PMC

Percentiles of labor income and capital income in Lucerne, 2005-2015. The plot shows two different income definitions. The first attributes two third of self-employment income to labor income and a third to capital income. We apply this definition for all other capital income statistics (see Sect. ). The second assigns all self-employment income to capital income. Dotted and dashed lines delimit the ranges of percentiles with zero labor income or capital income

The evolution of capital share in gross value added of non-financial corporations and the top 1% income share, Poland 1995–2013.
Source: Capital share: Polish National Accounts; Eurostat. Top 1% income share: authors’ computation based on income tax statistics. Distribution of fiscal income among tax units Note: capital income is calculated as 80 per cent of gross operating surplus in non-financial corporations. Capital share is the proportion of thus obtained capital income in factor-cost gross value added of non-financial corporations. We take 80 percent of gross operating surplus since Polish National Accounts place unincorporated enterprises with more than 10 employees in non-financial sector, and we assume that the part of its operating surplus should be attributed to labour income of owners and household members. The obtained estimates of capital share in GVA are consistent with those of Karabarbounis and Neiman ()

Association matrix between labor and capital income percentile ranks. Two thirds of self-employment income assigned to labor income and the remaining third to capital income. We apply this definition for all other statistics of labor and capital income (see Sect. ). Every cell gives the empirical probability of a percentile rank combination, i.e. with percentile ranks and empirical quantile ranks . Probability mass is distributed uniformly over percentile ranks covered by a mass point where percentiles are not unique like at zero labor income or zero capital income. Bold lines separate percentile range with zero labor income and capital income, respectively

Match–mismatch framework adjusted by reproductive strategy. The match–mismatch framework depicted above was modified to display the difference in exogenous (i.e. environmental) resource acquisition requirements of capital and income breeders during their breeding period. Endogenous (i.e. stored energetic capital) reproductive resource stores and costs are not pictured. Match and mismatch scenarios for income and capital breeders alternate by panel. (a) A temporal match between the peak environmental resource needs of income breeders with environmental resource availability/quality. It also depicts a temporal ‘mismatch’ between the peak environmental resource needs of capital breeders and available environmental resources. These scenarios are reversed in (b). Note the contrasts in energetic mismatch (non-overlapping areas) between capital breeders and environmental resources ((a), minimal) and income breeders and environmental resources ((b), extensive). (Online version in colour.)