台灣所得分配趨勢與影響因素研究:1991-2011

Abstract

伴隨經濟成長，所得分配一直是經濟學家關心的重要課題，1990年代開始，台灣經濟未如以往呈現高度成長景況，而所得分配差距的各項指標卻又日漸擴大，若以《家庭收支調查》五等分位組中最高及最低所得20\%倍數作為衡量指標，其變化在1990年代緩步上升，2001年急升至歷史高峰6.39，之後略跌但在2000年代維持平穩，直至2009年再抵歷史次高的6.34，且其變化趨勢，與失業率走勢亦步亦趨。 若未加計政府移轉收支，五等分位組最高及最低20\%所得差距倍數更為明顯，2009年達8.22，創下史上新高紀錄。整體而言，在研究期間的實證資料顯示，政府移轉收支一直有效發揮平均化的功能。 再者，受僱人員報酬份額從1990年代初開始逐漸下滑，至2010年該份額比率為44.6\%，2011年略回升至47.2\%。國民所得初次分配是刻劃整體經濟國內生產毛額分配於政府或民間各部門比率重要參考，本研究顯示，2000年之後，受僱人員報酬份額持續下降，且五等分位組所得差距也同向變化，相關係數為正，相關係數0.22。 本研究並針對1995、2000、2005及2010年進行家庭可支配所得不均度靜態分析，發現所有移轉支出項目，一直是平均化因子，來自政府移轉所得影響程度逐漸升高，來自私人移轉收入對不均度貢獻程度逐漸降低，整體移轉所得淨額降低靜態不均度的效果在2000年之後即超過10\%，若與1990年代相比，呈現漸增趨勢。 同時，本研究透過比較不同時點的家庭特性，得出2000年代所得分配漸擴大的因素，應該可以排除家庭人口結構變化可能，或至少不是此一時期影響變化的主因。同時，與靜態分析的結論相同，政府移轉所得淨額一直是平均化因子，絕對數字雖然降低，但仍然是影響所得分配重要因素。 最後，從財稅資料的分析得知，最高報稅所得10\%和最低報稅所得10\%的倍數，從1998年的18.11倍，上升至2010年的32.82倍，顯示報稅所得分配亦在擴大而非縮小。而財稅資料中最低報稅所得10\%家庭的狀況，與《家庭收支調查》中最低所得20\%的家庭狀況，有不謀而合的趨勢，平均所得不增反減，對未來研究者或相關公部門而言，應是值得繼續深究課題。

Economy growth and income distribution are always important topics in the field of economics research. Since 1990s, Taiwan's economy didn't keep growing at the same level as before and the indicator of income distribution was ecoming bigger. According to the survey of family income and expendirure, income inequality increased steadily in the 1990s as the percentage share of disposable income by quintile group of households. In 2001, the indicator rose to 6.39, the highest in the history. It droped a little down and kept stable until 2009. The trend of change was almost the same as the change of unemployment rate in this period. Without the government transfer, the indicator was 8.22 in 2009, highest in the history. Overall, the government transfer has kept making the income inequality less. Besides,the share of employer payroll drop gradually since the beginning of 1990s and went down to 44.6\% in 2010, though rose up to 47.2\% in 2011. This study shows that the percentage kept going down after 2000 and changed in the same direction with the indicator of income inequality. The correlation index is 0.22. This study also analysed the inequality of the family income in 1995, 2000, 2005, and 2010. The result shows that all the indexes of transfer expendirure were equalized factors and the influence of government transfer became greater. At the same time, the influence of private transfer became smaller gradually. The influence of transfer was over 10\% after 2000 and increased compared to 1990s. This study compares family characters in different time and conclude that the population factor was not longer the reason of income inequality. Government trasfer was alwyas the equalized factor though the influence was decreasing. Last, according to the tax data, the difference between the highest and lowest 10\% tax income family incresed from 18.11 in 1998 to 32.82 in 2010. And the income of poorest family decreases sharply, the same trends with the survey of family income and expenditure.