WEALTH AND INCOME, DISTRIBUTION OF.
Modern enquiries into the distribution of capital wealth are mainly confined to the total wealth of individuals in classes according to the amount of total fortune in each grade, whereas enquiries into the distribution of income, while predominantly similar in the attention given to relative amounts, also extends to two other fields. There is a consideration of the distribution ac cording to trades and occupations (e.g., the shares which agricul ture, mining, etc., represent of the aggregate) and the third type divides income according to its economic character—interest on capital, economic rent, the reward of work by hand or brain.
Distribution of Capital Wealth Amongst Individuals.— Inf ormation on the question is almost entirely derived from the government statistics of taxation of estates falling under liability at death. It is necessary to ascertain by the tables of mortality the number of people living at any time for each death in each grade. The highest fortunes tend to be held by the oldest people and, therefore, the "multiplier" in these grades is quite small compared with that in the lower grades of fortune where the average age of those coming under liability to estate duty is lower. The large fortune with a small multiplier and the small fortune with a larger multiplier, tend to give some equality to the total fortunes at each grade in ages. The result of the whole computa tion is generally known as the "multiplier," and this is applicable to the total sum falling under charge in a year in order to ascertain the aggregate fortune of all inhabitants living. This total is sub stantially less than the aggregate wealth of the country, because of the large sums held collectively by companies (in reserves), by clubs, trusts, societies and other corporations, which are either not reflected at all or else only imperfectly reflected in statements of individual wealth. In the separate grades, each with its separate "multiplier" to get the total fortune in that particular grade, the system of inter vivos giving the distribution of capital by its owners during their lifetime, which increases with each increase in the death duties, affects the results and has to be allowed for by special adjustments. (See the Colwyn Committee on Taxation and the National Debt (App. xxiii.) British Capital Estimate.—By this method the aggregate value of estates in Great Britain exceeding 15,cm in the hands of living individuals is estimated to be II i,000,000,000. This aggre gate is estimated to be distributed among the living owners ac cording to age-group and according to range of wealth as shown: Great Britain: Estimated Classification of Capital by Reference to Value of Estate and Age of Owner (Estates exceeding £S,000 only) These figures relate mainly to the position of affairs in 1923-24.
It will be seen that, for all fortunes over L5,000 disregarding ages, the percentage distribution is as follows: Col. (a) gives the equivalent of the Inland Revenue table. Col.
(b) gives the results of computations by Sir Josiah Stamp for 1921 for England and Wales only (Current Problems, p. 26o). Col.
(c) is derived from information furnished to the Select Commit tee on Increase of Wealth (War) by the Board of Inland Revenue in 1920 (App. to Report p. 236) as an estimate for wealth imme diately after the war, say, at June 1919. This deals with a corpus of post-war Wealth of 13,046 million I. distributed as follows: Sir Josiah Stamp gave the following figures based thereon, for the total wealth of all classes (Wealth and Taxable Capacity): "Thus we get two-thirds of the wealth held by just under 400,000 people, and the top one-third by 36,00o people. I think it is difficult to derive much reliable information as to whether the tendency is for individual fortunes to become increasingly great, that is for the proportion of wealth held by a fixed per centage of the whole population to become greater. The statistics have to be looked at over a considerable period, and they are affected by legal changes. The rates of mortality for the different age groups change slowly and affect the "multiplier" so that it is difficult to establish a statistical proof of a kind sufficiently rigid for so important an assertion." It is misleading to say that "two-thirds of the wealth is held by less than i per cent of the population" for, as Carr Saunders and Caradog Jones say, "It takes no account of the fact that the ultimate units in society regarded in relation to wealth are families rather than persons. The equal distribution of property implies an equal holding among heads of households rather than an equal distribution among all living persons, including babies in their cradles. It gives a more just impression to take the percentage of occupied persons over 20. We then estimate that about 21 per cent of occupied persons over 20 hold about two-thirds of the wealth, and that about 21 in i,000 of occupied persons over 20 hold one-third of the wealth." Distribution of Income in Great Britain.--Dr. Bowley esti mated for the United Kingdom that in 1910 all income receivers could be divided into two classes, 1.1 per cent who took 3o per cent of the whole national income and 98.9 per cent who shared the rest between them. The national income here apparently means that part of it accruing to individuals. Another division of the same total showed that 44 per cent went to only 51 per cent of all income receivers.