Cross-National Comparisons

This category contains all comparative research relating to wealth and wealth inequality. This can include comparing estimations of wealth or wealth inequality across countries as well as comparative analyses of other related issues, such as taxation, determinants, or impacts of wealth inequality.

Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality

Taxes on Wealth

Impacts of Wealth Inequality

Intergenerational Wealth

Methods of Estimation of Wealth Inequality

Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality

Wealth Taxation

2023 (9)

Wealth Inequality Dynamics in Europe and the United States: Understanding the Determinants. Blanchet, Thomas; and Martínez-Toledano, Clara. Journal of Monetary Economics, 133: 25–43. January 2023.

link working paper doi

@article{BlanchetMartinez-Toledano2023,
  title = {Wealth Inequality Dynamics in {{Europe}} and the {{United States}}: Understanding the Determinants},
  author = {Blanchet, Thomas and {Mart{\'i}nez-Toledano}, Clara},
  year = {2023},
  month = {jan},
  journal = {Journal of Monetary Economics},
  volume = {133},
  pages = {25--43},
  doi = {10.1016/j.jmoneco.2022.11.010},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmoneco.2022.11.010},
  urldate = {2023-10-17},
  abstract = {This paper studies the interaction between the long-term dynamics of aggregate household wealth and the wealth distribution in Europe and the United States. We do so by building the first Distributional Wealth Accounts for Europe, including households' assets, liabilities, investment flows, and the wealth distribution for most European countries from 1970--2020. We find that although aggregate household wealth to income ratios have followed a similar increasing pattern in both Europe and the United States since 1970, wealth concentration has increased much faster in the United States. Using wealth accumulation decompositions and counterfactual simulations, we show that the weaker rise in labor income inequality and the stronger rise in house prices relative to financial assets in Europe versus the United States appear to explain why Europe has experienced a more moderate rise in wealth concentration since the mid-1980s.},
  keywords = {Data Sources: Wealth Inequality,Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  url_working_paper = {https://bibbase.org/network/publication/blanchet-martineztoledano-wealthinequalitydynamicsineuropeandtheunitedstatesunderstandingthedeterminants-2022}
}

Wealth Inequality in Latin America. Carranza, Rafael; De Rosa, Mauricio; and Flores, Ignacio. International Inequalities Institute. June 2023.

link file

@techreport{Carranzaetal2023,
  title = {Wealth Inequality in {{Latin America}}},
  author = {Carranza, Rafael and De Rosa, Mauricio and Flores, Ignacio},
  year = {2023},
  month = {jun},
  number = {108},
  institution = {International Inequalities Institute},
  url = {https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/119426/},
  urldate = {2023-10-17},
  abstract = {How wealth has accumulated in the region and how is it distributed across households? Despite being widely recognized for its extreme income inequality, reliable data on wealth is scarce, partial and oftentimes contradictory, making it difficult to answer these basic questions. In this study, we estimate aggregates based on macroeconomic data, and inequality based on recently available surveys. We contrast our results with the literature, with a handful of state-of-the-art estimates from administrative sources, and with more available but extrapolated estimates from Credit Suisse and wid.world. Considering all the evidence, we distinguish reliable facts from what can only be conjectured or speculated. We find that aggregate wealth increased over two decades in four countries, now ranging close to 3.5 the national income for market value estimates and 5-6 times at book values. We also find that wealth inequality is amongst the highest in the world were it can be measured. Given data limitations, one can only speculate about aggregates in opaque countries and about inequality trends in any country in the region. Although recent research in the developed world has focused in combining data sources to better understand wealth, the region lags behind and urgently requires more and better public information.},
  keywords = {Data Sources: Wealth Inequality,Cross-National Comparisons,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  type = {{{III Working Paper}}},
  url_file = {Carranzaetal2023.pdf}
}

On Top of the Top: A Generalized Approach to the Estimation of Wealth Distributions. Disslbacher, Franziska; Ertl, Michael; List, Emanuel; Mokre, Patrick; and Schnetzer, Matthias. July 2023.

link file doi

@unpublished{Disslbacheretal2023,
  title = {On Top of the Top: A Generalized Approach to the Estimation of Wealth Distributions},
  author = {Disslbacher, Franziska and Ertl, Michael and List, Emanuel and Mokre, Patrick and Schnetzer, Matthias},
  year = {2023},
  month = {jul},
  doi = {10.2139/ssrn.4499915},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4499915},
  abstract = {The wealth distribution is infamously top-heavy, while the decisive upper tail is missing from survey data on household wealth in European countries. We provide a novel quantile regression approach to estimate all parameters of the Pareto and Generalized Pareto distribution to adjust for the rich missing in survey data due to differential non-response and under-reporting. In contrast to existing Pareto-based adjustment routines, the generalized and rules-based method is scalable, flexible in the face of heterogeneities in data quality and wealth accumulation regimes, transparent, and prevents over-shooting of wealth aggregates and wealth concentration estimates. We apply the method to data on fourteen Eurozone countries by supplementing the Household Finance and Consumption Survey (HFCS) with a novel database on country-specific rich lists from the European Rich List Database (ERLDB) compiled from country-specific rich lists. The magnitude of the resulting upper-tail adjustments varies substantially across countries, highlighting the importance of the rules-based method developed here. In addition, while the results are highly stable across an extensive range of sensitivity tests addressing the opacities of ERLDB data, the resulting estimates vary substantially across parameters borrowed from prior work.},
  keywords = {Data Sources: Wealth Inequality,Cross-National Comparisons,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  note = {Unpublished manuscript},
  url_file = {Disslbacheretal2023.pdf}
}

Revenue, Redistribution, and the Rise and Fall of Inheritance Taxation. Genschel, Philipp; Limberg, Julian; and Seelkopf, Laura. Comparative Political Studies. August 2023.

link file doi

@article{Genscheletal2023,
  title = {Revenue, Redistribution, and the Rise and Fall of Inheritance Taxation},
  author = {Genschel, Philipp and Limberg, Julian and Seelkopf, Laura},
  year = {2023},
  month = {aug},
  journal = {Comparative Political Studies},
  doi = {10.1177/00104140231194065},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1177/00104140231194065},
  abstract = {Why do countries repeal the inheritance tax? To investigate this question, we use a novel dataset on inheritance tax introductions and repeals worldwide. We argue that revenue requirements are the main determinant of repeal risks: The inheritance tax is resilient as long as it is central to the national revenue system; it becomes vulnerable to attacks once the rise of more efficient tax instruments marginalizes its revenue contribution. Devoid of fiscal purpose, its survival depends mainly on its redistributive features. Redistribution, however, is essentially contested and should be more important in democracies. The evidence is in line with our conjecture: The likelihood of inheritance tax repeal increases as other more buoyant taxes rise and non-democracies are more likely to repeal the tax than democracies.},
  keywords = {Data Sources: Taxes on Wealth,Cross-National Comparisons,Estate Inheritance and Gift Taxes},
  url_file = {Genscheletal2023.pdf}
}

The Gender Wealth Gap in Europe: Application of Machine Learning to Predict Individual-Level Wealth. Kukk, Merike; Meriküll, Jaanika; and R\ o\ om, Tairi. Review of Income and Wealth, 69(2): 289–317. June 2023.

link doi

@article{Kukketal2023,
  title = {The Gender Wealth Gap in {{Europe}}: Application of Machine Learning to Predict Individual-Level Wealth},
  author = {Kukk, Merike and Merik{\"u}ll, Jaanika and R{\~o}{\~o}m, Tairi},
  year = {2023},
  month = {jun},
  journal = {Review of Income and Wealth},
  volume = {69},
  number = {2},
  pages = {289--317},
  doi = {10.1111/roiw.12596},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/roiw.12596},
  abstract = {This article provides comparative estimates of the gender wealth gaps for 22 European countries, employing data from the Household Finance and Consumption Survey. The data on wealth are collected at the household level, while individual-level data are needed for the estimates of gender wealth gaps. We propose a novel approach using machine learning and model averaging methods to predict individual-level wealth data for multi-person households. Our results suggest that random forest performs best as the predicting tool for this exercise, outperforming elastic net and Bayesian model averaging. The estimated gender wealth gaps tend to be in favor of men, especially at the top of the wealth distribution. Men have 24 percent more wealth than women on average. We also find that a high home ownership rate is associated with a smaller country-level gender wealth gap. Our estimates suggest that the individual-level wealth inequality is on average 3 pp higher than the household-level wealth inequality in multi-member households.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality}
}

Elderly vs. Working-Age Generation: Homeownership and Housing Asset Inequality in a Cross-Country Perspective. Marcinkiewicz, Edyta. Social Indicators Research, 170(2): 447–463. November 2023.

link doi

@article{Marcinkiewicz2023,
  title = {Elderly vs. Working-Age Generation: Homeownership and Housing Asset Inequality in a Cross-Country Perspective},
  author = {Marcinkiewicz, Edyta},
  year = {2023},
  month = {nov},
  journal = {Social Indicators Research},
  volume = {170},
  number = {2},
  pages = {447--463},
  doi = {10.1007/s11205-023-03207-5},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-023-03207-5},
  abstract = {This study contributes to the discussion about wealth inequality, albeit from a more detailed housing perspective. It explores tenure inequality, as well as housing assets inequality. The latter includes a different approach than the one that prevails in the previous literature on wealth inequalities, which most often considers total net worth or net housing wealth. This study focuses on gross housing asset distribution, irrespective of mortgage debt, which corresponds with the potential of housing equity accumulation as a source of income in old age. It emphasises the intergenerational context, but simultaneously involves cross-country comparisons that allow for relative assessment of the intergenerational differences. Drawing from the Luxembourg Wealth Study (LWS) dataset the paper presents the results for fourteen developed countries. They suggest that the current working-age generation is to a lesser extent involved into homeownership, as compared to the older generation, which results in a smaller housing equity per household, but simultaneously it experiences greater housing inequality. Furthermore, as shown in a cross-country perspective, homeownership rates and housing asset inequality are negatively correlated. Consequently, higher housing asset inequality by lower homeownership rates are the factors that undermine the usefulness of the asset-based welfare concepts in a policy application. Such findings imply that in the macro perspective the potential of housing as a source of additional income in cash and in kind tends to shrink.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality}
}

Income-Poor, Asset-Rich? The Role of Homeownership in Shaping the Welfare Position of the Elderly. Marcinkiewicz, Edyta; and Chybalski, Filip. International Journal of Social Welfare. June 2023.

