New Brunswick Analysis 2016 Census Topic: Income

Transcription

1 2016 Census Topic: Income Post-Secondary Education, Training and Labour January 2018

2 Contents General Information... 2 Section 1 Household Income Household Income National Context Household Income Types of Households Household Income Sub-provincial... 5 CMA/CAs... 5 Counties (Census Divisions)... 5 Communities (Census Subdivisions)... 6 Section 2 Individual Income Individual Income National Context Individual Income Income Distribution Individual Income Sources of Income Individual Income Age and Sex Individual Income Sub-provincial CMA/CAs Counties (Census Divisions) Communities (Census Subdivisions) Section 3 Low Income Low Income National Context Low Income Sub-provincial CMA/CAs Counties (Census Divisions) Communities (Census Subdivisions) Appendix Page 1 of 20

3 General Information On September 13, 2017, the fourth wave of data from the 2016 Census of Population was released. This document will cover some of the key findings concerning the income data that was included in this release, focusing on New Brunswick. For the first time in 2016, the Census of Population Program gathered income information solely from administrative data sources (T1 filings, tax slips and CRA-administered government programs). The use of administrative data reduces respondent burden at the time of data collection and increases the quality and quantity of income data available. For all income and contribution variables, the reference period is the year 2015, and only individuals living in private households are included. To be consistent with Statistics various data tables and publications, all historical comparisons in this document are made to 2005, with all income adjusted for inflation (2015 constant dollars). For more detailed information, a Census Income Reference Guide is available on Statistics s website. i Income data is a valuable tool that allows for governments, non-profits, and other organizations to make better informed decisions about socio-economic policies and programs. Individuals and businesses can use income data to help determine where to reside or locate. Income is intrinsically linked to labour, education, tax and social policies, mobility and immigration, housing, and numerous other important topics. Additional information on income and how it relates to some of these topics will become available over the coming months, with further Census data releases scheduled for October 25, 2017 and November 29, Section 1 Household Income 1.1 Household Income National Context New Brunswick had the lowest median household total income of the provinces and territories in 2015 at $59,347; nationally, median household total income was $70,336. Between 2005 and 2015, median household total income (adjusted for inflation) in New Brunswick increased by $4,895 (+11.0%), the tenth largest increase of the provinces and territories. Nationally, median household total income increased by $6,879 (+10.8%) during this same time period (largely influenced by Ontario, which saw only a 3.8% increase). The other Maritime Provinces, along with Quebec, had similar median household total income levels to New Brunswick, and experienced similar growth between 2005 and Total income is the sum of income from all sources before taxes are deducted. It can be broken down into two major categories: market income (e.g. employment income, investment income, private retirement income, etc.) and government transfers (e.g. Old Age Security Pension, Canadian Pension Plan, Employment Insurance, child benefits, etc.) Page 2 of 20

4 It s worth noting that when comparing household incomes between different regions, that one region having a higher median household total income doesn t necessarily correspond to higher salaries or wages in that region. Factors such as the type of families/households living in that region (e.g. a region where people typically live alone would likely have a lower median household total income) and the demographics in that region (e.g. a region with an older population is more likely to have fewer employed residents, thus having lower total incomes), have a significant effect on median household total income. Median Household Total Income by Province/Territory (2015) NL PE NS QC ON MB SK AB BC YT NT NU $70,336 $67,272 $61,163 $60,764 $59,347 $59,822 $74,287 $68,147 $75,412 $93,835 $69,995 $84,521 $117,688 $97,441 Relative Change in Median Household Total Income by Province/Territory ( ) NL PE NS QC ON MB SK AB BC YT NT NU +10.8% +28.9% +11.1% +10.2% +11.0% +8.9% +3.8% +20.3% +36.5% +24.0% +12.2% +18.9% +24.5% +36.7% 1.2 Household Income Types of Households On a relative basis, increases in median household total income in New Brunswick outpaced national growth for all household types; however, this is in part the result of income levels in the province being lower to begin with. In terms of absolutes, median household income growth in the province outpaced for households consisting of only one census family while trailing slightly behind for other household types. Median household total income for couples with children in New Brunswick increased considerably between 2005 and 2015 (+21.4%, +$17,577). While income for both couples with children and lone-parent households has risen considerably since 2005, the amount of couples with children households continues to decrease, leading to more children being in, lower income, lone-parent households. Page 3 of 20

5 A census family is defined as a married or common law couple and the children, if any, of either and/or both partners, or a lone parent with at least one child living in the same dwelling (and that child or those children). All members of a particular census family live in the same dwelling. Other census-family households include one-census-family households in which additional persons are present and multiple-census-family households. Non-census-family households include one-person households, and two or more person noncensus-family households. Median Household Total Income by Household Type (New Brunswick and ) New Brunswick Household Type Median % Change Median % Change (2015) ( ) (2015) ( ) Census-family households $75, % $90, % One census family households $74, % $87, % Couple, without children $68, % $79, % Couple, with children $99, % $112, % Lone-parent $42, % $52, % Other census-family households $92, % $110, % Non-census-family households $31, % $37, % All Household Types $59, % $70, % In 2015, of those living together as a couple (married or common law) in the province, the higher total income recipient s income represented 69.4% of the couple s total income. In 2015, 82.4% of New Brunswick couples (married or common-law) had at least one employment income recipient (85.5% nationally), while 59.2% of couples had two employment income recipients (61.7% nationally). Page 4 of 20

6 1.3 Household Income Sub-provincial CMA/CAs Of the seven CMA/CAs in the province in 2015, Fredericton had the highest median household income ($66,877), while Campbellton had the lowest ($49,088). Median household total income in Miramichi was up 14.3% since 2005, the largest proportional increase of the New Brunswick () CMA/CAs, while Bathurst saw only a 4.6% increase, the lowest of the CMAs/CAs. This significant increase in household income in Miramichi was likely in part a result of the relocation of a federal pay centre to the area. Median Household Total Income by CMA/CA (New Brunswick, 2015) Change in Median Household Total Income by CMA/CA (New Brunswick, ) Bathurst $53,660 Bathurst +4.6% Campbellton $49,088 Campbellton +9.1% Edmundston $52,960 Edmundston +5.6% Fredericton $66,877 Fredericton +8.0% Miramichi $57,930 Miramichi +14.3% Moncton $62,871 Moncton +5.6% Saint John $63,737 Saint John +9.8% $59, % Counties (Census Divisions) Of the fifteen counties in the province, Kings County ($76,290) and Sunbury County ($71,512) had the highest median household total incomes, while Queens County ($49,146) and Victoria County ($49,146) had the lowest medians. Kent County (+16.4%) and Northumberland County (+16.0%) saw the largest increases in median household total income between 2005 and 2015 in the province. On the other hand, Albert County (+3.5%) and Madawaska County (+5.1%) experienced the smallest increases. Page 5 of 20

7 Communities (Census Subdivisions) In 2015, eight of the ten communities (Census Subdivisions) with the highest median household total income levels (of areas where data was available) in the province were located in either York County or Kings County. While communities with the highest median household income levels tended to have higher income levels across all household types, they also tended to have more one couple census family (with or without children) households, and fewer of the other household types (i.e. lone-parent households, other census family households, and non-census family households). While the low income levels seen in many First Nations communities are a concerning and important topic, a great deal of caution should be taken when comparing these income statistics to those of non-first-nations communities. As Statistics notes: The existence of substantial in-kind transfers (such as subsidized housing and First Nations band housing) and sizeable barter economies or consumption from own production (such as product from hunting, farming or fishing) could make the interpretation of low-income statistics more difficult in these situations. For these reasons, along with high non-response rates seen in many of these communities, First Nations communities were excluded from our analysis in this section. The communities with the lowest median household incomes generally had low population levels. In 2015, Communities that ranked in the bottom ten in terms of median household income (excluding First Nations communities) in the province had an average population of 1,116. Page 6 of 20

