country like Brazil that has experienced a large decrease in earnings inequality in the last decade Alvarez et al. (2018).

In order to identify the skill premium associated with innovation, Table 7 shows the results of estimating Equation 2 but interacting our innovation PoTec variable and the workers’ skill level<sup>10</sup> - column (1) - and then by restricting the sample for each skill level – columns (3), (5) and (7).<sup>11</sup> The main result is that, similarly to Aghion et al. (2019), the innovation premium is higher for low- and medium-skill workers. The innovation premium that a medium-skilled worker premium gets is 23 log points higher than the innovation premium of a high-skilled worker; 8 log points higher for low-skilled workers. Columns (3), (5) and (7) confirm these results splitting the sample; low and medium-skilled workers innovation premium remain high, and larger than the innovation premium of high-skilled workers.

These results seem to support the complementarity hypothesis that Aghion et al. (2019) found using UK data and also using a different skill classification. Table A2 shows the results using the same skill classification as in Aghion et al. (2019). The results show some differences in the size of the coefficients, with low-skilled workers, on average, obtaining a higher positive innovation wage premium. This is likely the result that the NQF classification defines many manufacturing and other maintenance basic occupations as low-skill occupations - in Table 7, about 21 million workers were classified as low-skill, against more than 73 million in Table A2.<sup>12</sup> The results, nevertheless, are aligned with Aghion et al. (2019) in supporting a potential complementarity of low and medium skill workers with high skills workers in innovative firms, which imply a larger innovation premium for these lower skills occupations.

One caveat of these findings, however, is that we are not controlling for potential unobserved firm factors. While, as discussed above, these firm fixed effects also capture part of the premium, they also allow controlling for these unobserved firm fixed effects. The estimates using both firm and worker fixed effects are shown in column (2). As before, the innovation wage premium is reduced, highlighting the larger firm fixed wage effect in innovative firms, which are better-paying firms. However, the relative distribution of the premium across skills changes, and now high skilled workers are getting a larger innovation premium. Although these estimates may suffer from limited mobility bias (see Bonhomme et al. (2020)), they suggest the need to look more in-depth on how different skill groups share the innovation wage premium.

> 10Occupations were classified following Autor and Dorn (2013), as discussed in section 3.B.

> 11Table B1 and Table B2 re-estimate the premium per skill level including both private and public sectors.

> 12Note that the NQF classification is mainly used for immigration purposes, which in many cases is intended to prevent workers from obtaining their right to work in the United Kingdom. With this in mind, our preferred definition of skills is the one developed in Autor and Dorn (2013), as it takes into account workers’ tasks and wages.

21