligible to receive loans from the World Bank (such as Chile) and recently graduated countries (such as Estonia) only. See PovcalNet (http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet/WhatIsNew.aspx) for definitions of geographical regions and industrialized countries.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Robust determinants of income distribution within countries.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Brazil BR: Income Share Held by Highest 10% data was reported at 41.000 % in 2022. This records a decrease from the previous number of 41.600 % for 2021. Brazil BR: Income Share Held by Highest 10% data is updated yearly, averaging 44.550 % from Dec 1981 (Median) to 2022, with 38 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 51.100 % in 1989 and a record low of 39.500 % in 2020. Brazil BR: Income Share Held by Highest 10% data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Brazil – Table BR.World Bank.WDI: Social: Poverty and Inequality. Percentage share of income or consumption is the share that accrues to subgroups of population indicated by deciles or quintiles.;World Bank, Poverty and Inequality Platform. Data are based on primary household survey data obtained from government statistical agencies and World Bank country departments. Data for high-income economies are mostly from the Luxembourg Income Study database. For more information and methodology, please see http://pip.worldbank.org.;;The World Bank’s internationally comparable poverty monitoring database now draws on income or detailed consumption data from more than 2000 household surveys across 169 countries. See the Poverty and Inequality Platform (PIP) for details (www.pip.worldbank.org).
This file contains data on Gini coefficients, cumulative quintile shares, explanations regarding the basis on which the Gini coefficient was computed, and the source of the information. There are two data-sets, one containing the "high quality" sample and the other one including all the information (of lower quality) that had been collected.
The database was constructed for the production of the following paper:
Deininger, Klaus and Lyn Squire, "A New Data Set Measuring Income Inequality", The World Bank Economic Review, 10(3): 565-91, 1996.
This article presents a new data set on inequality in the distribution of income. The authors explain the criteria they applied in selecting data on Gini coefficients and on individual quintile groups’ income shares. Comparison of the new data set with existing compilations reveals that the data assembled here represent an improvement in quality and a significant expansion in coverage, although differences in the definition of the underlying data might still affect intertemporal and international comparability. Based on this new data set, the authors do not find a systematic link between growth and changes in aggregate inequality. They do find a strong positive relationship between growth and reduction of poverty.
In what follows, we provide brief descriptions of main features for individual countries that are included in the data-base. Without being comprehensive, these notes are intended to indicate some of the considerations underlying our decision to include or exclude certain observations.
Argentina Various permanent household surveys, all covering urban centers only, have been regularly conducted since 1972 and are quoted in a wide variety of sources and years, e.g., for 1980 (World Bank 1992), 1985 (Altimir 1994), and 1989 (World Bank 1992). Estimates for 1963, 1965, 1969/70, 1970/71, 1974, 1975, 1980, and 1981 (Altimir 1987) are based only on Greater Buenos Aires. Estimates for 1961, 1963, 1970 (Jain 1975) and for 1970 (van Ginneken 1984) have only limited geographic coverage and do not satisfy our minimum criteria.
Despite the many urban surveys, there are no income distribution data that are representative of the population as a whole. References to national income distribution for the years 1953, 1959, and 1961(CEPAL 1968 in Altimir 1986 ) are based on extrapolation from national accounts and have therefore not been included. Data for 1953 and 1961 from Weisskoff (1970) , from Lecaillon (1984) , and from Cromwell (1977) are also excluded.
Australia Household surveys, the result of which is reported in the statistical yearbook, have been conducted in 1968/9, 1975/6, 1978/9, 1981, 1985, 1986, 1989, and 1990.
Data for 1962 (Cromwell, 1977) and 1966/67 (Sawyer 1976) were excluded as they covered only tax payers. Jain's data for 1970 was excluded because it covered income recipients only. Data from Podder (1972) for 1967/68, from Jain (1975) for the same year, from UN (1985) for 78/79, from Sunders and Hobbes (1993) for 1986 and for 1989 were excluded given the availability of the primary sources. Data from Bishop (1991) for 1981/82, from Buhman (1988) for 1981/82, from Kakwani (1986) for 1975/76, and from Sunders and Hobbes (1993) for 1986 were utilized to test for the effect of different definitions. The values for 1967 used by Persson and Tabellini and Alesina and Rodrik (based on Paukert and Jain) are close to the ones reported in the Statistical Yearbook for 1969.
Austria: In addition to data referring to the employed population (Guger 1989), national household surveys for 1987 and 1991 are included in the LIS data base. As these data do not include income from self-employment, we do not report them in our high quality data-set.
Bahamas Data for Ginis and shares are available for 1973, 1977, 1979, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, and 1993 in government reports on population censuses and household budget surveys, and for 1973 and 1975 from UN (1981). Estimates for 1970 (Jain 1975), 1973, 1975, 1977, and 1979 (Fields 1989) have been excluded given the availability of primary sources.
Bangladesh Data from household surveys for 1973/74, 1976/77, 1977/78, 1981/82, and 1985/86 are available from the Statistical Yearbook, complemented by household-survey based information from Chen (1995) and the World Development Report. Household surveys with rural coverage for 1959, 1960, 1963/64, 1965, 1966/67 and 1968/69, and with urban coverage for 1963/64, 1965, 1966/67, and 1968/69 are also available from the Statistical yearbook. Data for 1963/64 ,1964 and 1966/67, (Jain 1975) are not included due to limited geographic coverage, We also excluded secondary sources for 1973/74, 1976/77, 1981/82 (Fields 1989), 1977 (UN 1981), 1983 (Milanovic 1994), and 1985/86 due to availability of the primary source.