8 Median household total income for non-first-nation communities in the province ranged from $35,840 to $102,713 in The below graphs show the non-first-nation communities that had the highest and lowest median household total income levels in the province in Communities (Census Subdivisions) With the Highest Median Household Total Income (New Brunswick, 2015) Communities (Census Subdivisions) With the Lowest Median Household Total Income (New Brunswick, 2015) New Maryland, VL $102,713 Maisonnette, VL $35,840 Quispamsis, TV $101,968 Durham, P $36,403 Hanwell, RCR $95,061 Richibucto, TV $38,613 Kingsclear, P $90,573 Saint-Louis de Kent, VL $38,784 Rothesay, TV $88,623 Minto, VL $38,985 New Maryland, P $88,036 Chipman, VL $39,125 Grand Bay-Westfield, TV $84,813 Harcourt, P $39,296 Hampton, P $78,464 Rogersville, VL $40,021 Tide Head, VL $77,466 Port Elgin, VL $40,064 Oromocto, TV $77,074 Paquetville, P $41,440 For a list of standard geographical classification abbreviations, visit: Section 2 Individual Income 2.1 Individual Income National Context New Brunswick s working-age population (ages 15 and older) had the second lowest median individual total income of the provinces and territories in 2015 at $30,961; nationally, median individual total income was $34,204. Between 2005 and 2015, median individual total income in New Brunswick (for the working-age population) increased by $4,895 (+18.8%), the ninth largest increase of the provinces and territories. Nationally, median individual total income increased by $3,845 (+12.7%) during this same time period. Page 7 of 20

9 Median Individual Total Income by Province/Territory (2015) Relative Change in Median Individual Total Income by Province/Territory ( ) NL $34,204 $31,754 NL +12.7% +37.1% PE $31,744 PE +19.7% NS $31,813 NS +17.8% $30, % QC $32,975 QC +13.8% ON $33,539 ON +3.8% MB $34,188 MB +19.2% SK $38,299 SK +36.2% AB $42,717 AB +24.8% BC $33,012 BC +12.0% YT $45,804 YT +22.2% NT $50,618 NT +22.2% NU $29,743 NU +20.3% 2.2 Individual Income Income Distribution In 2015 there were 27,510 New Brunswickers whose individual total income was $100,000 or more, representing 4.4% of the working-age population, up from 2.8% in At a national level, 7.9% of the population earned at least $100, % of working-age New Brunswickers earned under $25,000 in terms of individual total income in 2015 (including those with zero or negative income), down considerably from 50.7% in Nationally, this percentage was 41.2% in Distribution of Individual Total Income (New Brunswick, 2005 and 2015) 30% 20% 10% 0% Page 8 of 20

10 2.3 Individual Income Sources of Income 68.3% of working-age New Brunswickers had employment income in 2015, up 0.2 p.p. from This percentage was in line with the Atlantic average (68.3%), but trailed behind the other provinces and the country as a whole (71.3% of the population had employment income nationally). Employment income accounted for 68.5% of total income in the province (with the remaining 31.5% coming from a combination of other market income and government transfers), compared to 72.0% at a national level. Median employment income was $29,124 in the province in This represented an increase of $3,627 since 2005 (the eighth largest increase among the provinces and territories), nearly double the increase that was seen at a national level (+$1,886); despite this, New Brunswick still trailed behind the national median of $33,684. In terms of other market income, the percentage of New Brunswickers with investment income decreased from 23.3% in 2005, to 19.5% in On the other hand, the percentage of New Brunswickers with private retirement income increased from 13.2% to 16.6% during that same period. As would be expected, these sources of income were much more common among older groups: 57.7% of New Brunswickers ages 65 and up had private retirement income, and 34.2% had some form of investment income. Market Income Employment Income Investment Income Private Retirement Income Market Income n.i.e. After-Tax Income Total Income (Before-Tax) Government Transfers OAS/GIS, CPP/QPP, EI, Child Benefits and Other Government Transfers* Income Taxes *The key components of this variable (other government transfers) are social assistance benefits, workers' compensation benefits, working income tax benefit, goods and services tax credit and harmonized sales tax credit, refundable provincial tax credits, provincial income supplements for seniors, other provincial credits, benefits and rebates, veterans' pensions, war veterans' allowance, pensions to widow(er)s and dependants of veterans. Page 9 of 20

11 Median Amount by Income Source, Individuals, Working-Age Population (New Brunswick, 2015) Source of Income Working-Age Population with an Amount Percentage of Working-Age Population with an Amount Median Amount Total income 594, % $30,961 Market income 516, % $28,444 Employment income 423, % $29,124 Wages, salaries and commissions 400, % $30,127 Net self-employment income 42, % $5,560 Investment income 120, % $428 Private retirement income 102, % $16,394 Market income not included elsewhere 80, % $2,001 Government transfers 439, % $8,164 Old Age Security pension (OAS) and Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS) 134, % $6,810 Pension Plan (CPP/QPP) 188, % $6,618 Employment Insurance (EI) benefits 100, % $7,283 Child benefits 79, % $3,560 Other government transfers 263, % $413 After-tax income 594, % $28,107 Income taxes (Paid to Government) 402, % $5, % of working-age New Brunswickers received some form of government transfer in 2015, up 6.1 p.p. from At a national level, 68.9% of the working-age population received some form of government transfer in 2015, up 8.6 p.p. since While the majority of New Brunswickers (and Canadians) received government transfers, transfers only accounted for a relatively small percentage of total income. In 2015, government transfers accounted for 16.8% of total income in the province in 2015; nationally, they accounted for 11.7%. The median amount received from transfers in the province was $8,164 in 2015, up from $7,125 in 2005 (+$1,039, +14.6%). In 2015, the most commonly received government transfer in New Brunswick (and ) was the GST/HST credit (categorized under other transfers ); 39.9% of New Brunswickers received a transfer from this credit, with the median amount received being $344. While the median amount received from OAS, GIS, and CPP/QPP transfers did not change significantly between 2005 and 2015, the number of working-age New Brunswickers who received these transfers increased significantly during this time (+5.0 p.p. for OAS/GIS recipients, and +7.9 p.p. for CPP/QPP recipients), a by-product of the province s aging population. 99.3% of New Brunswickers ages 65 and up were receiving government transfers in 2015 (with the median amount received being $15,105), including 94.8% receiving OAS/GIS transfers and 95.6% receiving CPP/QPP transfers. Page 10 of 20

12 Percentage of Working-Age Population Receiving Government Transfers, by Type (New Brunswick, 2015) 70.9% 21.1% 42.5% 30.4% 9.5% 16.3% 12.9% Any OAS GIS CPP/QPP EI Benefits Child Benefits Other Transfers $8,164 Median Amount Received from Government Transfers, by Type (New Brunswick, 2015) $6,798 $3,909 $6,618 $7,283 $3,560 $413 Any OAS GIS CPP/QPP EI Benefits Child Benefits Other Transfers 2.4 Individual Income Age and Sex Median individual total income for New Brunswick s core working-age population (ages 25 to 54) was $39,982 in 2015, while median employment income for the core working-age was $38,276. Between 2005 and 2015, in terms of absolutes, within the province, those between the ages of 35 and 44 saw the largest increase in total income (+$7,688), while in relative terms, those between the ages of 15 and 24 saw the greatest increase (+32.4%). This increase in income for youth was largely influenced by the province s minimum wage, which increased by 63.5% during this same time ii. According to Labour Force Survey estimates, as of 2015, the median hourly wage rate for New Brunswickers ages was $11.36 iii, with 23.2% of this population earning minimum wage iv. Between 2005 and 2015, those ages 75 and up saw the smallest increases in terms of income, both in terms of absolutes (+$1,358) and on a relative basis (+6.5%). Median Individual Total Income by Age Group (New Brunswick, 2015) $11,841 $34,184 $42,343 $40,355 $34,893 $25,066 $22, Page 11 of 20

13 Median total income for males was nearly $12,000 higher than median total income for females in 2015, although, this gap was slightly smaller than it was in was in 2005, with the median total income for females increasing by $4,973 during this time, compared to $4,302 for males. The gap in median total income between sexes is widest for those between the ages of 35 and 74. While this gap was smaller for those between the ages of 15 and 24, the median for males was nonetheless $1,267 higher compared to the female median. This gap is likely in large part a product of both the number of hours being worked for each sex (e.g. males worked on average 7.1 more hours than females per week in 2015 according to the Labour Force Survey v ), and the type of occupations and industries that individuals from each sex are working in. More insight into this will be available in November when Census data on labour and education is released. Median Individual Total Income by Sex (New Brunswick, 2005 and 2015) $20,823 $25,796 $33,214 $37,516 Female Male 2.5 Individual Income Sub-provincial CMA/CAs Of the seven CMA/CAs in the province in 2015, Fredericton had the highest median (individual) total income ($34,929), while Campbellton had the lowest ($27,965). Median individual total income in Miramichi experienced a 23.7% increase between 2005 and 2015, the largest proportional increase of the CMA/CAs, well above the provincial average (+18.8%), and almost double the relative growth seen at a national level (+12.7%). While median household total income in Bathurst only increased by 4.6% between 2005 and 2015, the lowest of the CMA/CAs, median individual total income in Bathurst grew by 18.1%, the third largest growth of the CMA/CAs. This disparity is in large part due to the typical household in Bathurst becoming smaller (in terms of number of people). In 2016, one person households represented 29.6% of total households in Bathurst, up significantly from 23.1% in 2006 (furthermore, a larger percentage of couples were living without children). Page 12 of 20

14 Median Individual Total Income by CMA/CA (New Brunswick, 2015) Relative Change in Median Individual Total Income by CMA/CA (New Brunswick, ) Bathurst $28,701 Bathurst +18.1% Campbellton $27,965 Campbellton +18.5% Edmundston $29,922 Edmundston +15.1% Fredericton $34,929 Fredericton +16.0% Miramichi $30,172 Miramichi +23.7% Moncton $33,587 Moncton +13.5% Saint John $33,488 Saint John +16.7% $30, % Counties (Census Divisions) Similar to what is seen with household income, counties in the Northeast and Northwest ERs (along with Queens County) lagged behind in terms of median (individual) total income, while Sunbury County and Kings County had favourable median individual total income levels ($37,057 and $36,055 respectively). Median individual total income grew significantly in the Northeast ER, with Northumberland, Restigouche and Gloucester seeing 25.4%, 21.7%, and 24.4% growth between 2005 and 2015 respectively; Kent County, in the Southeast, also saw significant growth (+25.6%). In terms of absolutes however, Sunbury County (+$6,457) and Kings County (+$5,999) saw the greatest growth. On the other hand, the Carleton, Queens, Saint John and Victoria counties saw relatively little growth. Only 58.0% of the Queens County population had employment income in 2015 (down from 58.6% in 2005), the lowest percentage of the provinces fifteen counties; on the other end of the spectrum, 74.6% of Sunbury County had employment income (up from 73.6% in 2005). 79.8% of the Gloucester County population received at least one type of government transfer in 2015, the highest of the New Brunswick counties, including 28.3% receiving Employment Insurance benefits (at some point during the year). Page 13 of 20

15 Communities (Census Subdivisions) Rankings of communities with the highest and lowest median individual total income levels are very similar to the rankings that were seen for median household total income (See Communities in Household Income section). On the high end, one noticeable difference is that the town of Oromocto, which had the tenth highest median household total income level, has the highest median individual income level. This is large a product of the type of households in Oromocto compared to other communities like New Maryland for example. 76.0% of households in New Maryland (village) are married or common-law couples, with or without children, living without additional people; in contrast, this share is only 58.1% for the town of Oromocto, with more people living alone and in other household types (i.e. fewer earners per household). Differences in household structure such as this are what drive the differences in rankings between household and individual income. For the reasons that were discussed in the household income communities section (earlier in the report), First Nations communities were excluded from our community-level analysis. The below graphs show the non-first-nation communities that had the highest and lowest median individual total income levels in the province in Page 14 of 20

16 Communities (Census Subdivisions) With the Highest Median Individual Total Income (New Brunswick, 2015) Communities (Census Subdivisions) With the Lowest Median Individual Total Income (New Brunswick, 2015) Oromocto, TV $46,336 Durham, P $19,136 New Maryland, VL $46,025 Maisonnette, VL $20,224 Quispamsis, TV $43,686 Harcourt, P $21,547 Hanwell, RCR $43,552 Paquetville, P $21,751 Rothesay, TV $42,549 Bath, VL $22,400 New Maryland, P $42,445 Saint-Isidore, P $22,432 Kingsclear, P $41,248 Wickham, P $22,528 Dieppe, C $39,582 Doaktown, VL $22,912 Grand Bay-Westfield, TV $38,810 Minto, VL $22,940 Tide Head, VL $37,376 Chipman, VL $23,040 Section 3 Low Income 3.1 Low Income National Context New Brunswick had the second highest prevalence of low income of the provinces and territories in 2015 (17.1%, according to the LIM-AT). This rate was in line with the rates of the other Maritime Provinces, but well above the national average (14.2%), although, while the prevalence of low income increased slightly (+0.2 p.p.) between 2005 and 2015 at a national level, it saw a slight decrease in New Brunswick (-0.1 p.p.). As of 2015, low income was much more prevalent for children ages 0 to 17 in the province (22.2%) compared to the country as a whole (17.0%). While this rate fell at the national level from its 2005 level (driven primarily by significant decreases in Newfoundland and Labrador and Saskatchewan), it increased slightly within the province, in part due to a relative increase in the percentage of children living in lone-parent households. A larger proportion of seniors (ages 65 and up) were living in low income in the province in 2015 (20.2%) compared to 2005 (17.0%). A similar trend was seen at a national level, where low income prevalence increased from 12.0% to 14.5%. The After-tax Low-Income Measure (LIM-AT) is a threshold representing a fixed percentage (50%) of median adjusted household after-tax income, where adjusted indicates that household needs are taken into account. In 2015, according to LIM-AT, a household of four with an after-tax income of under $44,266 (or a person living alone with an after-tax income under $22,133) was considered to be living in low income. Page 15 of 20

17 Prevalence of Low Income, All Ages (2015; LIM-AT) NL PE NS QC ON MB SK AB BC 14.2% 15.4% 16.9% 17.2% 17.1% 14.6% 14.4% 15.4% 12.8% 9.3% 15.5% Prevalance of Low Income, Ages 0-17, by Province (2015; LIM-AT) NL PE NS QC ON MB SK AB BC 17.0% 17.8% 14.3% 21.7% 22.2% 22.2% 18.4% 21.9% 17.8% 12.8% 18.5% Prevalence of Low Income, Ages 65+ (2015; LIM-AT) NL PE NS QC ON MB SK AB BC 14.5% 23.4% 19.8% 17.9% 20.2% 18.7% 12.0% 13.9% 8.6% 14.5% 14.9% While the low income measure is the most commonly used low income measure for the purpose of making international comparisons, other measures of low income, such as the Low-Income Cut-offs (LICOs) and the Market Basket Measure (MBM), are available, with each measure (including LIM) having its own advantages and disadvantages. Change in Prevalence of Low Income, All Ages, ( ; LIM-AT) Changes in Percentage Points NL PE NS QC ON MB SK AB BC Change in Prevalance of Low Income, Ages 0-17, ( ; LIM-AT) Change in Percentage Points NL PE NS QC ON MB SK AB BC Change in Prevalence of Low Income, Ages 65+, ( ; LIM-AT) Changes in Percentage Points NL PE NS QC ON MB SK AB BC Page 16 of 20