link doi

@article{MarcinkiewiczChybalski2023,
  title = {Income-Poor, Asset-Rich? The Role of Homeownership in Shaping the Welfare Position of the Elderly},
  author = {Marcinkiewicz, Edyta and Chybalski, Filip},
  year = {2023},
  month = {jun},
  journal = {International Journal of Social Welfare},
  doi = {10.1111/ijsw.12623},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsw.12623},
  abstract = {The study explores the distribution of elderly households in terms of combinations of different levels of income and wealth and relates to the typically greater homeownership rates in this group than in the younger generation. Using microdata from the Luxembourg Wealth Study for 12 countries it demonstrates that `income-poor, asset-rich' elderly households are a quite marginal category. However, the identification of this group is crucial from the policy perspective, as it constitutes a target for actions aiming at increasing the ability of the elderly households to use housing wealth in such a way as to improve their financial well-being. The results also suggest that higher homeownership rates among elderly households, as compared to non-elderly households, are not accompanied by proportionally greater household wealth. Nevertheless, when the level of data aggregation is reduced, there is some evidence that homeownership is positively associated with the welfare position of the elderly.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality}
}

Is There a Trade-off between Housing and Pension System Generosity? Empirical Evidence from the Luxembourg Wealth Study. Marcinkiewicz, Edyta; and Chybalski, Filip. Social Policy & Administration, 57(3): 349–366. May 2023.

link doi

@article{MarcinkiewiczChybalski2023a,
  title = {Is There a Trade-off between Housing and Pension System Generosity? Empirical Evidence from the Luxembourg Wealth Study},
  author = {Marcinkiewicz, Edyta and Chybalski, Filip},
  year = {2023},
  month = {may},
  journal = {Social Policy \& Administration},
  volume = {57},
  number = {3},
  pages = {349--366},
  doi = {10.1111/spol.12865},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12865},
  abstract = {This study contributes to the discussion about the role of housing in the old-age security. It attempts to identify some patterns concerning wealth accumulation preferences among elderly households. We pose a question whether these patterns can be associated with pension generosity measured by the level of income replacement. The study employs micro-data from the Luxembourg Wealth Study dataset. Using statistical analysis and multinomial logistic regression modelling we examine housing wealth patterns among elderly households with a special focus on the possible linkage between housing and pension system's generosity. The results of cross-country comparisons imply that there are large country differences in terms of housing wealth accumulation. Analyses of the relationship between (average) pension system generosity and the (average) share of housing assets in total assets at the country level using aggregated values do not provide any evidence for the pensions-housing trade-off. However, when the level of aggregation is reduced, a different picture emerges. Especially when the households having very small or no housing assets relative to total assets are excluded, it becomes clearer that individuals receiving higher pension tend to differentiate their asset portfolio. A possible explanation for this result could be that housing equity becomes less attractive as its role of old-age security is limited by pension generosity.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality}
}

Tax Principles, Policy Feedback and Self-Interest: Cross-National Experimental Evidence on Wealth Tax Preferences. Schechtl, Manuel; and Tisch, Daria. Socio-Economic Review. February 2023.

link doi

@article{SchechtlTisch2023,
  title = {Tax Principles, Policy Feedback and Self-Interest: Cross-National Experimental Evidence on Wealth Tax Preferences},
  author = {Schechtl, Manuel and Tisch, Daria},
  year = {2023},
  month = {feb},
  journal = {Socio-Economic Review},
  doi = {10.1093/ser/mwac071},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1093/ser/mwac071},
  abstract = {Rising wealth inequality and squeezed public budgets has brought wealth tax back into policy discussions. A net wealth tax might help to boost state revenue and reduce wealth inequality. Yet little is known about citizens' attitudes towards the design of a net wealth tax (i.e. the tax unit, exemption and rate). Using a novel multifactorial survey experiment, we examine citizens' endorsement of fundamental principles of taxation. Building on policy feedback theory, we examine if preferences differ in three policy arenas (USA, Germany and UK) and whether individuals' reasoning is dependent on self-interest. While a clear majority in all three countries generally endorses a wealth tax, our findings show that citizens care more about the amount exempted than the tax unit or rate. We do not identify a preference for any specific tax unit. Furthermore, tax preferences seem to be strikingly similar among citizens of all three countries. Yet we show that individuals are mostly concerned about not being personally affected by such a tax, which is reflected in their preference for substantial exemptions. We discuss our findings with regard to our understanding of wealth inequality, tax equity and the potential implications for policymakers.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Wealth Taxation},
  note = {mwac071}
}

2022 (13)

The Anatomy of the Global Saving Glut. Bauluz, Luis; Novokmet, Filip; and Schularick, Moritz. CESifo. April 2022.

link doi

@techreport{Bauluzetal2022,
  title = {The Anatomy of the Global Saving Glut},
  author = {Bauluz, Luis and Novokmet, Filip and Schularick, Moritz},
  year = {2022},
  month = {apr},
  number = {9732},
  institution = {CESifo},
  doi = {10.2139/ssrn.4103945},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4103945},
  abstract = {This paper provides a household-level perspective on the rise of global saving and wealth since the 1980s. We calculate asset-specific saving flows and capital gains across the wealth distribution for the G3 economies -- the U.S., Europe, and China. In the past four decades, global saving inequality has risen sharply. The share of household saving flows coming from the richest 10\% of household increased by 60\% while saving of middle-class households has fallen sharply. The most important source for the surge in top-10\% saving was the secular rise of global corporate saving whose ultimate owners the rich households are. Housing capital gains have supported wealth growth for middle-class households despite falling saving and rising debt. Without meaningful capital gains in risky assets, the wealth share of the bottom half of the population declined substantially in most G3 economies.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  type = {Working {{Paper}}}
}

Wealth Inequality Dynamics in Europe and the United States: Understanding the Determinants. Blanchet, Thomas; and Martínez-Toledano, Clara. October 2022.

published version

@unpublished{BlanchetMartinez-Toledano2022,
  title = {Wealth Inequality Dynamics in {{Europe}} and the {{United States}}: Understanding the Determinants},
  author = {Blanchet, Thomas and {Mart{\'i}nez-Toledano}, Clara},
  year = {2022},
  month = {oct},
  abstract = {This paper studies the interaction between the long-term dynamics of aggregate household wealth and the wealth distribution in Europe and the United States. We do so by building the first Distributional Wealth Accounts for Europe, including households' assets, liabilities, investment flows, and the wealth distribution for most European countries from 1970--2020. We find that although aggregate household wealth to income ratios have followed a similar increasing pattern in both Europe and the United States since 1970, wealth concentration has increased much faster in the United States. Using wealth accumulation decompositions and counterfactual simulations, we show that the weaker rise in labor income inequality and the stronger rise in house prices relative to financial assets in Europe versus the United States appear to explain why Europe has experienced a more moderate rise in wealth concentration since the mid-1980s},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  note = {Unpublished manuscript},
  url_published_version = {https://bibbase.org/network/publication/blanchet-martineztoledano-wealthinequalitydynamicsineuropeandtheunitedstatesunderstandingthedeterminants-2023}
}

Why Is Europe More Equal than the United States? Blanchet, Thomas; Chancel, Lucas; and Gethin, Amory. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 14(4): 480–518. October 2022.

link doi

@article{Blanchetetal2022,
  title = {Why {{Is Europe}} More Equal than the {{United States}}?},
  author = {Blanchet, Thomas and Chancel, Lucas and Gethin, Amory},
  year = {2022},
  month = {oct},
  journal = {American Economic Journal: Applied Economics},
  volume = {14},
  number = {4},
  pages = {480--518},
  doi = {10.1257/app.20200703},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1257/app.20200703},
  abstract = {This article combines all available data to produce pretax and post-tax income inequality series in 26 European countries from 1980 to 2017. Our estimates are consistent with macroeconomic growth and comparable with US distributional national accounts. Inequality grew in nearly all European countries, but much less than in the US. Contrary to a widespread view, we demonstrate that Europe's lower inequality levels cannot be explained by more equalizing tax and transfer systems. After accounting for indirect taxes and in-kind transfers, the US redistributes a greater share of national income to low-income groups than any European country. ``Predistribution,'' not ``redistribution,'' explains why Europe is less unequal than the United States.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality}
}

The Extreme Wealth-Income Ratio (Ewir): The Joker Smile Curve (Jsc) and the New Age of Extremes. Chauvel, Louis. LIS. May 2022.

link

@techreport{Chauvel2022,
  title = {The Extreme Wealth-Income Ratio (Ewir): The Joker Smile Curve (Jsc) and the New Age of Extremes},
  author = {Chauvel, Louis},
  year = {2022},
  month = {may},
  number = {39},
  institution = {LIS},
  url = {https://www.lisdatacenter.org/wps/lwswps/39.pdf},
  urldate = {2023-11-19},
  abstract = {Is it possible to observe explosive economic inequality, even if the Gini indices of income and of wealth remain stagnant? The answer is yes. The Extreme wealth-income ratio (EWIR), that compares the top quantiles of wealth accumulation to the median income level (among other similar variants), expresses the number (thousands) of years the richest fractions of the wealthy can buy of the average layperson's income. This new indicator brings to light new inequalities that no traditional indicator detects. Building on the traditional wealth-income ratio (WIR, Stiglitz, 1969) and the Top Wealth-Income Ratio (TWIR) recently developed by Chauvel et al. (2021), a new generalization is here proposed to provide a better measurement of the extremization of socioeconomic inequalities based on developments at the top of society. The EWIR is applied to various examples: decades of British, French, and American trends, global data from the last 20 years, and comparisons with data from large-scale surveys (LWS, EU-HFCS, and PSID, among others). The EWIR confirms that the Gini indices of income and wealth are not sufficient measurements for identifying extreme social inequalities.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Methods of Estimation of Wealth Inequality,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  type = {{{LWS Working Paper Series}}}
}

Intergenerational Wealth Transfers in Great Britain from the Wealth and Assets Survey in Comparative Perspective. Nolan, Brian; Palomino, Juan C.; Van Kerm, Philippe; and Morelli, Salvatore. Fiscal Studies. April 2022.

link doi

@article{Nolanetal2022,
  title = {Intergenerational Wealth Transfers in {{Great Britain}} from the {{Wealth}} and {{Assets Survey}} in Comparative Perspective},
  author = {Nolan, Brian and Palomino, Juan C. and Van Kerm, Philippe and Morelli, Salvatore},
  year = {2022},
  month = {apr},
  journal = {Fiscal Studies},
  doi = {10.1111/1475-5890.12299},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-5890.12299},
  abstract = {Wealth surveys that collect information on intergenerational transfers provide new scope for comparative study of those transfers and their relationship with wealth across rich countries. However, this is problematic in the case of Great Britain, due to specific features of the Wealth and Assets Survey (WAS), the central source of survey-based household wealth data, in particular the extent of missing information in its first wave. This has severely constrained efforts to investigate patterns of wealth transfer in Great Britain in comparative perspective. In this paper, we set out these issues and present ways of dealing with them. On this basis, we then examine the main similarities and differences in patterns of intergenerational transmission of wealth between Great Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the United States. Our findings reveal common features across these countries as well as some important respects in which Great Britain was distinctive, though less of an outlier than the US. About 35 per cent of British households reported receiving an intergenerational wealth transfer at some point, similar to most of the comparator countries but much higher than the US. We conclude by setting out how WAS can be enhanced to address these issues at source, proposals with which the Office for National Statistics is seriously engaged.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Intergenerational Wealth}
}

