Trends in wealth inequality by asset type
This graph shows the contribution of each asset class to overall wealth inequality, and how this changed over time. The sum of these contributions is the Gini coefficient for each year, which rose from 0.57 in 2003-04 to 0.62 in 2017-18.
It also shows the contribution of different components of household wealth (asset classes) to overall wealth inequality. The three asset classes making the greatest contributions to wealth inequality at the end of the period in 2015-16 (when the Gini coefficient was 0.62) were owner-occupied housing (contributing 0.22, reflecting its high overall weight among household assets), shares and business income (contributing 0.15, reflecting its high concentration in high-wealth households), and superannuation (contributing 0.12, reflecting its high overall weight among household assets).
The main contributors to growth in wealth inequality from 2003-04 to 2017-18 were superannuation (whose contribution to the Gini coefficient for wealth rose by 0.04) and investment property (whose contribution rose by 0.01). This reflects relatively strong growth in the overall value of those assets, together with their heavy concentration among wealthier households.
Comparison of household disposable incomes
This table compares the minimum and average household incomes of the lowest 40% income group, the highest 5% and the highest 1%.
In 2015-16, the average household income of the highest 1% was $11,682 per week, over ten times the average disposable income of the lowest 40% , which was $1,022 per week. Their incomes were almost twice that of the highest 5% and almost six times the overall average household disposable income ($2,033).
The incomes of the highest 1% of households also increased more rapidly. Between 1999-00 and 2015-16, their average incomes rose 15% faster than the incomes of households in the highest 5%; and 42% faster than the lowest 40%.
Components of Australia’s wealth
Ths graph shows the parts of Australia's wealth.
2017-18: 39% of household wealth is held in owner-occupied housing, 12% in investment property, 21% in superannuation another 20% in shares and other financial assets (such as bonds and bank accounts), and 9% in other non-financial assets such as cars.
2015-16: A large component of Australia’s household wealth (39%) is held in the family home, followed by 20% in superannuation , and 19% in financial assets such as shares and business assets. Around 12% is held in other real estate – investment properties - and 10% in other non‑financial assets such as vehicles and home contents.
Shares of wealth across wealth groups by asset type
This graph shows how different types of wealth holdings are distributed across wealth groups. It shows that ownership of shares, investment real estate and superannuation is highly concentrated.
2017-18: The wealthiest 20% group holds 81% of shares and other financial investments; and 83% of investment property. Superannuation is also shared unequally, with 61% by value held by the highest 20%, and 20% held by the next highest wealth group. Owner-occupied housing is more equally distributed, with 55% by value held by the highest 20%, and 27% by the second-highest wealth group.
2015-16: The highest 20% of the wealth distribution owns over 80% of all wealth in investment properties and shares and over 60% of all superannuation assets. Household wealth in the residential home is more evenly distributed, though the highest 20% still holds 54% of all wealth in this form. The most evenly distributed asset type is ‘other non‑financial assets’ (e.g. vehicles and home contents), since households across the distribution (including non home-owners) are likely to own these kinds of assets.
Trends in real average household disposable income since 1999-00
This shows how average household disposable incomes have grown in ‘real terms’ (after inflation) in Australia between 1999-00 and 2015-16.
During the boom period from 2000 to 2008, average household disposable income grew by a remarkable 4.3% per year in real terms. This reflected rapid overall economic growth underpinned by mining and housing booms. However, in 2008, the Global Financial Crisis cut economic growth by half. This reduced average disposable income slightly the following year. Average income then slowly increased, and dropped slightly again in 2015-16.
Comparison of income support payment rates and poverty lines
Government payments in Australia include income support payments for adults in low income households (divided into the higher pension payments such as Age Pension and lower allowance payments such as Newstart Allowance), Family Tax Benefits for children in low and middle-income families, and supplementary payments such as Rent Assistance for private tenants in low-income households. This graph illustrates the rate structure that applied in 2015-16.
Trends in poverty, all people, 1999-00 to 2017-18
This graph shows the poverty rates, after housing costs have been deducted, as a percentage of all people from 1999-00 to 2017-18. Whilst we focus on the consistent estimates based on the pre-2007 measure by the ABS (lower line), this graph also includes the higher poverty rates derived from the 2007-08 ABS income measure (upper line).
The graph shows how the overall poverty rate fluctuated within a band between 11.5% and 14.5% between 1999-00 and 2017-18. Poverty declined substantially from 13.1% in 1999 to 11.5% in 2003, rose sharply during the boom years to 14.4% just before the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) in 2007, declined to 12.6% in 2009, and since then has risen modestly to 13.1% in 2017-18.
Trends in poverty - children, 1999-00 to 2017-18
This graph shows the poverty rate amongst children, after housing costs have been deducted, as a percentage of all children. It shows that poverty among children (people aged under 15 years) has moved within a higher band than overall poverty, fluctuating between 14.3% and 18.6% from 1999-00 to 2017-18. Before the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) in 2007, it followed a similar path to the overall poverty rate, declining substantially from 18.6% in 1999-00 to 14.3% in 2003-04, and rising sharply between from 2003-04 to 18.1% in 2001-02. After the GFC, however, the path of child poverty diverged from that of overall poverty. It fell only slightly to 17.8% in 2009-10, declined further to 16.5% in 2013-14, then rose to 16.9% in 2017-18
Trends in income support payments compared with wages
This graph compares the single maximum rate of Newstart Allowance and pension payments with wages, represented by the minimum wage, average weekly full-time earnings and the median full-time wage, in 2018 dollars. It shows that the gap between the Newstart Allowance and single pension rates, as well as average and median wages, has grown over time.
Profile of each income group by age
This graph shows the make-up of each income group by age.
2019-20: The largest age-group in every income group are 25-64 year olds, as they have a greater share of the population as a whole. However, the lowest income group comprises almost a third of older people, while they comprise only 8% of the highest income group.
2017-18: The largest age-group in every income group are 25-64 year olds, reflecting their greater share of the overall population. However, older individuals are over-represented (66%) in the lowest 40% income group, as are children aged under 15 (45%). Almost half (48%) of people of working age, 25-64 years, were in the highest 40% income group, reflecting that age group’s larger size and greater earning capacity.
2015-16: The largest age-group in every income group are 25-64 year olds. However, older individuals are over-represented (29%) in the lowest 20% income group, and children are over-represented (23%) in the second 20%. In contrast, individuals found in the highest 20% are much more likely to be aged 25-64 years (68%).