A growing body of research documents the importance of wealth and the racial wealth gap in perpetuating inequality across generations. We add to this literature by examining the impact of wealth on child income by race, while also extending our analysis to three generations. Our two stage least squares regressions reveal that grandparental and parental wealth and the younger generation’s household income is strongly positively correlated. We further explore the relationship between income and wealth by decomposing the child’s income by race. We find that the disparity in income between black and white respondents is mainly attributable to differences in family background. In context, differences in family background are stronger than differences in educational attainment. When we examine different income percentiles, however, we find that the effect of grandparental and parental wealth endowment is much stronger at the top of the income distribution. These findings indicate that wealth is an important source of income inequality.

In the U.S., median household income rose from 51,570 U.S. dollars in 1967 to 80,610 dollars in 2023. In terms of broad ethnic groups, Black Americans have consistently had the lowest median income in the given years, while Asian Americans have the highest; median income in Asian American households has typically been around double that of Black Americans.

Data and code accompanying "The Racial Wealth Gap and the Role of Firm Ownership"This paper develops an overlapping generations model that isolates the impact of the U.S. racial wealth gap in 1962 on the long-run dynamics of wealth. The model predicts that one component of the initial gap, firm ownership, coupled with the intergenerational transfer of that ownership, results in a permanent wealth gap independent of other dimensions of inequality. This implies that even if all discrimination against black Americans had ceased upon the end of Jim Crow, the wealth gap would have persisted without a reparations policy addressing the fact that the initial firm ownership gap arose in the first place.

Graph and download economic data for Income Gini Ratio for Households by Race of Householder, All Races (GINIALLRH) from 1967 to 2023 about gini, households, income, and USA.

This paper evaluates racial inequalities in healthcare affordability between high-deductible and conventional insurance. Using the 2011-2017 National Health Interview Survey, the study finds that Blacks in high-deductible plans are not disproportionately higher-income nor more engaged in other savings vehicles, unlike their White counterparts, indicating they may be income constrained rather than desiring to partially self-insure. Furthermore, conditional on income, wealth explained more of the racial disparity in healthcare access among high-deductible enrollees than conventional enrollees, consistent with the hypothesis that benefit designs relying on households’ cash reserves would yield greater disparities due to the magnitude of racial inequalities in assets.

In 2023, the Gini index for households of Asian origin in the United States stood at ****. The Census Bureau defines the Gini index as “a statistical measure of income inequality ranging from zero to ***. A measure of *** indicates perfect inequality, i.e., *** household having all the income and rest having none. A measure of zero indicates perfect equality, i.e., all households having an equal share of income.”

The survey was fielded online by YouGov in November 2020. The questionnaire covers a range of topics, including:Beliefs about whether Britain was an equal or unequal society before the COVID-19 outbreak and whether this will change post-recoveryPerceptions of whether inequalities are increasing or decreasingConcern about a range of specific inequality types, including unequal outcomes in income and wealth, education and health, and between different genders, generations, racial or ethnic groups, and different areas of the UKIdentifying the groups most negatively affected by the pandemicPerceptions of income distributions, and their association with other forms of unequal outcomes (eg in health)Beliefs about the determinants of unequal outcomes and opportunities to get ahead in lifeAttitudes towards welfare, redistribution and the furlough schemeBeliefs around fairness and meritThe survey also contains a series of split samples, testing framing effects of questions around perceptions of inequalities, redistribution and fairness, as well as the Moral Foundations Questionnaire.

In the third quarter of 2024, the top ten percent of earners in the United States held over ** percent of total wealth. This is fairly consistent with the second quarter of 2024. Comparatively, the wealth of the bottom ** percent of earners has been slowly increasing since the start of the *****, though remains low. Wealth distribution in the United States by generation can be found here.

In this paper, we address what has been termed “the Fed view,” the Federal Reserve’s model for black-white wealth inequality, articulated in a series of mutually consistent papers making two arguments. First, the Fed view has it that the black-white wealth gap, when measured with an “expanded wealth concept,” is smaller than previously thought. Second, the Fed view has it that the black-white wealth gap is primarily explained by income differences shaped by personal decisions around human capital acquisition, family structure, risk taking, and the legacy of residential segregation.