Wealth Inequality, Intergenerational Transfers, and Family Background. Palomino, Juan C.; Marrero, Gustavo A.; Nolan, Brian; and Rodríguez, Juan G. Oxford Economic Papers, 74(3): 643–670. July 2022.

link doi

@article{Palominoetal2022,
  title = {Wealth Inequality, Intergenerational Transfers, and Family Background},
  author = {Palomino, Juan C. and Marrero, Gustavo A. and Nolan, Brian and Rodr{\'i}guez, Juan G.},
  year = {2022},
  month = {jul},
  journal = {Oxford Economic Papers},
  volume = {74},
  number = {3},
  pages = {643--670},
  doi = {10.1093/oep/gpab052},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1093/oep/gpab052},
  abstract = {We estimate the contribution of intergenerational transfers (inheritances and gifts) and family background to wealth inequality in four OECD countries: France, Spain, Great Britain, and the USA. We compare the observed wealth distribution with a non-parametric counterfactual distribution where all differences in wealth associated with intergenerational transfers and family background are removed. Despite the diversity of the countries analysed, we find similar patterns. The combined contribution of intergenerational transfers and family background to wealth inequality is sizeable in the four countries, ranging from 36\% in Great Britain to 49\% in the USA. When interactions between the two factors are accounted for, and the Shapley value decomposition is used to fully disentangle the contribution of each factor based on its marginal contribution, intergenerational transfers account for between 26\% in Great Britain and 36\% of wealth inequality in France, with family background ranging from 9\% in France to 17\% in the USA.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Intergenerational Wealth}
}

Heterogeneity in Macroeconomics: The Compositional Inequality Perspective. Ranaldi, Marco; and Palagi, Elisa. Stone Center on Socio-Economic Inequality. October 2022.

link doi

@techreport{RanaldiPalagi2022,
  title = {Heterogeneity in Macroeconomics: The Compositional Inequality Perspective},
  author = {Ranaldi, Marco and Palagi, Elisa},
  year = {2022},
  month = {oct},
  number = {57},
  institution = {Stone Center on Socio-Economic Inequality},
  doi = {10.31235/osf.io/fjcxb},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/fjcxb},
  abstract = {This work presents a framework to jointly study individuals' heterogeneity in terms of their capital and labor endowments (endowment heterogeneity) and of their saving and consumption behaviors (behavioral heterogeneity), from an empirical perspective. By adopting a newly developed synthetic measure of compositional inequality, this work classifies more than 20 economies across over two decades on the basis of their heterogeneity characteristics. Modern economies are far from being characterized by agents with same propensities to save and consume and same endowments (Representative Agent systems), or by the existence of rich capital-abundant savers and poor hand-to-mouth consumers (Kaldorian systems). Our framework and results are discussed in light of the heterogeneity assumptions underlying several types of macroeconomic models with heterogeneous agents (Kaldorian, TANK \& HANK, OLG, and ABM models). A negative relationship between behavioral heterogeneity and the economy's saving rate is also documented.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  type = {Stone {{Center Working Paper Series}}}
}

Inheritances and Wealth Inequality: A Machine Learning Approach. Salas-Rojo, Pedro; and Rodríguez, Juan Gabriel. The Journal of Economic Inequality, 20(1): 27–51. March 2022.

link doi

@article{Salas-RojoRodriguez2022,
  title = {Inheritances and Wealth Inequality: A Machine Learning Approach},
  author = {{Salas-Rojo}, Pedro and Rodr{\'i}guez, Juan Gabriel},
  year = {2022},
  month = {mar},
  journal = {The Journal of Economic Inequality},
  volume = {20},
  number = {1},
  pages = {27--51},
  doi = {10.1007/s10888-022-09528-8},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s10888-022-09528-8},
  abstract = {This paper explores the relationship between received inheritances and the distribution of wealth (financial, non-financial and total) in four developed countries: the United States, Canada, Italy and Spain. We follow the inequality of opportunity (IOp) literature and\,-\,considering inheritances as the only circumstance- we show that traditional IOp approaches can lead to non-robust and arbitrary measures of IOp depending on discretionary cut-off choices of a continuous circumstance such as inheritances. To overcome this limitation, we apply Machine Learning methods (`random forest' algorithm) to optimize the choice of cut-offs and we find that IOp explains over 60\% of wealth inequality in the US and Spain (using the Gini coefficient), and more than 40\% in Italy and Canada. Including parental education as an additional circumstance -available for the US and Italy- we find that inheritances are still the main contributor. Finally, using the S-Gini index with different parameters to weight different parts of the distribution, we find that the effect of inheritances is more prominent at the middle of the wealth distribution, while parental education is more important for the asset-poor.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Intergenerational Wealth,Methods of Estimation of Wealth Inequality}
}

Has the Global Financial Crisis Increased Wealth Inequality? Shchepeleva, Maria; Stolbov, Mikhail; and Weill, Laurent. International Economics, 169: 148–160. May 2022.

link doi

@article{Shchepelevaetal2022,
  title = {Has the Global Financial Crisis Increased Wealth Inequality?},
  author = {Shchepeleva, Maria and Stolbov, Mikhail and Weill, Laurent},
  year = {2022},
  month = {may},
  journal = {International Economics},
  volume = {169},
  pages = {148--160},
  doi = {10.1016/j.inteco.2021.12.004},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inteco.2021.12.004},
  abstract = {This paper examines the impact of the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) on wealth inequality. We investigate this question, using data for 143 countries for the period 2010--2018. We find no significant impact of the occurrence of the crisis on wealth inequality. We show limited evidence that the severity of the banking crisis affects the change in wealth inequality. Furthermore, the impact of the GFC on the change in wealth inequality is influenced by the country characteristics: the GFC has more enhanced wealth inequality in countries with higher levels of economic and financial development as well as lower initial levels of wealth inequality. We therefore contribute to a better understanding of the real effects of banking crises by providing evidence of the distributional effects of the GFC.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality}
}

Household Wealth and Its Distribution in the Netherlands, 1854-2019. Toussaint, Simon J.; de Vicq, Amaury; Moatsos, Michail; and van der Valk, Tim. World Inequality Lab. November 2022.

link file

@techreport{Toussaintetal2022,
  title = {Household Wealth and Its Distribution in the {{Netherlands}}, 1854-2019},
  author = {Toussaint, Simon J. and {de Vicq}, Amaury and Moatsos, Michail and {van der Valk}, Tim},
  year = {2022},
  month = {nov},
  number = {2022/19},
  institution = {World Inequality Lab},
  url = {https://wid.world/document/household-wealth-and-its-distribution-in-the-netherlands-1854-2019-world-inequality-lab-working-paper-2022-19/},
  urldate = {2024-05-30},
  abstract = {We analyze the evolution of aggregate household wealth, its composition, and top wealth shares since the mid-19th century for the Netherlands, a country which played a significant role in economic history. The main forces at play are the size and variation of colonial wealth up until WWII, and the introduction of a --particularly strong-- pension system thereafter. We show that the wealth-income ratio followed the familiar U-shaped pattern over the 20th century. The Netherlands, however, had the largest wealth-income ratio on record, growing since the mid-1850s, driven by industrialization and booming private foreign investments, to a peak of 900\% around 1880. In contrast to other countries, the wealth-income ratio remained high up until 1929. To better understand these trends, we construct the first series on colonial wealth and show that colonial and other foreign investment account for most of the gap with other countries in the pre-WWII period. The initial post-war decline in the ratio is driven by rapid income growth. The increase in the ratio since the 1970s has been mainly driven by the uniquely large capital-funded pension system. In contrast with other major countries, housing plays only a secondary role in net wealth accumulation due to significant mortgage debt. Methodologically, we are the first to compare historical national accounts, estate multiplier, and wealth tax data approaches to construct aggregate wealth. We find that the estate multiplier is a good alternative to the historical national accounts benchmark, while the use of wealth tax data results in unrealistically low estimates.},
  keywords = {Data Sources: Wealth Inequality,Cross-National Comparisons,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  type = {Working {{Paper}}},
  url_file = {Toussaintetal2022.pdf}
}

Wealth Inequality in Pre-Industrial Europe: What Role Did Associational Organizations Have? van Bavel, Bas. The Economic History Review. January 2022.

link doi

@article{vanBavel2022,
  title = {Wealth Inequality in Pre-Industrial {{Europe}}: What Role Did Associational Organizations Have?},
  author = {{van Bavel}, Bas},
  year = {2022},
  month = {jan},
  journal = {The Economic History Review},
  doi = {10.1111/ehr.13137},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/ehr.13137},
  abstract = {A host of studies on wealth inequality in pre-industrial Europe has recently been published. Out of these, a narrative emerges of rising inequality in a context of emerging markets and growing state taxation, punctuated by calamities. By surveying the available material, this article highlights an element that is less systematically discussed in this literature: the role of associational organizations. They developed less regressive forms of taxation and redistribution, embedded the transfer and use of land and capital in coordination systems that curtailed accumulation, and sometimes even imposed maximums of wealth ownership. The article tentatively argues that the resulting downward effect on wealth inequality was found most conspicuously in societies where associations of middling groups of owners-producers held strong positions in economic and political life, even despite the exclusive character of their organizations. Such societies were gradually eroded in the early modern period, most notably as a result of the emergence of factor markets and state centralization, and the associated processes of proletarianization and scale enlargement. This did not happen without opposition and conflict, however, as the process was sometimes halted and showed distinct geographical patterns, which in turn influenced patterns of wealth inequality.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality}
}

Wealth Inequality: A Hybrid Approach toward Multidimensional Distributional National Accounts in Europe. Waltl, Sofie R. Review of Income and Wealth, 68(1): 74–108. March 2022.

