9196_not-searchable
/en/inntekt-og-forbruk/statistikker/inntind/aar
9196
Immigrants are better off
statistikk
2008-06-27T10:00:00.000Z
Income and consumption;Social conditions, welfare and crime;Immigration and immigrants
en
inntind, Households' income, particular groups, income distribution, household income, low-income groups (for example single parents, long-term sick, supplementary benefit recipients), poor, median income, low-income limits, EU scale, OECD scaleIncome and wealth, Living conditions , Income and consumption, Income and consumption, Social conditions, welfare and crime, Immigration and immigrants
false

Households' income, particular groups, 2006

Content

Published:

This is an archived release.

Go to latest release

Immigrants are better off

Non-western immigrants were among the groups with the strongest increase in household income in 2006.

Households where the main income earner is of non-western origin had in 2006 an increase in after-tax household income per consumption unit of 3.2 per cent in real terms. This was a stronger increase than was the case in the total population, where income rose by 2.6 per cent. The improvement in income for immigrant households may be explained by stronger labour force participation in this group. Despite the improvement, the median income for immigrant households remains well below the overall median income.

Better off pensioners, worse off long-term unemployed

Most groups had an increase in household income in 2006, in real terms. Among the groups with the strongest increase in household income, we find old-age pensioners and receivers of Voluntary Early Retirement Benefits. Among the groups with the weakest increase in household income, we find receivers of social assistance and household headed by persons with a longstanding illness. These households had an increase in real terms of just 1 per cent in 2006.

The only group that experienced a reduction in household income in 2006, was households headed by a long-term unemployed. The number of long-term unemployed fell substantially in 2006. Those that still remained unemployed were, however, worse off compared to those who belonged to this group some years previously.

Stability in the proportion with persistent low-income

Based on the EUs definition of persistent low-income, 7.9 per cent of the population (excluding students) had persistent low-income (see the text box below) in 2006, the same proportion as the year before. Based on the OECD method, 2.9 per cent of the population had persistent low- income, down from 3.0 per cent the previous year.

The composition of the low-income group varies depending on the definition in use. When using the EU definition there are still many old-age pensioners among those with persistent low-income. The number of old-age pensioners with low income is, however, rapidly declining. When using the OECD definition the majority of those with persistent low-income are households with children, primarily single parents and couples with many children.

Persistent low-income

People are considered to have persistent low-income when their average income (per consumption unit) over a three-year period falls below the low-income threshold for the same period, i.e. the sum of equivalent income across the three years is less than the sum of the low-income threshold for the same three years.

The difference between the EU and the OECD definition is that the EU definition has a higher low-income threshold than the OECD (60% of the median vs. 50% of the median). In addition the EU definition takes to a greater extent into account the economies of scale within the households, than the OECD definition does.

Tables: