Wie haben sich die Einkommen unterschiedlicher Bevölkerungsgruppen in Deutschland seit der Wiedervereinigung entwickelt? Unsere Studie untersucht die Entwicklung und Zusammensetzung des Nationaleinkommens entlang der Verteilung im Zeitraum von 1992 bis 2019. Während die untere Hälfte der Einkommensverteilung (unterhalb des Medianeinkommens) bis Mitte der 2000er Jahre reale Einkommensverluste verzeichnete, stiegen die Einkommen der oberen Mittelschicht (die obersten 10%, ohne das einkommensstärkste 1%) stetig. Die Spitzeneinkommen (oberstes 1%) blieben zwischen 1992 und 2019 relativ stabil. Arbeitseinkommen dominieren bei den unteren 99%, während das oberste 1% von Unternehmenseinkommen – insbesondere aus arbeitsintensiven Dienstleistungsunternehmen und freien Berufen – bestimmt ist. Unsere Ergebnisse sind zentral für die Debatte über Reformen der Sozialversicherungsbeiträge und der Einkommensbesteuerung.

Is there a multicultural neighborhood price premium? We exploit plausibly exogenous variation in British colonization patterns in Northern Ireland during the early 1600s which created neighborhoods of varying religious composition that persists until today. These religious groups are culturally distinct, but are observationally equivalent ethnically and socioeconomically. A standard deviation increase neighborhood-level multiculturalism raises house prices by 9.6%. Multiculturalism raises property prices by increasing asset liquidity and housing demand as a wider spectrum of society demand houses in these areas. The findings and mechanism contrast sharply with prior evidence showing negative relationships due to homophily, social networks, and identification challenges.

This paper analyzes the distribution and composition of pre-tax national income in Germany since 1992, combining personal income tax returns, household survey data, and national accounts. Inequality rose from the 1990s to the late 2000s due to falling labor incomes among the bottom 50% and rising incomes in the top 10%. This trend reversed after 2007 as labor incomes across the bottom 90% increased. The top 1% income share, dominated by business income, remained relatively stable between 1992 and 2019. A large share of Germany’s top 1% earners are non-corporate business owners in labor-intensive professions. At least half of the business owners in P99-99.9 and a quarter in the top 0.1% operate firms in professional services – a pattern mirroring the United States. From 1992 to 2019, Germany’s top 0.1% income concentration exceeded France’s and matched U.S. levels until the late 2000s.

Standard labor market models assume that workers hold accurate beliefs about the external wage distribution, and hence their outside options with other employers. We test this assumption by comparing German workers’ beliefs about outside options with objective benchmarks. First, we find that workers wrongly anchor their beliefs about outside options on their current wage: workers that would experience a 10% wage change if switching to their outside option only expect a 1% change. Second, workers in low-paying firms underestimate wages elsewhere. Third, in response to information about the wages of similar workers, respondents correct their beliefs about their outside options and change their job search and wage negotiation intentions. Finally, we analyze the consequences of anchoring in a simple equilibrium model. In the model, anchored beliefs keep overly pessimistic workers stuck in low-wage jobs, which gives rise to monopsony power and labor market segmentation.