18 3.2 Low Income Sub-provincial CMA/CAs 21.0% of the Campbellton population was in low income in 2015, this represented the highest low income prevalence rate of the seven CMA/CAs in the province (fifth highest nationally). Nonetheless, this represented an improvement from 2005, when 22.0% of the Campbellton population was in low income. In contrast, 15.5% of the Moncton and Fredericton populations were in low income, the lowest of the CMA/CAs (but still above the national average). Between 2005 and 2015, Edmundston saw the greatest increase in terms of low income prevalence of the CMAs/CAs, with its rate increasing from 16.5% to 18.2%. Low income prevalence in Non-CMA/CA decreased by 1.3 p.p. between 2005 and Prevalence of Low Income (LIM-AT) by CMA/CA (New Brunswick, 2015) CMA/CA Change Bathurst 18.5% 18.7% +0.2 p.p. Campbellton 22.0% 21.0% -1.0 p.p. Edmundston 16.5% 18.2% +1.7 p.p. Fredericton 13.9% 15.5% +1.6 p.p. Miramichi 16.9% 16.5% -0.4 p.p. Moncton 14.4% 15.5% +1.1 p.p. Saint John 16.0% 16.7% +0.7 p.p. Non-CMA/CA 19.8% 18.5% -1.3 p.p. Total Population 17.2% 17.1% -0.1 p.p. Page 17 of 20

19 Counties (Census Divisions) Of the five Economic Regions (ERs) In New Brunswick in 2015, low income was most prevalent in the Northeast (19.5%) and Northwest (19.4%) ERs, and least prevalent in the Southeast ER (15.4%). While the two northern ERs had very similar low income prevalence rates in 2015, between 2005 and 2015, their trends were very different. While the low income rate in the Northeast decreased by 1.5 p.p., the Northwest s low income rate increased by 1.7 p.p. during that same time. Within the Northeast ER, low income was most prevalent in Restigouche County (21.0%), while in the Northwest ER, it was most prevalent in Victoria County (22.0%). In Sunbury County, within the Central ER, only 9.5% of the population were in low income. The low income rate saw moderate decreases in the Gloucester, Kent, Sunbury, and Restigouche counties between 2005 and On the other hand, moderate increases were seen in the Carleton, York, Queens, Saint John, Victoria and Madawaska counties. Prevalence of Low Income (LIM-AT) by Economic Region (New Brunswick, 2015) Economic Region (ER) All Ages Change Ages 0-17 Ages 65+ (2015) ( ) (2015) (2015) Northeast ER 19.5% -1.5 p.p. 24.0% 26.8% Northumberland 18.3% -0.5 p.p. 23.5% 23.9% Restigouche 21.0% -1.1 p.p. 26.7% 26.1% Gloucester 19.5% -2.2 p.p. 23.2% 28.7% Southeast ER 15.4% 0.0 p.p. 20.1% 17.5% Albert 12.2% -0.3 p.p. 17.0% 12.7% Westmorland 15.8% +0.5 p.p. 20.5% 16.7% Kent 16.8% -2.2 p.p. 21.3% 24.9% Southwest ER 17.4% +0.1 p.p. 24.0% 17.1% Saint John 21.8% +1.5 p.p. 32.4% 18.5% Charlotte 19.5% -0.9 p.p. 27.0% 20.8% Kings 12.0% -0.7 p.p. 15.6% 14.0% Central ER 15.5% +0.7 p.p. 22.5% 15.6% Sunbury 9.5% -2.2 p.p. 11.8% 15.0% Queens 23.3% +1.2 p.p. 33.1% 24.8% York 16.4% +1.7 p.p. 24.7% 14.0% Northwest ER 19.4% +1.7 p.p. 24.1% 25.0% Carleton 19.1% +3.0 p.p. 24.2% 22.9% Victoria 22.0% +1.2 p.p. 28.7% 27.7% Madawaska 18.2% +1.1 p.p. 21.2% 24.9% Total Population 17.1% -0.1 p.p. 22.2% 20.2% Page 18 of 20