Goal 10Reduce inequality within and among countriesTarget 10.1: By 2030, progressively achieve and sustain income growth of the bottom 40 per cent of the population at a rate higher than the national averageIndicator 10.1.1: Growth rates of household expenditure or income per capita among the bottom 40 per cent of the population and the total populationSI_HEI_TOTL: Growth rates of household expenditure or income per capita (%)Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other statusIndicator 10.2.1: Proportion of people living below 50 per cent of median income, by sex, age and persons with disabilitiesSI_POV_50MI: Proportion of people living below 50 percent of median income (%)Target 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies and practices and promoting appropriate legislation, policies and action in this regardIndicator 10.3.1: Proportion of population reporting having personally felt discriminated against or harassed in the previous 12 months on the basis of a ground of discrimination prohibited under international human rights lawVC_VOV_GDSD: Proportion of population reporting having felt discriminated against, by grounds of discrimination, sex and disability (%)Target 10.4: Adopt policies, especially fiscal, wage and social protection policies, and progressively achieve greater equalityIndicator 10.4.1: Labour share of GDPSL_EMP_GTOTL: Labour share of GDP (%)Indicator 10.4.2: Redistributive impact of fiscal policySI_DST_FISP: Redistributive impact of fiscal policy, Gini index (%)Target 10.5: Improve the regulation and monitoring of global financial markets and institutions and strengthen the implementation of such regulationsIndicator 10.5.1: Financial Soundness IndicatorsFI_FSI_FSANL: Non-performing loans to total gross loans (%)FI_FSI_FSERA: Return on assets (%)FI_FSI_FSKA: Regulatory capital to assets (%)FI_FSI_FSKNL: Non-performing loans net of provisions to capital (%)FI_FSI_FSKRTC: Regulatory Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets (%)FI_FSI_FSLS: Liquid assets to short term liabilities (%)FI_FSI_FSSNO: Net open position in foreign exchange to capital (%)Target 10.6: Ensure enhanced representation and voice for developing countries in decision-making in global international economic and financial institutions in order to deliver more effective, credible, accountable and legitimate institutionsIndicator 10.6.1: Proportion of members and voting rights of developing countries in international organizationsSG_INT_MBRDEV: Proportion of members of developing countries in international organizations, by organization (%)SG_INT_VRTDEV: Proportion of voting rights of developing countries in international organizations, by organization (%)Target 10.7: Facilitate orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration and mobility of people, including through the implementation of planned and well-managed migration policiesIndicator 10.7.1: Recruitment cost borne by employee as a proportion of monthly income earned in country of destinationIndicator 10.7.2: Number of countries with migration policies that facilitate orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration and mobility of peopleSG_CPA_MIGRP: Proportion of countries with migration policies to facilitate orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration and mobility of people, by policy domain (%)SG_CPA_MIGRS: Countries with migration policies to facilitate orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration and mobility of people, by policy domain (1 = Requires further progress; 2 = Partially meets; 3 = Meets; 4 = Fully meets)Indicator 10.7.3: Number of people who died or disappeared in the process of migration towards an international destinationiSM_DTH_MIGR: Total deaths and disappearances recorded during migration (number)Indicator 10.7.4: Proportion of the population who are refugees, by country of originSM_POP_REFG_OR: Number of refugees per 100,000 population, by country of origin (per 100,000 population)Target 10.a: Implement the principle of special and differential treatment for developing countries, in particular least developed countries, in accordance with World Trade Organization agreementsIndicator 10.a.1: Proportion of tariff lines applied to imports from least developed countries and developing countries with zero-tariffTM_TRF_ZERO: Proportion of tariff lines applied to imports with zero-tariff (%)Target 10.b: Encourage official development assistance and financial flows, including foreign direct investment, to States where the need is greatest, in particular least developed countries, African countries, small island developing States and landlocked developing countries, in accordance with their national plans and programmesIndicator 10.b.1: Total resource flows for development, by recipient and donor countries and type of flow (e.g. official development assistance, foreign direct investment and other flows)DC_TRF_TOTDL: Total assistance for development, by donor countries (millions of current United States dollars)DC_TRF_TOTL: Total assistance for development, by recipient countries (millions of current United States dollars)DC_TRF_TFDV: Total resource flows for development, by recipient and donor countries (millions of current United States dollars)Target 10.c: By 2030, reduce to less than 3 per cent the transaction costs of migrant remittances and eliminate remittance corridors with costs higher than 5 per centIndicator 10.c.1: Remittance costs as a proportion of the amount remittedSI_RMT_COST: Remittance costs as a proportion of the amount remitted (%)SI_RMT_COST_BC: Corridor remittance costs as a proportion of the amount remitted (%)SI_RMT_COST_SC: SmaRT corridor remittance costs as a proportion of the amount remitted (%)