link doi

@article{Waltl2022,
  title = {Wealth Inequality: A Hybrid Approach toward Multidimensional Distributional National Accounts in {{Europe}}},
  author = {Waltl, Sofie R.},
  year = {2022},
  month = {mar},
  journal = {Review of Income and Wealth},
  volume = {68},
  number = {1},
  pages = {74--108},
  doi = {10.1111/roiw.12519},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/roiw.12519},
  abstract = {This article proposes a practically feasible framework for compiling Multidimensional Distributional National Accounts (MDINAs) serving two functions: a comprehensive measure of (components of) net worth and their distribution, and a link to macroeconomic statistics. I break down 12 components of marketable wealth by wealth and income groups, and three functions of wealth for Austria, Finland, France, Germany, and Spain. MDINA complemented by summary indicators reveal large heterogeneity in the degree of inequality, and shed light on differences in the structure of wealth portfolios across and within countries. I combine data collected in the largely harmonized HFCS survey and adjust for remaining differences in survey modes regarding the treatment of the top tail using (Generalized) Pareto models estimated from rich lists or top wealth shares derived from tax data and leaked information on wealth held in offshore tax havens. Measured inequality increases strongest in countries where surveys refrain from appropriate top-tail corrections.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Methods of Estimation of Wealth Inequality}
}

Drawing a Line: Comparing the Estimation of Top Incomes between Tax Data and Household Survey Data. Yonzan, Nishant; Milanovic, Branko; Morelli, Salvatore; and Gornick, Janet. The Journal of Economic Inequality, 20: 67–95. April 2022.

link doi

@article{Yonzanetal2022,
  title = {Drawing a Line: Comparing the Estimation of Top Incomes between Tax Data and Household Survey Data},
  author = {Yonzan, Nishant and Milanovic, Branko and Morelli, Salvatore and Gornick, Janet},
  year = {2022},
  month = {apr},
  journal = {The Journal of Economic Inequality},
  volume = {20},
  pages = {67--95},
  doi = {10.1007/s10888-021-09515-5},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s10888-021-09515-5},
  abstract = {The paper uses the flexibility of household survey data to align their income categories and recipient units with the income categories and units found in data produced by tax authorities. Our analyses, based on a standardized definition of fiscal income, allow us to locate, for top-income groups, the sources of discrepancy. We find, using the cases of the United States, Germany, and France, that the results from survey-based and tax data correspond extremely well (in terms of total income, mean income, composition of income, and income shares) above the 90th percentile and up to the top 1\% of the distribution. Information about income composition, available in the US, allows us to investigate the determinants of this gap in the US. About three-fourths of the tax/survey gap is due to differences in non-labor incomes, especially self-employment (business) income. The gap itself may be due to tax-induced re-classification of income from corporate to personal or/and to lower ability of surveys to capture top 1\% incomes.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Methods of Estimation of Wealth Inequality}
}

2021 (18)

A Tale of Two Countries: The Long Shadow of the Crisis on Income and Wealth in Germany and Italy. Bartels, Charlotte; and Morelli, Salvatore. Journal of Modern European History, 19(1): 33–39. February 2021.

link doi

@article{BartelsMorelli2021,
  title = {A Tale of Two Countries: {{The}} Long Shadow of the Crisis on Income and Wealth in {{Germany}} and {{Italy}}},
  author = {Bartels, Charlotte and Morelli, Salvatore},
  year = {2021},
  month = {feb},
  journal = {Journal of Modern European History},
  volume = {19},
  number = {1},
  pages = {33--39},
  doi = {10.1177/1611894420974299},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1177/1611894420974299},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality}
}

The Timing of Intergenerational Transfers and Household Wealth: Too Little, Too Late? Burrows, Vivien; and Lennartz, Chris. May 2021.

link

@techreport{BurrowsLennartz2021,
  title = {The Timing of Intergenerational Transfers and Household Wealth: Too Little, Too Late?},
  author = {Burrows, Vivien and Lennartz, Chris},
  year = {2021},
  month = {may},
  number = {2021-11},
  url = {https://research.reading.ac.uk/economics/research/discussion-papers/},
  abstract = {Wealth transfers between family members play an important role in explaining wealth accumulation and wealth inequalities. While part of this is accounted for by the size of the transfer, the timing of the transfer is also likely to be important, reflecting either a cumulative advantage effect or a lifecycle effect. This paper uses data from the Eurosystem Housing Finance and Consumption Survey to analyse how the age at which a transfer was received affects household net wealth and different components of household wealth. We find that the age at which a transfer is received does matter: after controlling for the total value and number of transfers received, receiving a transfer later in life has a negative impact on household net wealth, and this effect appears to operate primarily through housing wealth, and in particular non-HMR property wealth. We then explore the extent to which these effects vary across European countries.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Intergenerational Wealth},
  type = {Discussion {{Paper}}}
}

Comparing Global Inequality of Income and Wealth. Davies, James; and Shorrocks, Anthony. Inequality in the Developing World, pp. 49–73. 2021.

link doi

@incollection{DaviesShorrocks2021,
  title = {Comparing Global Inequality of Income and Wealth},
  author = {Davies, James and Shorrocks, Anthony},
  year = {2021},
  booktitle = {Inequality in the Developing World},
  pages = {49--73},
  publisher = {Oxford University Press},
  doi = {10.1093/oso/9780198863960.003.0003},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198863960.003.0003},
  abstract = {This paper is the first to compare global trends in income and wealth inequality this century. It is based on large income and wealth microdata samples designed to be representative of all countries in the world. Measured by the Gini coefficient, inequality between countries accounts for about two-thirds of global income inequality, but noticeably less--- around one half--- of wealth inequality. Broadly similar results are found for different years and different inequality indices, bar the share of the top 1 per cent. Over time, changes in countries' mean income and wealth, and population sizes, have reduced world inequality. Income inequality has changed little within countries, so the downward trend remains intact. However, within-country wealth inequality has risen, halting the downward shift in global wealth inequality and raising the share of the top 1 per cent after 2007.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  address = {Oxford},
  chapter = {3},
  editor = {Grad{\'i}n, Carlos and Leibbrandt, Murray and Tarp, Finn},
  isbn = {978-0-19-886396-0}
}

Long Run Canadian Wealth Inequality in International Context. Davies, James B.; and Di Matteo, Livio. Review of Income and Wealth, 67(1): 134–164. March 2021.

link appendices doi

@article{DaviesDiMatteo2021,
  title = {Long Run {{Canadian}} Wealth Inequality in International Context},
  author = {Davies, James B. and Di Matteo, Livio},
  year = {2021},
  month = {mar},
  journal = {Review of Income and Wealth},
  volume = {67},
  number = {1},
  pages = {134--164},
  doi = {10.1111/roiw.12453},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/roiw.12453},
  abstract = {A gap in estimates of the personal distribution of Canadian wealth between 1902 and 1970 is partly filled, using estate multiplier estimates for 1945--1968. The historical record is extended by adjusting the upper tail in survey results since 1970 to make it consistent with respected journalists' ``rich lists.'' Top wealth shares decline from 1892 to 1902 and from 1945 to the late 1960s, consistent with the downward trend in most advanced western countries over much of the 20th century. Since 1984 there has been a clear upward trend in wealth inequality in Canada, as in many other countries, and in the United States. Currently, wealth inequality is higher in Canada than in the U.K. and much of continental Europe, somewhat lower than Austria or Germany, and distinctly lower than the U.S. Contrasts between Canada and the U.S. in wealth inequality trends are discussed.},
  keywords = {Data Sources: Taxes on Wealth,Cross-National Comparisons,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  url_appendices = {https://bibbase.org/network/publication/davies-dimatteo-longruncanadianwealthinequalityininternationalcontextappendices-2021}
}

Wealth Accumulation and Retirement Preparedness in Cross-National Perspective: A Gendered Analysis of Outcomes among Single Adults. Gornick, Janet C.; and Sierminska, Eva. Journal of European Social Policy, 31(5): 549–564. December 2021.

link doi

@article{GornickSierminska2021,
  title = {Wealth Accumulation and Retirement Preparedness in Cross-National Perspective: A Gendered Analysis of Outcomes among Single Adults},
  author = {Gornick, Janet C. and Sierminska, Eva},
  year = {2021},
  month = {dec},
  journal = {Journal of European Social Policy},
  volume = {31},
  number = {5},
  pages = {549--564},
  doi = {10.1177/09589287211056174},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1177/09589287211056174},
  abstract = {Wealth is an increasingly important dimension of economic well-being and is attracting rising attention in discussions of social inequality. In this article, we compare -- within and across countries -- wealth outcomes, and link those to both employment-related factors and policy solutions that have the potential to improve wealth creation and retirement security for women. By constructing country-specific portraits of wealth outcomes and `retirement preparedness', we reveal extensive cross-national variation in multiple facets of wealth. Our regression analysis finds a statistically significant and positive effect of work experience on wealth, with that effect, in general, increasing over time. The effect of work experience for single women is greater than for single men, suggesting that, among men, other, stronger forces are at work in creating wealth. The retirement preparedness outcomes indicate that single women in all three countries are in a precarious position at retirement, with much lower expected annual wealth levels than single men. The second preparedness indicator, which links expected annual wealth to income, demonstrates that men have the potential to cover larger shares of their income at retirement -- and thus are more able, than their female counterparts, to maintain standards of living achieved earlier in life. Our policy discussion indicates that employment remains a viable option for ultimately bolstering women's wealth accumulation. Many scholars, gender equality advocates and policymakers have argued for raising women's employment rates -- for a multitude of reasons -- but few, if any, have made the case for strengthening women's employment in order to ultimately bolster women's wealth building. We hope to help reduce the gap in the literature on policy supports for women's employment and re-open the discussion on how women can create more wealth.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality}
}

Inheritance Tax Regimes: A Comparison. Jestl, Stefan. Public Sector Economics, 45(3): 363–385. September 2021.

link doi

@article{Jestl2021,
  title = {Inheritance Tax Regimes: A Comparison},
  author = {Jestl, Stefan},
  year = {2021},
  month = {sep},
  journal = {Public Sector Economics},
  volume = {45},
  number = {3},
  pages = {363--385},
  doi = {10.3326/pse.45.3.3},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.3326/pse.45.3.3},
  abstract = {This paper provides an overview of different inheritance tax regimes in selected European countries and the United States. We show that in the majority of countries the tax rate is related to the relationship between testator and the beneficiary as well as the value of the inherited assets. In most countries the transfer of wealth within families is treated preferentially (lower tax rates, tax exemptions and reliefs). This is particularly the case for business assets and family homes. The analysis further discusses the features and effects of inheritance tax regimes, which include behavioural responses of individuals and different distributional effects of an inheritance tax. Although the actual revenues of inheritance taxation are quite low in the selected countries, some indicators point to higher revenue potentials in the future. An appropriate design for inheritance taxation could further help to decelerate the increase in wealth inequality.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Estate Inheritance and Gift Taxes}
}