20 In 2015, Saint John County had the seventh highest prevalence of low income for children ages 0 to 17 in the country, at 32.4% (up from 28.8% in 2005). In 2015, thirteen of the fifteen counties in the province had a prevalence of low income for children ages 0 to 17 that was as high, or higher, than the national average (17.0%), with Sunbury County (11.8%) and Kings County (15.6%) being the two exceptions. The Northeast and Northwest ERs (especially Gloucester County and Victoria County) had very high prevalence of lower income for seniors (ages 65 and up) in 2015, at 26.8% and 25.0% respectively. Communities (Census Subdivisions) A significant number of the communities with the highest prevalence rates of low income were located in the Northwest ER, although areas with low income were spread across the entire province. (Note: as previously mentioned, First Nation communities are excluded from these calculations vi ). Communities (Census Subdivisions) With the Lowest Prevalence of Low Income (New Brunswick, 2015) Communities (Census Subdivisions) With the Highest Prevalence of Low Income (New Brunswick, 2015) New Maryland, VL 4.0% Durham, P 38.6% Oromocto, TV 5.3% Port Elgin, VL 36.8% New Maryland, P 5.4% Perth-Andover, VL 29.8% Tide Head, VL 5.9% Minto, VL 29.7% Quispamsis, T 6.6% Aroostook, VL 29.5% Hanwell, RCR 7.0% Maisonnette, VL 29.3% Grand Bay-Westfield, TV 7.4% Belledune, VL 28.6% Kingsclear, P 7.9% Sussex, TV 28.4% Chatham, P 7.9% Dumbarton, P 28.4% Burton, P 8.0% Saint-Louis de Kent, VL 28.3% Page 19 of 20

21 Appendix Median Household Total Income by County (New Brunswick, 2015) Northeast ER Northumberland Restigouche Gloucester Southeast ER Albert Westmorland Kent Southwest ER Saint John Charlotte Kings Central ER Sunbury Queens York Northwest ER Carleton Victoria Madawaska $55,223 $49,553 $52,793 $66,521 $61,903 $54,123 $53,387 $55,701 $48,539 $76,290 $71,512 $65,274 $55,749 $49,146 $53,146 Change in Median Household Total Income by County (New Brunswick, ) Northeast ER Northumberland Restigouche Gloucester Southeast ER Albert Westmorland Kent Southwest ER Saint John Charlotte Kings Central ER Sunbury Queens York Northwest ER Carleton Victoria Madawaska +3.5% +10.2% +8.3% +7.0% +8.0% +11.9% +16.0% +16.4% +15.2% +12.0% +9.0% +8.6% +8.0% +8.1% +5.1% i Income Reference Guide, Census of Population, 2016: ii Year-end minimum wages used for this calculation iii Median hourly wage by age taken from CANSIM Table iv See the 2017 New Brunswick Minimum Wage Factsheet for more information: v Average actual hours worked (all workers) by sex taken from CANSIM Table vi The existence of substantial in-kind transfers (such as subsidized housing and First Nations band housing) and sizeable barter economies or consumption from own production (such as product from hunting, farming or fishing) could make the interpretation of low-income statistics more difficult in these situations. Page 20 of 20