Barbados National household surveys have been conducted in 1951/52 and 1978/79 (Downs, 1988). Estimates based on personal tax returns, reported consistently for 1951-1981 (Holder and Prescott, 1989), had to be excluded as they exclude the non-wage earning population. Jain's figure (used by Alesina and Rodrik) is based on the same source.
Belgium Household surveys with national coverage are available for 1978/79 (UN 1985), and for 1985, 1988, and 1992 (LIS 1995). Earlier data for 1969, 1973, 1975, 1976 and 1977 (UN 1981) refer to taxable households only and are not included.
Bolivia The only survey with national coverage is the 1990 LSMS (World Development Report). Surveys for 1986 and 1989 cover the main cities only (Psacharopoulos et al. 1992) and are therefore not included. Data for 1968 (Cromwell 1977) do not refer to a clear definition and is therefore excluded.
Botswana The only survey with national coverage was conducted in 1985-1986 (Chen et al 1993); surveys in 74/75 and 85/86 included rural areas only (UN 1981). We excluded Gini estimates for 1971/72 that refer to the economically active population only (Jain 1975), as well as 1974/75 and 1985/86 (Valentine 1993) due to lack of national coverage or consistency in definition.
Brazil Data from 1960, 1970, 1974/75, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1980, 1982, 1983, 1985, 1987 and 1989 are available from the statistical yearbook, in addition to data for 1978 (Fields 1987) and for 1979 (Psacharopoulos et al. 1992). Other sources have been excluded as they were either not of national coverage, based on wage earners only, or because a more consistent source was available.
Bulgaria: Data from household surveys are available for 1963-69 (in two year intervals), for 1970-90 (on an annual basis) from the Statistical yearbook and for 1991 - 93 from household surveys by the World Bank (Milanovic and Ying).
Burkina Faso A priority survey has been undertaken in 1995.
Central African Republic: Except for a household survey conducted in 1992, no information was available.
Cameroon The only data are from a 1983/4 household budget survey (World Bank Poverty Assessment).
Canada Gini- and share data for the 1950-61 (in irregular intervals), 1961-81 (biennially), and 1981-91 (annually) are available from official sources (Statistical Yearbook for years before 1971 and Income Distributions by Size in Canada for years since 1973, various issues). All other references seem to be based on these primary sources.
Chad: An estimate for 1958 is available in the literature, and used by Alesina and Rodrik and Persson and Tabellini but was not included due to lack of primary sources.
Chile The first nation-wide survey that included not only employment income was carried out in 1968 (UN 1981). This is complemented by household survey-based data for 1971 (Fields 1989), 1989, and 1994. Other data that refer either only to part of the population or -as in the case of a long series available from World Bank country operations- are not clearly based on primary sources, are excluded.
China Annual household surveys from 1980 to 1992, conducted separately in rural and urban areas, were consolidated by Ying (1995), based on the statistical yearbook. Data from other secondary sources are excluded due to limited geographic and population coverage and data from Chen et al (1993) for 1985 and 1990 have not been included, to maintain consistency of sources..
Colombia The first household survey with national coverage was conducted in 1970 (DANE 1970). In addition, there are data for 1971, 1972, 1974 CEPAL (1986), and for 1978, 1988/89, and 1991 (World Bank Poverty Assessment 1992 and Chen et al. 1995). Data referring to years before 1970 -including the 1964 estimate used in Persson and Tabellini were excluded, as were estimates for the wage earning population only.
Costa Rica Data on Gini coefficients and quintile shares are available for 1961, 1971 (Cespedes 1973),1977 (OPNPE 1982), 1979 (Fields 1989), 1981 (Chen et al 1993), 1983 (Bourguignon and Morrison 1989), 1986 (Sauma-Fiatt 1990), and 1989 (Chen et al 1993). Gini coefficients for 1971 (Gonzalez-Vega and Cespedes in Rottenberg 1993), 1973 and 1985 (Bourguignon and Morrison 1989) cover urban areas only and were excluded.
Cote d'Ivoire: Data based on national-level household surveys (LSMS) are available for 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, and 1995. Information for the 1970s (Schneider 1991) is based on national accounting information and therefore excluded
Cuba Official information on income distribution is limited. Data from secondary sources are available for 1953, 1962, 1973, and 1978, relying on personal wage income, i.e. excluding the population that is not economically active (Brundenius 1984).
Czech Republic Household surveys for 1993 and 1994 were obtained from Milanovic and Ying. While it is in principle possible to go back further, splitting national level surveys for the former Czechoslovakia into their independent parts, we decided not to do so as the same argument could be used to
Brazil is one of the most unequal countries in terms of income in Latin America. In 2022, it was estimated that almost 57 percent of the income generated in Brazil was held by the richest 20 percent of its population. Among the Latin American countries with available data included in this graph, Colombia came in first, as the wealthiest 20 percent of the Colombian population held over 59 percent of the country's total income.