Replication data and code for Ellora Derenoncourt, Chi Hyun Kim, Moritz Kuhn, Moritz Schularick, Wealth of Two Nations: The U.S. Racial Wealth Gap, 1860–2020, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2023;, qjad044, https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjad044

In this project our goal is to see if subtle framing differences in how we ask about racial inequality between black and white americans elicits accuracy in perceptions of the black-white wealth gap.

In 2023, the percentage of income held by the richest 20 percent of the population in Colombia amounted to 58.7 percent. Between 1980 and 2023, the figure dropped by 0.3 percentage points, though the decline followed an uneven course rather than a steady trajectory.

75% of households from the Bangladeshi ethnic group were in the 2 lowest income quintiles (after housing costs were deducted) between April 2021 and March 2024.

PSID data extract for computing per capita white-to-Black wealth gaps and active saving rates of Black and white Americans during 1984-2019.

Census data are frequently used throughout Vital Signs as denominators for normalizing many other indicators and rates. The socioeconomic and demographic indicators are grouped into the following categories: population, race/ethnicity, age, households, and income and poverty.

Does the measurement of the racial wealth gap shift depending on the model, method, and data set used? We contrast the traditional mean Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition with the distributional Recentered Influence Function (RIF) methods. The untransformed, logarithm-transformed, and inverse hyperbolic sine-transformed versions in both Survey of Consumer Finances and Panel Study of Income Dynamics data sets exhibit similarities. The Oaxaca-Blinder (mean) decomposition highlights that receiving an inheritance explains a larger portion of the racial wealth gap than educational attainment. Conversely, the RIF method at the median suggests that educational attainment accounts for more of the wealth gap than inheritance receipt.

"Neighborhood Financial Health (NFH) Digital Mapping and Data Tool provides neighborhood financial health indicator data for every neighborhood in New York City. DCWP's Office of Financial Empowerment (OFE) also developed NFH Indexes to present patterns in the data within and across neighborhoods. NFH Index scores describe relative differences between neighborhoods across the same indicators; they do not evaluate neighborhoods against fixed standards. OFE intends for the NFH Indexes to provide an easy reference tool for comparing neighborhoods, and to establish patterns in the relationship of NFH indicators to economic and demographic factors, such as race and income. Understanding these connections is potentially useful for uncovering systems that perpetuate the racial wealth gap, an issue with direct implications for OFE’s mission to expand asset building opportunities for New Yorkers with low and moderate incomes. This data tool was borne out of the Collaborative for Neighborhood Financial Health, a community-led initiative designed to better understand how neighborhoods influence the financial health of their residents.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the South Carolina median household income by race. The dataset can be utilized to understand the racial distribution of South Carolina income.

Content

The dataset will have the following datasets when applicable

Please note: The 2020 1-Year ACS estimates data was not reported by the Census Bureau due to the impact on survey collection and analysis caused by COVID-19. Consequently, median household income data for 2020 is unavailable for large cities (population 65,000 and above).

• South Carolina median household income breakdown by race betwen 2012 and 2022
• Median Household Income by Racial Categories in South Carolina (2022)

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

Interested in deeper insights and visual analysis?

Explore our comprehensive data analysis and visual representations for a deeper understanding of South Carolina median household income by race. You can refer the same here

Mortality Hazard Ratios and 95% Confidence Intervals for African Americans relative to Whites by Sex and Poverty Status, Healthy Aging in Neighborhoods of Diversity across the Life Span Study, Baltimore, Maryland, 2004–2013 (N = 3675).