Southern Centre for Inequality Studies (SCIS) - (Working papers)
Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://hdl.handle.net/10539/38293
Browse
43 results
Search Results
Item Ownership and inequality: Policy interventions in South Africa and possible ways forward(Southern Centre for Inequality Studies (SCIS), 2022-11) Goga, Sha'ista; Valodia, ImraanThis paper reviews some of the policies that have been introduced to address ownership diversity and broadening ownership. Policies like B-BBEE have gone some way towards doing this but not far enough. Considering ‘softer’ regulations e.g. in the form of incentives, could assist with expanding ownership especially considering new digital economies and informal sector workers.Item Enabling inclusive economic ecosystems in Africa: A role for city governments?(Southern Centre for Inequality Studies (SCIS), 2022-12) Joseph, Stacey-Leigh; Karuri-Sebina, GeciThis paper finds that the local state, and in particular major African cities, have a critical ecosystem role in advancing inclusive economic development and mitigating inequality. It reaches this conclusion by investigating: • What potential exists for African cities to design and implement inclusive local economic development approaches; and • How local actors (local government/municipal, civic, commercial and knowledge actors) can play an active role in positively influencing production and socio-economic equality, including through their leveraging of new technologies.Item Towards a Tracking System to Enforce Competition Law in the southern and east African Region(Southern Centre for Inequality Studies (SCIS), 2022-11) Manjengwa, Earnest; Padayachie, Karissa Moothoo; Nsomba, Grace; Tshabalala, Ntombifuthi; Vilakazi, ThandoThe paper explores the role of market power in exacerbating inequality by looking at the effects of competition on income and wealth distribution. It argues that the conceptual framework, proposed in the paper, can be used to better understand market power and inequality in various African countries in order to develop appropriate responses.Item Beyond a Treasury View of the World: Reflections from Theory and History on Heterodox Economic Policy Options for South Africa(University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, 2018-05) Padayachee, VishnuItem Reimagining the Global Economy: Alternative Visions for an Equitable and Sustainable Post-Covid-19 Economic Recovery(Southern Centre for Inequality Studies (SCIS), 2022-07) Mhlana, SiviweItem Estimates of Employment in South Africa Under the Five-Level Lockdown Framework SCIS Working(Southern Centre for Inequality Studies (SCIS), 2020-05) Francis, David; Ramburuth-Hurt, Kamal; Valodia, ImraanDuring the COVID-19 pandemic and response, an important question, from both a health and economic policy perspective, is how many workers are able to return to work as the lockdown is eased and tightened in response to the spread of the virus. Using a static analysis derived from industry subsectors, we estimate employment allowed under each level of the five-level lockdown framework. We estimate that under level five of the lockdown framework, 40% of total employment is permitted, or 6.6 million workers. This rises to 55% (9.2 million) under level four; 71% (11.8 million) under level three; 94% (15.6 million) under level two and 100% under level one. This is a static analysis and assumes that no jobs are lost as a result of a lockdown. As such, its principle use is as a distributional analysis of the share of workers permitted to work under each level of the lockdown.Item Firm Wage Premia, Rent-Sharing and Monopsony When Underemployment is High(Southern Centre for Inequality Studies (SCIS), 2021-02) Bassier, IhsaanHow important are firms in the labour markets of developing countries? Using matched employer-employee data from South Africa, I find firms explain a larger share of wages than in other, richer countries. It shows this can be parsimoniously explained by the high degree of underemployment. Estimating separations elasticities by instrumenting wages of matched workers with firm wages, among other methods, I find a low separations elasticity which generates a high degree of monopsony. The correspondingly high estimated rent-sharing elasticity explains the important role of firm wage policies, even in an economy with a large labour surplus. This paper is a work in progress.Item Knowledge and Inequality: An Exploration(Southern Centre for Inequality Studies (SCIS), 2021-09) Nathan, DevItem A Wealth Tax for South Africa(Southern Centre for Inequality Studies (SCIS), 2021-01) Chatterjee, Aroop; Czajka, Léo; Gethin, AmoryThis paper considers the feasibility of implementing a progressive wealth tax to collect additional government revenue to both reinforce fiscal sustainability in the wake of the COVID-19 crisis and reduce persistent extreme inequality in South Africa. Drawing on our new companion paper, we first identify the tax base and discuss the design of potential tax schedules. Testing alternative tax schedules, we estimate how much additional revenue could be collected from a progressive tax on the top 1% richest South Africans. Our results show that under conservative assumptions, a wealth tax could raise between 70 and 160 billion Rands—1.5% to 3.5% of the South African GDP.We discuss in turn how sensitive our estimates are to assumptions on (1) mismeasurement of wealth and (2) tax avoidance and evasion, based on the most recent tax policy literature. We examine technical issues related to the enforcement of the tax, and how third-party reporting and pre-filled declarations could be used to optimize measurement of taxable wealth and minimize evasion and avoidance opportunities. Finally, we explain how this new tax could interact with other capital related taxes already in place in South Africa, and discuss the potential impact on growth.Item Estimating the Distribution of Household Wealth in South Africa(Southern Centre for Inequality Studies (SCIS), 2020-04) Chatterjee, Aroop; Czajka, Léo; Gethin, AmoryThis paper estimates the distribution of personal wealth in South Africa by combining tax microdata covering the universe of income tax returns, household surveys and macroeconomic balance sheets statistics. We systematically compare estimates of the wealth distribution obtained by direct measurement of net worth, rescaling of reported wealth to balance sheets totals, and capitalisation of income flows. We document major inconsistencies between available data sources, in particular regarding the measurement of dividends, corporate assets and wealth held through trusts. Both household surveys and tax data remain insufficient to properly capture capital incomes. Notwithstanding a significant degree of uncertainty, our findings reveal unparalleled levels of wealth concentration. The top 10 per cent own 86 per cent of aggregate wealth and the top 0.1 per cent close to one third. The top 0.01 per cent of the distribution (3,500 individuals) concentrate 15 per cent of household net worth, more than the bottom 90 per cent as a whole. Such high levels of inequality can be accounted for in all forms of assets at the top end, including housing, pension funds and other financial assets. Our series show no sign of decreasing wealth inequality since apartheid: if anything, we find that inequality has remained broadly stable and has even slightly increased within top wealth groups.