Poverty in the EU Using Augmented Measures of Financial Resources: The Role of Assets and Debt. Kuypers, Sarah; and Marx, Ive. Journal of European Social Policy, 31(5): 496–516. December 2021.

link doi

@article{KuypersMarx2021,
  title = {Poverty in the {{EU}} Using Augmented Measures of Financial Resources: The Role of Assets and Debt},
  author = {Kuypers, Sarah and Marx, Ive},
  year = {2021},
  month = {dec},
  journal = {Journal of European Social Policy},
  volume = {31},
  number = {5},
  pages = {496--516},
  doi = {10.1177/09589287211040421},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1177/09589287211040421},
  abstract = {Despite clear limitations, poverty research in the rich world overwhelmingly relies on income-based measures. Households may have significant savings and assets that they can draw on to boost their living standards, but may also have debts that depress the living standard they can actually achieve with their disposable income. Using data from the Eurosystem Household Finance and Consumption Survey (HFCS), this article offers a picture of poverty in 17 EU countries that takes into account assets and debt, using various approaches. While earlier studies have found that poverty rates tend to be lower when wealth is accounted for, this study highlights the situation of those who become or remain poor even when savings and assets are included. It focuses both on within-country patterns of joint income--wealth poverty and on cross-country differences. It is shown that the elderly are generally less prone to being poor once assets are accounted for. However, for renter households with a young, female, low educated, unemployed or inactive and single head, the risk of being poor when assets and debt are accounted for remains high and in some cases even increases. That is generally the case because they have few assets, rather than because of high debts. The substantial variation in poverty rates observed across countries can to some extent be accounted for by socio-demographic factors, but a lot of variation still remains unaccounted for.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Methods of Estimation of Wealth Inequality}
}

Intra-Household Gender Inequality, Welfare, and Economic Development. Malghan, Deepak; and Swaminathan, Hema. LIS. February 2021.

link

@techreport{MalghanSwaminathan2021,
  title = {Intra-Household Gender Inequality, Welfare, and Economic Development},
  author = {Malghan, Deepak and Swaminathan, Hema},
  year = {2021},
  month = {feb},
  number = {34},
  institution = {LIS},
  url = {https://www.lisdatacenter.org/wps/lwswps/34.pdf},
  urldate = {2023-12-03},
  abstract = {Differences in economic outcomes between men and women within a household, or intra-household gender inequality has suffered from relative neglect despite a renewed focus on gender inequality. Using global micro-data from nearly three million house-holds, we present evidence that this neglect renders our understanding of the relation-ship between gender inequality and economic development analytically and empirically incomplete. We show that intra-household gender inequality in earnings is persistent across the income distribution, across a wide range to countries, and over four-decades. For a sub-sample of countries, we show that the relationship between intra-household gender inequality and household economic status is non-monotonic -- that we refer to as the ``micro-Kuznets'' relationship. We also develop an empirical framework to mea-sure the aggregate welfare loss from intra-household gender inequality. For a range of plausible inequality aversion assumptions, we report an median welfare loss of over 15\% of aggregate earnings.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons},
  type = {{{LWS Working Paper Series}}}
}

Income and Wealth Volatility: Evidence from Italy and the U.S. in the Past Two Decades. Menta, Giorgia; Wolff, Edward N.; and D'Ambrosio, Conchita. The Journal of Economic Inequality, 19(2): 293–313. 2021.

link doi

@article{Mentaetal2021,
  title = {Income and Wealth Volatility: Evidence from {{Italy}} and the {{U}}.{{S}}. in the Past Two Decades},
  author = {Menta, Giorgia and Wolff, Edward N. and D'Ambrosio, Conchita},
  year = {2021},
  journal = {The Journal of Economic Inequality},
  volume = {19},
  number = {2},
  pages = {293--313},
  doi = {10.1007/s10888-020-09473-4},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s10888-020-09473-4},
  abstract = {Income volatility and wealth volatility are central objects of investigation for the literature on income and wealth inequality and dynamics. Here we analyse the two concepts in a comparative perspective for the same individuals in Italy and the U.S. over the last two decades. We find that in both countries wealth volatility reaches significantly higher values than income volatility, the effect being mostly driven by changes in the market value of real estate assets. We also show that there is more volatility in both dimensions in the U.S. and that the overall trend in both countries is increasing over time. We conclude by exploring volatility in consumption.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality}
}

Inheritance, Gifts and the Accumulation of Wealth for Low-Income Households. Morelli, Salvatore; Nolan, Brian; Palomino, Juan C.; and Van Kerm, Philippe. Journal of European Social Policy, 31(5): 533–548. December 2021.

link doi

@article{Morellietal2021,
  title = {Inheritance, Gifts and the Accumulation of Wealth for Low-Income Households},
  author = {Morelli, Salvatore and Nolan, Brian and Palomino, Juan C. and Van Kerm, Philippe},
  year = {2021},
  month = {dec},
  journal = {Journal of European Social Policy},
  volume = {31},
  number = {5},
  pages = {533--548},
  doi = {10.1177/09589287211040419},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1177/09589287211040419},
  abstract = {Many low-income households in rich countries have very little wealth, but the role of intergenerational wealth transmission in underpinning this deficit is not known. This article seeks to fill that gap by investigating patterns of past wealth transfer receipt for low-income versus other households in seven rich countries and assessing the contribution that these transfers, or their absence, make to current wealth levels. We find that households on low incomes are relatively disadvantaged in terms of intergenerational transfers received in the past, both in terms of the likelihood of having received any and the amounts received by those who do benefit from such transfers. The role that this disadvantage plays in the linkage between current low-income and low wealth is assessed and evidence presented that it is significant. Simulation of a universal wealth transfer scheme or `capital endowment' on reaching adulthood for two countries shows that such a policy could lead to a marked decline in the proportion of low-income adults with negative or no wealth. This and alternative or complementary policy responses to these wealth deficits merit the most serious attention.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Intergenerational Wealth}
}

Intergenerational Wealth Transfers and Wealth Inequality in Rich Countries: What Do We Learn from Gini Decomposition? Nolan, Brian; Palomino, Juan C.; Van Kerm, Philippe; and Morelli, Salvatore. Economics Letters, 199. February 2021.

link doi

@article{Nolanetal2021,
  title = {Intergenerational Wealth Transfers and Wealth Inequality in Rich Countries: What Do We Learn from {{Gini}} Decomposition?},
  author = {Nolan, Brian and Palomino, Juan C. and Van Kerm, Philippe and Morelli, Salvatore},
  year = {2021},
  month = {feb},
  journal = {Economics Letters},
  volume = {199},
  doi = {10.1016/j.econlet.2020.109701},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2020.109701},
  abstract = {The role of intergenerational transfers of wealth via inheritance and gifts inter vivos in the accumulation of household wealth and the generation of wealth inequality has been hotly debated. This paper uses data from household wealth surveys for six rich countries -- Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the US -- to assess the contribution of intergenerational wealth transfers to wealth inequality using decomposition methods for the Gini coefficient. The results show that transfer wealth is consistently a good deal more unequally distributed than non-transfer wealth and total wealth. Transfer wealth accounts for only about one-tenth of overall wealth inequality for the US compared to one-third for Germany and Italy. This mirrors the importance of transfer wealth in total wealth in each country, with differences in inequality in transfer wealth and its correlation with total wealth having only a modest impact. We find that a marginal percentage increase in all transfers reduces total wealth inequality in Britain, Germany and the US, while it would increase total wealth inequality in France, Italy and Spain.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Intergenerational Wealth},
  note = {109701}
}

Inheritance Taxation in OECD Countries. OECD. OECD Publishing. May 2021.

link doi

@book{OECD2021_InheritanceTaxationOECDCountries,
  title = {Inheritance Taxation in {{OECD}} Countries},
  author = {{OECD}},
  year = {2021},
  month = {may},
  number = {28},
  publisher = {OECD Publishing},
  doi = {10.1787/e2879a7d-en},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1787/e2879a7d-en},
  abstract = {The report explores the role that inheritance taxation could play in raising revenues, addressing inequalities and improving efficiency in OECD countries. It provides background on the distribution and evolution of household wealth and inheritances, assesses the case for and against inheritance taxation drawing on existing theoretical and empirical literature, and examines the design of inheritance, estate and gift taxes in OECD countries. The report concludes with a number of reform options that governments could consider to improve the design and functioning of wealth transfer taxes.},
  keywords = {Data Sources: Taxes on Wealth,Cross-National Comparisons,Estate Inheritance and Gift Taxes,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  address = {Paris},
  isbn = {978-92-64-63428-2},
  series = {{{OECD Tax Policy Studies}}}
}

Comparing Child Wealth Inequality across Countries. Pfeffer, Fabian T.; and Waitkus, Nora. RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences, 7(3): 28–49. August 2021.

link doi

@article{PfefferWaitkus2021,
  title = {Comparing Child Wealth Inequality across Countries},
  author = {Pfeffer, Fabian T. and Waitkus, Nora},
  year = {2021},
  month = {aug},
  journal = {RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences},
  volume = {7},
  number = {3},
  pages = {28--49},
  doi = {10.7758/RSF.2021.7.3.02},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.7758/RSF.2021.7.3.02},
  abstract = {This article compares the wealth situation of children across fourteen countries. Children experience lower levels of wealth than the rest of the population, seniors in particular. We show that, in most countries, child wealth is distributed substantially more unequally than the wealth of seniors. We also demonstrate that an international ranking of child wealth inequality diverges sharply from one based on child income inequality. The wealth situation of children in the United States is exceptional: they lag further behind seniors in terms of their wealth and face the highest levels of wealth inequality and, by far, wealth concentration.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality}
}

The Wealth Inequality of Nations. Pfeffer, Fabian T.; and Waitkus, Nora. American Sociological Review, 86(4): 567–602. August 2021.

link doi

@article{PfefferWaitkus2021a,
  title = {The Wealth Inequality of Nations},
  author = {Pfeffer, Fabian T. and Waitkus, Nora},
  year = {2021},
  month = {aug},
  journal = {American Sociological Review},
  volume = {86},
  number = {4},
  pages = {567--602},
  doi = {10.1177/00031224211027800},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1177/00031224211027800},
  abstract = {Comparative research on income inequality has produced several frameworks to study the institutional determinants of income stratification. In contrast, no such framework and much less empirical evidence exist to explain cross-national differences in wealth inequality. This situation is particularly lamentable as cross-national patterns of inequality in wealth diverge sharply from those in income. We seek to pave the way for new explanations of cross-national differences in wealth inequality by tracing them to the influence of different wealth components. Drawing on the literatures on financialization and housing, we argue that housing equity should be the central building block of the comparative analysis of wealth inequality. Using harmonized data on 15 countries included in the Luxembourg Wealth Study (LWS), we demonstrate a lack of association between national levels of income and wealth inequality and concentration. Using decomposition approaches, we then estimate the degree to which national levels of wealth inequality and concentration relate to cross-national differences in wealth portfolios and the distribution of specific asset components. Considering the role of housing equity, financial assets, non-housing real assets, and non-housing debt, we show that cross-national variation in wealth inequality and concentration is centrally determined by the distribution of housing equity.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality}
}

