🔍 Read the full analysis: Is AI Making The Capital-Labour Divide Wider? on ThorstenMeyerAI.com
Prime made for students and young adults
- Fast, free delivery for dorm and study essentials
- Prime Video and Amazon Music included
- Member-only deals
TL;DR
The US Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that workers received 53.0% of nonfarm business value in the third quarter of 2026, the lowest share in its series dating to 1947. The decline raises questions about how gains are divided between workers and owners, but the data do not show that AI caused it.
US workers received 53.0% of the value produced in the nonfarm business sector in the third quarter of 2026, the lowest share in Bureau of Labor Statistics records dating to 1947. The November 5 report documents a long decline in labour’s share of income, but it does not establish that artificial intelligence caused it.
The BLS measure compares pay for work—including wages, salaries and benefits—with gross value added in the nonfarm business sector, which accounts for about three quarters of the US economy. The remaining share includes income and costs attributed to capital, such as profits, interest, rents and depreciation. The second-quarter figure was revised to about 53.4%, according to the source material.
The share stood at about 65% in 1947, reached 66.2% at the end of 1960 and remained around 63% in 2000. It fell below 60% in early 2004 and averaged about 56% in 2011. The third-quarter 2026 reading means workers received 53 cents of each dollar of measured value, compared with about 66 cents in 1960.
The measure includes an estimate for self-employed workers: the BLS assumes their labour income corresponds to the average hourly pay of employees in the same sector. That adjustment matters because self-employment income can combine returns to a person’s work and capital.
Infographic 01 · The number to remember
53 cents of every dollar
How much of the value created in US businesses goes to the people who work there, 1947 to 2026.
US labour share · nonfarm business · % of value added (annual averages unless noted)
BLS publishes the series as an index (2017 = 100) and the latest level (53.0% in Q3 2026). The levels shown here are derived by scaling the index to that published level; they include an estimate of the labour income of the self-employed and use gross value added, so the capital side includes depreciation. Bars start at zero.
Sources: BLS, Productivity and Costs, Q3 2026 (5 Nov 2026); BLS labor share series PRS85006173 (via FRED).
Powered by Thorsten Meyer AI
Who Receives the Gains from Production
The labour share is one way to track how income generated by businesses is divided between workers and owners of capital. A sustained decline can mean that a smaller portion of measured output goes to labour, even as the economy produces more overall. Because the sector generates trillions of dollars in value each year, percentage-point changes represent large sums, though this statistic alone does not show what any particular worker earns or how household incomes change.
The trend matters to debates about productivity, wages and economic inequality. If technology lets businesses produce more with fewer workers, or gives owners greater leverage over how gains are distributed, workers may receive a smaller share. But the labour-share measure is not a direct test of AI’s effects: it does not identify which technologies were adopted, which jobs changed, or whether workers’ pay fell because of automation.
Popular right now
Bose QuietComfort Wireless Headphones – Twilight Blue (Limited Edition)
TCL 55-Inch T7 Series 4K QLED Smart Google TV (55T7)
KitchenAid Artisan 5-Qt Tilt-Head Stand Mixer, KSM150PS, Almond Cream
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
The division of economic output between wages, profits and rents has been a central question in economics since at least David Ricardo’s 1817 work on political economy. For much of the twentieth century, the US figures appeared relatively stable. John Maynard Keynes wrote in 1939 that labour’s share was strikingly stable, and economist Nicholas Kaldor later treated that stability as one of the patterns economic-growth models needed to explain.
International data point to a related, though not identical, trend. The International Labour Organization estimated that the global labour income share fell 1.6 percentage points from 2004 to 2024, including 0.6 points after 2019. The ILO said the shift represented $2.4 trillion in labour income in 2024, measured in constant purchasing-power dollars. Its 2026 trends report put the global share at 52.6% in 2025, below the 2019 figure of 53.0%.
The ILO’s analysis of data from 2003 to 2019 found evidence compatible with automation-oriented technological progress contributing to declines in labour’s income share. That finding is evidence of a possible contribution, not proof that AI explains the US record. The source material also notes that national movements can differ: Germany’s wage share rose to 73.5% in 2025, mainly as profits and property income fell amid a stagnant economy.
““To determine the laws which regulate this distribution, is the principal problem in Political Economy.””
— David Ricardo, in On the Principles of Political Economy, and Taxation (1817)
The BLS figure records how income is divided, but it does not identify the causes of the decline. It cannot separate the effects of AI from other forms of automation, changes in industries and business structures, shifts in market power, or other economic forces. Nor does the aggregate share reveal how gains and losses are distributed among different workers, firms or households.
The figures also rely on definitions and estimates, including the treatment of self-employed people and depreciation. The available source material does not provide a breakdown linking the third-quarter result to AI adoption, particular occupations or industries, or changes in individual wages. The record low is confirmed by the cited BLS series; a causal connection to AI remains unproven by these data.
Watching Future Data and AI Evidence
The next steps are to track revisions and subsequent BLS releases to see whether the third-quarter reading persists or changes as more data arrive. Further analysis would need to connect labour-share movements with evidence about AI and automation adoption, productivity, employment and compensation across industries and occupations.
For now, the measured development is clear: labour’s share of US nonfarm business value has fallen substantially from its mid-twentieth-century levels. Whether AI is widening that divide—and how much of the trend it explains—remains an open question rather than a conclusion established by the latest figures.
Key Questions
What does the 53.0% figure measure?
It is the share of gross value added in the US nonfarm business sector attributed to labour income, including wages, salaries and benefits. The BLS estimates labour income for self-employed people as part of the calculation.
Does the record low prove AI is taking income from workers?
No. The BLS figure shows a decline in labour’s share but does not identify its cause. The ILO has reported evidence compatible with automation contributing to global declines, but that does not prove AI caused the US result.
How does the figure compare with earlier years?
The share was about 66.2% at the end of 1960, around 63% in 2000 and about 56% on average in 2011. It reached 53.0% in the third quarter of 2026, the lowest level in the series beginning in 1947.
Is the same pattern happening worldwide?
The ILO estimated that the global labour income share fell 1.6 percentage points between 2004 and 2024 and placed it at 52.6% in 2025. National patterns vary; the source material reports that Germany’s wage share rose in 2025 as profits and property income fell.
Source: ThorstenMeyerAI.com
