• Skip to content
  • Skip to navigation
Global site
  • Meet our people
    • Audit
      • Audit
      • Compliance and audit reviews
      • External audit
      • Financial reporting advisory
    • Tax
      • Tax
      • Corporate tax
      • Indirect tax
      • Individual tax
      • Private business tax structuring
      • Tax disputes
      • Research & development
    • Business services
      • Business services
      • Management reporting
      • Financial reporting advisory
      • Succession planning
      • Trust management
      • Forecasting and budgeting
      • Outsourced accounting services
      • Setting up in New Zealand
    • Management consulting
      • Management consulting
      • Policy reviews & development
      • Performance improvement
      • Programme & project management
      • Strategy
      • Risk
    • Modern digital resiliency
      • Modern digital resiliency
      • Modern data protection & recovery
      • RiskOps
      • CtrlOps
      • FinOps
      • Cloud InfraOps
      • Digital infrastructure
    • Digital advisory
      • Digital advisory
      • Cloud services
      • Data analytics
      • IT assurance
      • Cyber resilience
      • Virtual asset advisory
      • Virtual CSO
    • Finance & funding
      • Finance & funding
      • Debt advisory
      • Financial modelling
      • Raising finance
      • Business valuations
    • Deals
      • Deals
      • Business valuations
      • Mergers & acquisitions
      • Transaction advisory
      • Capital markets
      • Financial modelling
    • Insolvency
      • Insolvency
      • Complex and international services
      • Corporate insolvency
    • Restructuring & turnaround
      • Restructuring & turnaround
      • Independent business review
      • Litigation support
    • Forensics
      • Forensics
      • Business valuations
      • Forensic accounting & dispute advisory
      • Expert witness
      • Investigation services
  • Insights
    • Financial services
    • Not for profit
    • Property & construction
    • Public sector
    • Retirement villages & aged care
  • Careers
    • Working at Grant Thornton
      • Working at Grant Thornton
      • Benefits & flexibility
      • Your career development
      • Diversity, equity & inclusion
    • Experienced hires
      • Experienced hires
      • The application process
      • FAQs
    • Early careers
      • Early careers
      • Graduates
      • Internships
      • Our service lines
      • The application process
      • FAQs
  • Events
  • Locations
Global site
  1. Home
  2. Press releases
  3. 2014
  4. Has household income inequality really changed in the last 20 years?

Has household income inequality really changed in the last 20 years?

16 Sep 2014

2014

Peter Sherwin, Partner, Privately Held Business at Grant Thornton New Zealand, looks at New Zealand household incomes, the numbers of ‘poor households’ and how things have changed in this country over the last 20 years in light of a myriad of statements made by the different parties in the lead up to the election.

The OECD and our own Ministry of Social Development have extensively researched these topics and their findings differ with some of the comments being made in the run up to the election.

An OECD survey of income inequality indicates that there is no evidence of any sustained rise or fall in income inequality in New Zealand since their research began in the mid-1990s. The trend line is flat.

The most recent OECD survey ranks New Zealand 19th out of 34 countries on the income inequality table. New Zealand ranks equal with Canada, Estonia and Italy. Australia is 24th and Chile is the most unequal. The most equal country is Iceland.

Sixteen European countries have more income equality than New Zealand including Netherlands, Germany, France and Czech Republic, which is possibly due to better education standards and higher pay rates.

The latest New Zealand Ministry of Social Development survey of household incomes (after income tax paid and benefits received) shows that the gains over all income categories in 2013 were similar, which demonstrates that income inequality in 2013 was comparable to what it was in the mid-1990s.

However, the gap between benefit levels and New Zealand superannuation, wages and household income between 1983 and 2013 has grown.

There is no evidence of growing income equality in the population overall between high income households and middle and low income households in the last 20 years; and there is growing evidence of an increasing proportion of dual-earner families - 66% of two parent families were dual earners in 2013, up from 50% in the early 1980s.

There is an issue with child poverty with 24% of children (200,000) living in households dependent on an adult receiving a benefit and 200,000 children living in a household with no full-time worker. However, this is down from 233,000 (22%) in 2010 and 280,000 (30%) in 1998.

Children in one-parent families have a higher rate of income poverty than those in two parent families (51% vs 13%) in 2013.

On average from 2011 to 2013, 16% of European/Pakeha children lived in poor households compared with 28% of Pacific Island and 34% of Maori children. 70% of poor children lived in rental accommodation.

Household income poverty is generally considered to be incomes below 60% of the median household income.

Further enquiries, please contact:

Peter Sherwin
Partner, Privately Held Business
M +64 (0)21 638 522
E peter.sherwin@nz.gt.com

CONNECT CONNECT

  • Contact us
  • Meet our people
  • Careers
  • Locations

ABOUT ABOUT

  • About Grant Thornton
  • Insights
  • Gender pay gap and gender pay equity
  • Press

LEGAL LEGAL

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Sitemap
  • Cookie Preferences

Follow usFollow us

© 2025 Grant Thornton International Ltd (GTIL) - All rights reserved. "Grant Thornton” refers to the brand under which the Grant Thornton member firms provide assurance, tax and advisory services to their clients and/or refers to one or more member firms, as the context requires. GTIL and the member firms are not a worldwide partnership. GTIL and each member firm is a separate legal entity. Services are delivered by the member firms. GTIL does not provide services to clients. GTIL and its member firms are not agents of, and do not obligate, one another and are not liable for one another’s acts or omissions.