The Wealth Inequality of Nations. Pfeffer, Fabian T.; and Waitkus, Nora. American Sociological Review, 86(4): 567–602. August 2021.

link doi

@article{PfefferWaitkus2021b,
  title = {The Wealth Inequality of Nations},
  author = {Pfeffer, Fabian T. and Waitkus, Nora},
  year = {2021},
  month = {aug},
  journal = {American Sociological Review},
  volume = {86},
  number = {4},
  pages = {567--602},
  doi = {10.1177/00031224211027800},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1177/00031224211027800},
  abstract = {Comparative research on income inequality has produced several frameworks to study the institutional determinants of income stratification. In contrast, no such framework and much less empirical evidence exist to explain cross-national differences in wealth inequality. This situation is particularly lamentable as cross-national patterns of inequality in wealth diverge sharply from those in income. We seek to pave the way for new explanations of cross-national differences in wealth inequality by tracing them to the influence of different wealth components. Drawing on the literatures on financialization and housing, we argue that housing equity should be the central building block of the comparative analysis of wealth inequality. Using harmonized data on 15 countries included in the Luxembourg Wealth Study (LWS), we demonstrate a lack of association between national levels of income and wealth inequality and concentration. Using decomposition approaches, we then estimate the degree to which national levels of wealth inequality and concentration relate to cross-national differences in wealth portfolios and the distribution of specific asset components. Considering the role of housing equity, financial assets, non-housing real assets, and non-housing debt, we show that cross-national variation in wealth inequality and concentration is centrally determined by the distribution of housing equity.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality}
}

Inheritance Taxation in Comparative Perspective. Schechtl, Manuel. LIS. June 2021.

link

@techreport{Schechtl2021,
  title = {Inheritance Taxation in Comparative Perspective},
  author = {Schechtl, Manuel},
  year = {2021},
  month = {jun},
  number = {35},
  institution = {LIS},
  url = {https://www.lisdatacenter.org/wps/lwswps/35.pdf},
  urldate = {2023-12-03},
  abstract = {The role of inheritances for wealth inequality has been frequently addressed. However, until recently, comparative data has been scarce. This paper compiles inheritance tax information from EY Worldwide Estate and Inheritance Tax Guide and combines it with microdata from the Luxembourg Wealth Study. The results indicate substantial differences in the tax base and the distributional potential of inheritance taxation across countries.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Estate Inheritance and Gift Taxes},
  type = {{{LWS Working Paper Series}}}
}

The Wealth Gap between Ageing Immigrants and Native-Born in Ten European Countries. Semyonov, Moshe; and Lewin-Epstein, Noah. Czech Sociological Review, 57(6): 639–660. October 2021.

link doi

@article{SemyonovLewin-Epstein2021,
  title = {The Wealth Gap between Ageing Immigrants and Native-Born in Ten {{European}} Countries},
  author = {Semyonov, Moshe and {Lewin-Epstein}, Noah},
  year = {2021},
  month = {oct},
  journal = {Czech Sociological Review},
  volume = {57},
  number = {6},
  pages = {639--660},
  doi = {10.13060/csr.2021.033},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.13060/csr.2021.033},
  abstract = {Using data from the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe from 10 European countries, this study contributes to the research on immigrants' economic incorporation by focusing on the nativity wealth gaps in mid and late life. Three origin groups of immigrants were distinguished: non-European, post-communist, and West, Central, and South European countries. We estimated the size of the wealth gap between each immigrant population and natives, the sources of the gap, and the trajectory of wealth convergence. The data revealed that the mean net worth of native-born groups was higher than that of all immigrant sub-groups. The gap was widest for non-European immigrants and lowest for West, Central, and South European immigrants. Differences in the rate of homeownership accounted for the largest portion of the gap, while neither differential levels of income nor education accounted for much of the gap between native-born and either non-European immigrants or immigrants from post-communist countries. Reception of gifts or inheritances did not account for a meaningful portion of the gaps. Estimation of the rate of convergence suggests that it would take an average of 85 years after arrival for an average immigrant household to bridge the wealth gap between it and an average native-born household. The rate of wealth convergence was somewhat faster for non-Europeans and slower for West, Central, and South Europeans.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality}
}

The Impact of Inheritance on the Distribution of Wealth: Evidence from China. Wei, Hongyao; and Yang, Zhengyi. Review of Income and Wealth. 2021.

link doi

@article{WeiYang2021,
  title = {The Impact of Inheritance on the Distribution of Wealth: Evidence from {{China}}},
  author = {Wei, Hongyao and Yang, Zhengyi},
  year = {2021},
  journal = {Review of Income and Wealth},
  doi = {10.1111/roiw.12513},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/roiw.12513},
  abstract = {Using the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study, we investigate household inheritances' structural characteristics and their effects on wealth distribution. First, we find that the proportion of households receiving inheritances in China is slightly lower than that of some European countries and the United States, and the inheritance scale, especially the proportion of inheritances in household net worth, is much lower. Second, inheritances can significantly promote wealth accumulation, and wealthy households are more likely to receive larger-scale inheritances. Therefore, inheritances can aggravate class stratification and reduce social mobility. Third, inheritances reduce relative wealth inequality but widen the absolute wealth gap. This effect's duality is that although wealthy households have inheritances on a larger scale, the relative importance of the inheritance is more significant for poorer households, who inherit more relative to their household net worth. Altruistic motivations of inheritance donors can help explain this phenomenon.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Intergenerational Wealth}
}

2020 (7)

Why Wealth Inequality Differs between Post-Socialist Countries? Brzeziński, Michał; and Sałach, Katarzyna. University of Warsaw Faculty of Economic Sciences. 2020.

link doi

@techreport{BrzezinskiSalach2020,
  title = {Why Wealth Inequality Differs between Post-Socialist Countries?},
  author = {Brzezi{\'n}ski, Micha{\l} and Sa{\l}ach, Katarzyna},
  year = {2020},
  number = {14/2020 (320)},
  institution = {University of Warsaw Faculty of Economic Sciences},
  doi = {10.2139/ssrn.3631191},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3631191},
  abstract = {We provide the first attempt to understand how differences in households' sociodemographic and economic characteristics account for disparities in wealth inequality between five post-socialist countries of Central and Eastern Europe. We use 2013/2014 data from the second wave of the Household Finance and Consumption Survey (HFCS) and the reweighted Oaxaca-Blinder-like decompositions based on recentered influence function (RIF) regressions. Our results show that the differences in homeownership rates account for up to 42\% of the difference in wealth inequality measured with the Gini index and for as much as 63-109\% in case of the P50/P25 percentile ratio. Differences in homeownership rates are related to alternative designs of housing tax policies but could be also driven by other factors. We correct for the problem of the `missing rich' in household surveys by calibrating the HFCS survey weights to top wealth shares adjusted using wealth data from national rich lists. Empirically, the correction procedure strengthens the importance of homeownership rates in accounting for cross-country wealth inequality differences, which suggests that our results are not sensitive to the significant underestimation of top wealth observations in the HFCS.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Wealth Taxation},
  type = {Working {{Papers}}}
}

What Do We Know on Household Wealth? Caprara, Diego; De Bonis, Riccardo; and Infante, Luigi. Rivista di Storia Economica, pp. 43–85. April 2020.

link doi

@article{Capraraetal2020,
  title = {What Do We Know on Household Wealth?},
  author = {Caprara, Diego and De Bonis, Riccardo and Infante, Luigi},
  year = {2020},
  month = {apr},
  journal = {Rivista di Storia Economica},
  number = {1/2020},
  pages = {43--85},
  doi = {10.1410/99051},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1410/99051},
  abstract = {We provide an in-depth analysis of household wealth in the main advanced countries. We start by analyzing the evolution of household wealth in Italy since 1950, looking at real and financial assets. Then we compare financial and real assets of households in Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, the UK, the USA and Japan. We distinguish between price and quantity effects as determinants of changes in financial wealth. We study the differences in the composition of household financial wealth across countries, looking at deposits, bonds, shares, mutual funds, and insurance/pension instruments. We summarize the main trends of household debt and conclude comparing net household wealth per capita.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality}
}

Inequality, Foreign Investment, and Imperialism Prior to World War I. Hauner, Thomas; Milanovic, Branko; and Naidu, Suresh. February 2020.

link

@unpublished{Hauneretal2020,
  title = {Inequality, Foreign Investment, and Imperialism Prior to {{World War I}}},
  author = {Hauner, Thomas and Milanovic, Branko and Naidu, Suresh},
  year = {2020},
  month = {feb},
  url = {https://stonecenter.gc.cuny.edu/research/inequality-foreign-investment-and-imperialism/},
  urldate = {2024-05-29},
  abstract = {This paper presents empirical evidence for economic (imperialist) theories of the outbreak of World War I, especially the Hobson thesis, which links domestic inequality to surplus of savings, need for foreign investment and imperialist competition. We find that it stands up reasonably well to scrutiny. The belligerent countries were at the historical income and wealth inequality peaks prior to the War; the holdings of net foreign assets expanded absolutely and relatively to GDP; such assets were held almost entirely by the rich; and foreign assets bore higher average returns than similar classes of domestic assets, even adjusting for risk. We also find evidence that countries that owned more foreign assets kept larger armies.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Impacts of Wealth Inequality},
  note = {Unpublished manuscript}
}

Wealth Inequalities. König, Johannes; Schröder, Carsten; and Wolff, Edward N. Handbook of Labor, Human Resources and Population Economics, pp. 1–38. 2020.

