本篇研究旨在探討利率政策對所得分佈不均的關係，利用 Azzimonti, De Francisco, and Quadrini (2014) 的模型加以延伸擴展，並加入土地或資產的價格變動，從而進一步探討中央銀行的低利率政策對企業主與受薪階層的影響。

模型假設簡單將市場參與者分成2大類，分別是企業家與受薪的勞工，藉由此2大類分別的終生效用函數對利率的變動來說明利率政策對所得分配的影響。Joseph E. Stiglitz (2015b) 提及在低利率政策之下將導致信用的膨脹，進而使土地或資產的價值提高，而土地或資產之價格不斷上漲為造成所得分佈不均之重要原因之一，故本篇論文將土地價格變動納入模型加以延伸，並觀察台灣近幾年之現況。

此篇研究發現，在中央銀行的低利率政策之下，有產階層的企業家之財富條件將會愈來愈好，而與之相對的受薪階層的勞工之財富條件將會愈來愈差；而台灣近幾年之數據亦顯示當利率降低之際，代表所得分佈不均的GINI指數隨之上升，與本篇之研究結果相符。

The objective of this thesis is to testify the relation between interest rate policy and income inequality. We develop a model based on Azzimonti, De Francisco, and Quadrini (2014) and expand the model by considering the change of the land or asset price so as to analyze the impact of low interest rate on the welfare of entrepreneurs and workers, respectively.

The model simply divides the agents into two groups, entrepreneurs and workers, and uses their lifetime utility to explain the impact of interest rate policy on income inequality. Joseph E. Stiglitz (2015b) mentioned that low interest rate would expand the credit availability and drive up the land or asset price. The continuous upward trend of land or asset price is one of the important reason causing income inequality. After taking into account the land or asset price on the sensibility of income inequality toward interest rate, this thesis is able to provide a theoretical underpinning of Taiwan’s empirical observation in recent years.

We find out that with low interest rate policy, entrepreneurs’ wealth condition is doing better and better while the workers’ wealth is getting worse. Taiwan’s data in the recent years also shows that once the central bank lowering the interest rate GINI index, which represent the income inequality distribution, will rise immediately. This situation is in accord with the thesis.

一、英文文獻

Azzimonti, M., De Francisco, E., & Quadrini, V. (2014). Financial globalization, inequality, and the rising public debt. The American Economic Review, 104(8), 2267-2302.

Bachmann, R., & Bai, J. H. (2013). Politico-economic inequality and the comovement of government purchases. Review of Economic Dynamics, 16(4), 565-580.

Blundell, R., Pistaferri, L., & Preston, I. (2008). Consumption inequality and partial insurance. The American Economic Review, 98(5), 1887-1921.

Cutler, D. M., & Katz, L. F. (1992). Rising Inequality? Changes in the Distribution of Income and Consumption in the 1980s (No. w3964). National Bureau of Economic Research.

DeBacker, J. M., Heim, B. T., Vidangos, I., & Panousi, V. (2011). Rising inequality: Transitory or permanent? New evidence from a US panel of household income 1987-2006.

Haider, S. J. (2001). Earnings instability and earnings inequality of males in the United States: 1967–1991. Journal of labor Economics, 19(4), 799-836.

Johnson, D. S., & Smeeding, T. M. (1998). Intergenerational Equity in the United States: the Changing Well-being of the Old and the Young, 1960-1995.Bureau of Labor Statistics Working Paper.

Kopczuk, W., Saez, E., & Song, J. (2010). Earnings inequality and mobility in the United States: evidence from social security data since 1937. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 125(1), 91-128.

Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the twenty-first century. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press

Spence, Michael (2014), “The Real Challenges to Growth,＂ Project Syndicate, Jan. 23

Stiglitz, J. E. (2012). The price of inequality: How today's divided society endangers our future. WW Norton & Company.

Stiglitz, J. E. (2015a). FED POLICY, INEQUALITY, & EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY.

Stiglitz, J. E. (2015b). The origins of inequality, and policies to contain it. National Tax Journal, 68(2), 425-48.

 
二、中文文獻

王德睦、何華欽、劉一龍，(2008)。 所得成長, 所得不均與家戶變遷對貧窮率之影響: 以台灣地區 1990 年至 2004 年爲例. 臺灣社會福利學刊, 7(1), 29-63.

林宗弘，(2015)。 臺灣階級不平等擴大的原因與後果. 臺灣經濟預測與政策, 45(2), 45-68.

林金源、朱雲鵬，(2000)。 台灣個人工作報酬不均度的長期變化. 台灣經濟學會年會論文集, 第 57-75 頁. 附錄: CGE 模型架構與資料處理.

林金源、朱雲鵬，(2002)。 台灣跨期薪資所得不均度之研究: 因素分析法的應用.經濟論文, 30(3), 341-361.

洪明皇，(2012)。 台灣消費不均度的變化. 社會科學論叢, 6(1), 73-103.

洪明皇、鄭文輝，(2013)。 台灣高所得者所得份額之變化: 1977-2010. 調查研究-方法與應用, (30), 47-95.