IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/oec/elsaab/92-en.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How Expensive is the Welfare State?: Gross and Net Indicators in the OECD Social Expenditure Database (SOCX)

Author

Listed:
  • Willem Adema

    (OECD)

  • Maxime Ladaique

    (OECD)

Abstract

This paper first presents information on trends and composition of social expenditure across the OECD. Gross public social expenditure on average across OECD increased from 16% of GDP in 1980 to 21% in 2005, of which public pensions (7% of GDP) and public health expenditure (6% of GDP) are the largest items. This paper then accounts for the effects of the tax system and private social expenditure which leads to a greater similarity in social expenditure-to-GDP ratios across countries and to a reassessment of the magnitude of welfare states. After accounting for the impact of taxation and private benefits, social expenditure (1) amounts to over 30% of GDP at factor cost in Belgium, Germany, and France and (2) ranges within a few percentage points of each other in Austria, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal and the United States. Ce document présente les tendances et la composition des dépenses sociales des pays de l’OCDE. Les dépenses sociales publiques brutes on augmenté de 16 % du PIB en 1980 à 21 % du PIB en 2005, dont les retraites publiques (7 % du PIB) et les dépenses de santé publique (6 % du PIB) représentent les plus grandes catégories de dépenses en moyenne en 2005. Ce document examine ensuite les effets de l'intervention du gouvernement sur les dépenses sociales par le système fiscal et la prise en compte des prestations sociales privées, qui ont pour effet d’égaliser les ratios entre les niveaux des dépenses sociales et le PIB. Après la prise en compte des prestations sociales privées et de l’impact de la fiscalité, les dépenses sociales atteignent plus de 30 % du PIB aux coûts des facteurs en Belgique, Allemagne et France ; enfin les écarts entre les dépenses sociales en Autriche, Canada, Danemark, Finlande, Italie, Pays-Bas, Portugal et aux États-Unis ne sont que de quelques points de pourcentage.

Suggested Citation

  • Willem Adema & Maxime Ladaique, 2009. "How Expensive is the Welfare State?: Gross and Net Indicators in the OECD Social Expenditure Database (SOCX)," OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers 92, OECD Publishing.
    • Handle: RePEc:oec:elsaab:92-en
    DOI: 10.1787/220615515052
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1787/220615515052
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1787/220615515052?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Uwe Jirjahn & Jens Mohrenweiser & Stephen C Smith, 2022. "Works councils and workplace health promotion in Germany," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 43(3), pages 1059-1094, August.
    2. Gerlinde Verbist & Michael Föster & Vaalavou, M., 2013. "GINI DP 74: The Impact of Publicly Provided Services on the Distribution of Resources: Review of New Results and Methods," GINI Discussion Papers 74, AIAS, Amsterdam Institute for Advanced Labour Studies.
    3. Hideki Konishi & Naomi Miyazato, 2018. "Distributive Impacts of Social Protection Systems in OECD Countries: Public-Private Mix and Hidden Welfare States," Working Papers 1804, Waseda University, Faculty of Political Science and Economics.
    4. Bove, Vincenzo & Efthyvoulou, Georgios & Navas, Antonio, 2017. "Political cycles in public expenditure: butter vs guns," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 582-604.
    5. Tim Rie & Ive Marx, 2013. "GINI Country Report: Growing Inequalities and their Impacts in Belgium," GINI Country Reports belgium, AIAS, Amsterdam Institute for Advanced Labour Studies.
    6. Judith Niehues, 2010. "Social Spending Generosity and Income Inequality: A Dynamic Panel Approach," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 336, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    7. Corrado Giulietti & Jackline Wahba, 2013. "Welfare migration," Chapters, in: Amelie F. Constant & Klaus F. Zimmermann (ed.), International Handbook on the Economics of Migration, chapter 26, pages 489-504, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. Glatzer, Miguel, 2012. "Welfare State Growth and the Current Crisis in Portugal: Social Spending and its Challenges," Institute of European Studies, Working Paper Series qt4702x2jm, Institute of European Studies, UC Berkeley.
    9. Pasquale Tridico, 2014. "Welfare models, inequality and economic performance during globalisation," Departmental Working Papers of Economics - University 'Roma Tre' 0191, Department of Economics - University Roma Tre.
    10. D'Orlando, Fabio & Ferrante, Francesco & Ruiu, Gabriele, 2011. "Culturally based beliefs and labor market institutions," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 150-162, April.
    11. Niehues, Judith, 2010. "Social Spending Generosity and Income Inequality: A Dynamic Panel Approach," IZA Discussion Papers 5178, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Peeters, Marga, 2011. "“Better Safe than Sorry” - Individual Risk-free Pension Schemes in the European Union - Macroeconomic Benefits, the Mobile Working Citizen’s Perspective and Why Nots," MPRA Paper 33571, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Douglas Sutherland & Peter Hoeller & Rossana Merola, 2012. "Fiscal Consolidation: Part 1. How Much is Needed and How to Reduce Debt to a Prudent Level?," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 932, OECD Publishing.
    14. Konstantinos, Pouliakas & Ioannis, Theodossiou, 2010. "An Inquiry Into the Theory, Causes and Consequences of Monitoring Indicators of Health and Safety At Work," MPRA Paper 20336, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Marga Peeters, 2012. "Better Safe than Sorry - Individual Risk-free Pension Schemes in the European Union," Contemporary Economics, University of Economics and Human Sciences in Warsaw., vol. 6(3), September.
    16. Fernando Alexandre & Luís Aguiar Conraria & Pedro Bação & Miguel Portela, 2011. "A Poupança em Portugal," GEMF Working Papers 2011-19, GEMF, Faculty of Economics, University of Coimbra.
    17. Tomassi, Federico, 2011. "Equità sociale ed efficienza economica: La spesa sociale totale netta nei paesi Ocse tra il 2001 e il 2007 [Social equality and economic efficiency: Net total social expenditure in the Oecd countri," MPRA Paper 44378, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Dahl, Espen & van der Wel, Kjetil A., 2013. "Educational inequalities in health in European welfare states: A social expenditure approach," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 60-69.
    19. George Gerapetritis, 2014. "Europe’s new deal: a new version of an expiring deal," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 91-115, August.
    20. Isabelle Joumard & Mauro Pisu & Debbie Bloch, 2012. "Tackling income inequality: The role of taxes and transfers," OECD Journal: Economic Studies, OECD Publishing, vol. 2012(1), pages 37-70.
    21. Isabelle Joumard & Mauro Pisu & Debra Bloch, 2012. "Less Income Inequality and More Growth – Are They Compatible? Part 3. Income Redistribution via Taxes and Transfers Across OECD Countries," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 926, OECD Publishing.
    22. Bertola, Giuseppe & Lo Prete, Anna, 2010. "Whence Policy? Government Policies, Finance, and Economic Integration," CEPR Discussion Papers 7820, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    23. Peter Whiteford, 2010. "The Australian Tax‐Transfer System: Architecture and Outcomes," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 86(275), pages 528-544, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    private social spending; public welfare system; social policy; tax breaks with a social purpose; taxation of benefit income;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H2 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue
    • H53 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Government Expenditures and Welfare Programs

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oec:elsaab:92-en. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eloecfr.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.