link doi

@incollection{Konigetal2020,
  title = {Wealth Inequalities},
  author = {K{\"o}nig, Johannes and Schr{\"o}der, Carsten and Wolff, Edward N.},
  year = {2020},
  booktitle = {Handbook of Labor, Human Resources and Population Economics},
  pages = {1--38},
  publisher = {Springer International Publishing},
  doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-57365-6_168-1},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57365-6_168-1},
  abstract = {In many countries, wealth is highly concentrated, much more so than income. This review presents the long run trend of wealth inequality since the 1990s. Subsequently, it discusses the multitude of available datasets documenting and investigating wealth inequality and then critically evaluates the benefits and drawbacks of each. Following, an overview on descriptive studies of wealth inequality with a focus on augmented and pension wealth, portfolio composition, and intergenerational transmission is provided. Finally, the review details developments in structural models that explain the concentration of wealth. The evidence points to a sharp rise of wealth inequality beginning in the early 1990s through the mid-2010s in the United States. However, recent trends differ, for example, for Sweden and the United Kingdom. The last two decades have witnessed a virtual explosion of datasets on household wealth, including, notably, new internationally conformable databases such as the World Inequality Database, the Luxembourg Wealth Study Database, the Household Finance and Consumption Survey, and new administrative data from Nordic countries. The possibility to combine different datasets via record linkage or statistical matching further enlarges their research potential. Several new studies have expanded the concept of wealth from conventional marketable wealth to augmented wealth including pension and social security wealth. On the theoretical front, new modeling approaches have been devised to account for the extreme skewness in wealth distributions, including the introduction of heterogeneous rates of return by wealth class.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Methods of Estimation of Wealth Inequality},
  editor = {Zimmerman, K.F.}
}

Intergenerational Transfers by Size and Wealth Inequality in Rich Countries. Nolan, Brian; Palomino, Juan; Van Kerm, Philippe; and Morelli, Salvatore. Stone Center on Socio-Economic Inequality. September 2020.

link doi

@techreport{Nolanetal2020,
  title = {Intergenerational Transfers by Size and Wealth Inequality in Rich Countries},
  author = {Nolan, Brian and Palomino, Juan and Van Kerm, Philippe and Morelli, Salvatore},
  year = {2020},
  month = {sep},
  number = {21},
  institution = {Stone Center on Socio-Economic Inequality},
  doi = {10.31235/osf.io/eyh8s},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/eyh8s},
  abstract = {This paper uses household wealth surveys to compare patterns of intergenerational wealth transfers across six rich countries and assess the relationships between transfers, current levels of net wealth, and wealth inequality. The paper examines four Euro Area countries, France, Germany, Italy, and Spain and extends the systematic comparison to the US and the UK. It finds that many of those currently at the top of the wealth distribution did not benefit from intergenerational transfers, but those who did received particularly large amounts while those toward the bottom of the wealth distribution received very little. A substantial gap in net wealth is seen between those who received or did not receive some wealth transfer. Controlling for age, gender, education and household size reduces the size of that gap but it remains substantial, especially in the US. We further look at how a marginal increase in the proportion of recipients of transfers of differing sizes would contribute to the shape of the overall wealth distribution using influence function regressions. Crucially, we show that the impact depends not only on the locations in the wealth distributions of recipients versus non-recipients, but also on the size of the receipt, an aspect which has been overlooked to date. In most countries, increasing the proportion of recipients of large transfers generally increases overall wealth inequality. In contrast, having more recipients of small or medium-sized transfers would be expected to reduce wealth inequality modestly, as they are more concentrated around the middle of the wealth distribution than non-recipients.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Intergenerational Wealth},
  type = {Stone {{Center Working Paper Series}}}
}

Capital and Ideology. PIketty, Thomas. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. 2020.

link

@book{Piketty2020,
  title = {Capital and Ideology},
  author = {PIketty, Thomas},
  year = {2020},
  publisher = {The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press},
  url = {http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/fr/ideology},
  urldate = {2022-03-16},
  keywords = {Data Sources: Taxes on Wealth,Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Estate Inheritance and Gift Taxes,Impacts of Wealth Inequality,Intergenerational Wealth,Wealth Taxation},
  address = {Cambridge, MA},
  isbn = {978-0-674-24507-5},
  translator = {Goldhammer, Arthur}
}

Public Income Transfers and Wealth Accumulation at the Bottom: Within and between Country Differences in Canada and the United States. Rothwell, David W.; Giordono, Leanne S.; and Robson, Jennifer. Social Policy & Administration, 54(6): 914–932. November 2020.

link doi

@article{Rothwelletal2020,
  title = {Public Income Transfers and Wealth Accumulation at the Bottom: Within and between Country Differences in Canada and the United States},
  author = {Rothwell, David W. and Giordono, Leanne S. and Robson, Jennifer},
  year = {2020},
  month = {nov},
  journal = {Social Policy \& Administration},
  volume = {54},
  number = {6},
  pages = {914--932},
  doi = {10.1111/spol.12629},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12629},
  abstract = {Both Canada and the United States are considered liberal welfare states, yet exhibit notable differences in income poverty attributed to social policy. While a more generous welfare system lifts many above income poverty, models of household financial behaviour suggest that more income from the state should displace private savings via a substitution effect. Using nationally representative wealth surveys from Canada and the US from 1998/1999 to 2016 we extend knowledge on the relationship between the welfare state and private wealth accumulation. Specifically, we study household asset poverty defined as financial asset levels that fall below three-month adjusted income poverty threshold. Asset poverty rates varied over time in the two countries and were higher in the less generous US welfare state. Further, income transfer share was positively related to asset poverty in Canada but not in the US. Counterfactual estimates offered evidence of the substitution effect in Canada, where higher levels of transfers may crowd out private asset accumulation. Results invite further consideration of the concept of asset poverty and its relationship to welfare state characteristics.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality}
}

2019 (2)

Income and Wealth above the Median: New Measurements and Results for Europe and the United States. Chauvel, Louis; Hartung, Anne; Bar-Haim, Eyal; and Van Kerm, Philippe. What Drives Inequality?, pp. 89–104. 2019.

link doi

@incollection{Chauveletal2019,
  title = {Income and Wealth above the Median: New Measurements and Results for {{Europe}} and the {{United States}}},
  author = {Chauvel, Louis and Hartung, Anne and {Bar-Haim}, Eyal and Van Kerm, Philippe},
  year = {2019},
  booktitle = {What Drives Inequality?},
  pages = {89--104},
  publisher = {Emerald Publishing Limited},
  doi = {10.1108/S1049-258520190000027007},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1108/S1049-258520190000027007},
  abstract = {The study of the upper tail of the income and wealth distributions is important to the understanding of economic inequality. By means of the `isograph', a new tool to describe income or wealth distributions, the authors compare wealth and income and wealth-to-income ratios in 16 European countries and the United States using data for years 2013/2014 from the Eurozone Household Finance and Consumption Survey and the US Survey on Consumer Finance. Focussing on the top half of the distribution, the authors find that for households in the top income quintile, wealth-to-income ratios generally increase rapidly with income; the association between high wealth and high incomes is highest among the highest percentiles. There is generally a positive relationship between median wealth in the country and the wealth of the top 1\%. However, the United States is an outlier where the median wealth is relatively low but the wealth of the top 1\% is extremely high.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  chapter = {Ch. 6},
  editor = {Decancq, Koen and Van Kerm, Philippe},
  isbn = {978-1-78973-378-5}
}

Estimating International Tax Evasion by Individuals. Vellutini, Charles; Casamatta, Georges; Bousquet, Léa; and Poniatowski, Grzegorz. European Commission's Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union. September 2019.

link file doi

@techreport{Vellutinietal2019,
  title = {Estimating International Tax Evasion by Individuals},
  author = {Vellutini, Charles and Casamatta, Georges and Bousquet, L{\'e}a and Poniatowski, Grzegorz},
  year = {2019},
  month = {sep},
  number = {76},
  institution = {{European Commission's Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union}},
  doi = {10.2778/300732},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.2778/300732},
  abstract = {This study provides estimates of offshore wealth held by individuals (for the world's main economies) and corresponding estimates of international tax evasion (for the EU and EU Member States). Following the literature, the methodology relies on public statistics published by international organisations. Several additions to the standard approach are proposed including (i) estimates of offshore wealth held indirectly through shell companies, based on the identification of ``Type II'' international financial centres (defined as jurisdictions providing shell companies and similar devices); (ii) the use of foreign direct investment data to improve on available statistics for cross-borders deposits. Key results are as follows. The global offshore wealth is estimated at USD 7.8 trillion in 2016 (EUR 7.5 trillion) or 10.4\% of global GDP, a considerable amount. This estimate is largely consistent with existing published valuations. The EU share is valued at USD 1.6 trillion (EUR 1.5 trillion), or 9.7\% of GDP. The corresponding EU estimated revenue lost to international tax evasion is EUR 46 billion in 2016 (0.32\% of GDP). Among Member states, there is a great deal of heterogeneity, both in monetary terms of the estimated offshore wealth (and the corresponding tax evasion) and in GDP percentages of the same.},
  keywords = {Data Sources: Wealth Topography,Cross-National Comparisons,Wealth Taxation},
  type = {Taxation {{Paper}}},
  url_file = {Vellutinietal2019.pdf}
}

2018 (9)

Who Owns the Wealth in Tax Havens? Macro Evidence and Implications for Global Inequality. Alstadsæter, Annette; Johannesen, Niels; and Zucman, Gabriel. Journal of Public Economics, 162: 89–100. 2018.

link doi

@article{Alstadsaeteretal2018,
  title = {Who Owns the Wealth in Tax Havens? {{Macro}} Evidence and Implications for Global Inequality},
  author = {Alstads{\ae}ter, Annette and Johannesen, Niels and Zucman, Gabriel},
  year = {2018},
  journal = {Journal of Public Economics},
  volume = {162},
  pages = {89--100},
  doi = {10.1016/j.jpubeco.2018.01.008},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2018.01.008},
  abstract = {Drawing on newly published macroeconomic statistics, this paper estimates the amount of household wealth owned by each country in offshore tax havens. The equivalent of 10\% of world GDP is held in tax havens globally, but this average masks a great deal of heterogeneity---from a few percent of GDP in Scandinavia, to about 15\% in Continental Europe, and 60\% in Gulf countries and some Latin American economies. We use these estimates to construct revised series of top wealth shares in ten countries, which account for close to half of world GDP. Because offshore wealth is very concentrated at the top, accounting for it increases the top 0.01\% wealth share substantially in Europe, even in countries that do not use tax havens extensively. It has considerable effects in Russia, where the vast majority of wealth at the top is held offshore. These results highlight the importance of looking beyond tax and survey data to study wealth accumulation among the very rich in a globalized world.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Wealth Taxation}
}

Wealth and Inheritance in Britain from 1896 to the Present. Atkinson, Anthony B. The Journal of Economic Inequality, 16(2): 137–169. 2018.

link doi

@article{Atkinson2018,
  title = {Wealth and Inheritance in {{Britain}} from 1896 to the Present},
  author = {Atkinson, Anthony B.},
  year = {2018},
  journal = {The Journal of Economic Inequality},
  volume = {16},
  number = {2},
  pages = {137--169},
  doi = {10.1007/s10888-018-9382-1},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s10888-018-9382-1},
  abstract = {Personal wealth has grown since the 1970s twice as fast in real terms as national income. Has this rise in the wealth-income ratio led to a corresponding increase in the wealth being passed on from one generation to the next? Are we returning to the levels of inheritance found in the 19th century? The aim of this paper is to construct UK evidence on the extent of the transmission of wealth in the form of estates and gifts inter vivos. It takes a long-run view of inheritance, starting from 1896, when the modern Estate Duty was introduced, and exploits the extensive estate data published over the years. Construction of a long-run time series for more than a century is challenging, and there are important limitations. The resulting time-series demonstrates the major importance of inheritance in the UK before the First World War, when the total transmitted wealth represented some 20 per cent of net national income. In the inter-war period, the total was around 15 per cent, falling to some 10 per cent after the Second World War, and then falling further to below 5 per cent in the late 1970s. Since then, there has indeed been an upturn: a rise from 4.8 per cent in 1977 to 8.2 per cent in 2006. This increase was more or less in line with the increase in personal wealth, and has to be interpreted in the light of the changing net worth of the corporate and public sectors of the economy.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Intergenerational Wealth}
}

Accounting for Cross-Country Differences in Wealth Inequality. Cowell, Frank; Karagiannaki, Eleni; and Mcknight, Abigail. Review of Income and Wealth, 64(2): 332–356. 2018.

link doi

@article{Cowelletal2018,
  title = {Accounting for Cross-Country Differences in Wealth Inequality},
  author = {Cowell, Frank and Karagiannaki, Eleni and Mcknight, Abigail},
  year = {2018},
  journal = {Review of Income and Wealth},
  volume = {64},
  number = {2},
  pages = {332--356},
  publisher = {Blackwell Publishing Ltd},
  doi = {10.1111/roiw.12278},
  url = {http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/roiw.12278},
  abstract = {There is considerable cross-country variation in levels of household wealth and in wealth inequality. This paper assesses the extent to which these differences can be accounted for by differences in the distributions of households' demographic and economic characteristics. A counterfactual decomposition analysis of micro data from five countries (Italy, U.K., U.S., Sweden and Finland) is used to identify the effects of characteristics on component wealth holdings, their value and their distribution. The findings of the paper suggest that the biggest share of cross-country differences is not attributable to the distribution of household demographic and economic characteristics but rather reflect strong unexplained country effects.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons}
}

The Global Concentration of Wealth. Goda, Thomas. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 42(1): 95–115. 2018.

link doi

@article{Goda2018,
  title = {The Global Concentration of Wealth},
  author = {Goda, Thomas},
  year = {2018},
  journal = {Cambridge Journal of Economics},
  volume = {42},
  number = {1},
  pages = {95--115},
  doi = {10.1093/cje/bex020},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/bex020},
  abstract = {This paper compares changes in relative and absolute wealth concentrations to establish whether both processes have followed similar trajectories. The findings indicate that while the relative wealth concentration level has increased in recent times, it is not extraordinarily high from a historical perspective. In contrast, the absolute wealth concentration level is most likely higher than has ever previously occurred, due to the growth of per capita wealth holdings and the population size of high net worth individuals (HNWIs). The available data also suggest that HNWIs recovered very quickly from the losses that they experienced in the financial crisis of 2008. As a result, HNWIs' wealth holdings in 2013 were at least 30\% higher than they were in 2007. The post-crisis recovery of billionaires was even stronger, with their 2014 net wealth holdings more than 85\% higher than 2007 levels.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality}
}

Wealth Inequality, Democracy and Economic Freedom. Islam, Md Rabiul. Journal of Comparative Economics, 46(4). 2018.

link doi

@article{Islam2018,
  title = {Wealth Inequality, Democracy and Economic Freedom},
  author = {Islam, Md Rabiul},
  year = {2018},
  journal = {Journal of Comparative Economics},
  volume = {46},
  number = {4},
  doi = {10.1016/j.jce.2018.01.002},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jce.2018.01.002},
  abstract = {Using a novel panel data set from the Credit Suisse on the top wealth shares for 46 sample countries spanning 2000--2014, this paper empirically investigates to what extent wealth inequality influences economic freedom and whether this relationship is affected by the level of democracy. Economic freedom is measured by the Fraser Institute's economic freedom summary index as well as its five major sub-indices, such as government size, property rights, access to sound money, freedom to trade, and regulations. Wealth inequality is measured by the top wealth shares. Trade union density is used as an instrument for wealth inequality. Empirical results suggest that the rising wealth inequality significantly hampers overall economic freedom, property rights protection, freedom to trade, soundness of money and regulatory environment. Furthermore, this negative effect of wealth inequality is reinforced at a lower level of democracy. These findings are robust to alternative measures of wealth inequality, economic freedom, treatment for endogeneity, and model specification.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

Wealth Inequality in Korea, 2000–2013: Evidence from Inheritance Tax Statistics. Kim, Nak Nyeon. Journal of the Korean Welfare State and Social Policy, 2(1): 26–57. 2018.

link

@article{Kim2018,
  title = {Wealth Inequality in {{Korea}}, 2000--2013: Evidence from Inheritance Tax Statistics},
  author = {Kim, Nak Nyeon},
  year = {2018},
  journal = {Journal of the Korean Welfare State and Social Policy},
  volume = {2},
  number = {1},
  pages = {26--57},
  url = {http://www.welfarestate.re.kr/beluxe_wtFu73/5421},
  urldate = {2022-04-01},
  abstract = {This paper estimates the individual wealth distribution since 2000 by applying the estate multiplier method to the inheritance tax statistics. Based on these estimates, the main findings are as follows. First, the top 1\% (or 10\%) of the adult population aged 20 and above owned 24\% (or 63\%) of total wealth for 2000--2007 and 25\% (or 66\%) for 2010--2013. Wealth concentration was much higher than income concentration, which was 12.1\% (or 44.1\%). Second, the wealth concentration in South Korea was lower than Anglo Saxon countries but somewhat higher than European continental countries such as France, falling in the middle of these two groups. A similar international status was true of income concentration. Third, Statistics Korea's Survey of Household Finances and Living Conditions does not adequately cover the financial assets of the top wealth brackets and consequently underestimates wealth inequality.},
  keywords = {Data Sources: Wealth Inequality,Cross-National Comparisons,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality}
}

Inherited Advantage: Comparing Households That Receive Gifts and Bequests with Non-Receiving Households across the Distribution of Household Wealth in 11 European Countries. Korom, Philipp. European Sociological Review, 34(1): 79–91. February 2018.

link doi

@article{Korom2018,
  title = {Inherited Advantage: Comparing Households That Receive Gifts and Bequests with Non-Receiving Households across the Distribution of Household Wealth in 11 {{European}} Countries},
  author = {Korom, Philipp},
  year = {2018},
  month = {feb},
  journal = {European Sociological Review},
  volume = {34},
  number = {1},
  pages = {79--91},
  doi = {10.1093/esr/jcx084},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcx084},
  abstract = {This study examines the importance of gifts and bequests ('wealth transfers') across the distribution of household wealth. Unconditional quantile regression applied to harmonized survey data obtained from 11 European countries reveals that households that receive gifts and bequests own considerably more wealth than non-receiving households, all other things being equal. The wealth gap varies hugely along the distribution of net wealth. At the median, the wealth gap reaches about 119,000 euros and increases to 630,000 euros at the 90th percentile. With regard to the 99th percentile, survey data even indicate differences in wealth levels greater than 2.3 million euros. Further analysis finds evidence that the impact of wealth transfers on household wealth follows an inverted U-shaped pattern: gifts and bequests contribute the most to the stock of private wealth in the broad mid-section and less so at the lower and upper ends of the distribution. Overall, the study provides evidence for a strong nexus between inheritance and household wealth that is not limited to the top.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Intergenerational Wealth}
}

Wealth Inequality. Morelli, Salvatore; Nolan, Brian; and Van Kerm, Philippe. Generating Prosperity for Working Families in Affluent Countries. 2018.

link doi

@incollection{Morellietal2018,
  title = {Wealth Inequality},
  author = {Morelli, Salvatore and Nolan, Brian and Van Kerm, Philippe},
  year = {2018},
  booktitle = {Generating Prosperity for Working Families in Affluent Countries},
  publisher = {Oxford University Press},
  doi = {10.1093/oso/9780198807056.003.0012},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198807056.003.0012},
  abstract = {This chapter brings wealth into the picture, again in a comparative perspective, to bring out key features of recent trends and their implications for the prosperity and prospects of ordinary families. Data on the distribution of wealth has been improving in recent years, and new data are exploited here to examine patterns of wealth holding across the income distribution. In doing so, particular attention is paid to the extent and nature of wealth held by middle and lower income working-age families, and how this differs from those higher up the distribution. The chapter also looks at inequality in the distribution of wealth compared with income, and whether wealth inequality has widened as income inequality has grown.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  address = {Oxford},
  isbn = {978-0-19-880705-6}
}

How Fat Is the Top Tail of the Wealth Distribution? Vermeulen, Philip. Review of Income and Wealth, 64(2): 357–387. 2018.

link doi

@article{Vermeulen2018,
  title = {How Fat Is the Top Tail of the Wealth Distribution?},
  author = {Vermeulen, Philip},
  year = {2018},
  journal = {Review of Income and Wealth},
  volume = {64},
  number = {2},
  pages = {357--387},
  doi = {10.1111/roiw.12279},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/roiw.12279},
  abstract = {Differential unit non-response in household wealth surveys biases estimates of top tail wealth shares downward. Using Monte Carlo evidence, I show that adding only a few extreme observations to wealth surveys is sufficient to remove the downward bias. Combining extreme wealth observations from Forbes World's billionaires with the Survey of Consumer Finances, the Wealth and Assets Survey, and the Household Finance and Consumption Survey, I provide new improved estimates of top tail wealth in the United States, the United Kingdom, and nine euro area countries. These new estimates indicate significantly higher top wealth shares than those calculated from the wealth surveys alone.},
  keywords = {Data Sources: Wealth Inequality,Cross-National Comparisons,Methods of Estimation of Wealth Inequality,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality}
}

2017 (8)

On the Share of Inheritance in Aggregate Wealth: Europe and the USA, 1900–2010. Alvaredo, Facundo; Garbinti, Bertrand; and Piketty, Thomas. Economica, 84(334): 239–260. 2017.

link doi

@article{Alvaredoetal2017,
  title = {On the Share of Inheritance in Aggregate Wealth: {{Europe}} and the {{USA}}, 1900--2010},
  author = {Alvaredo, Facundo and Garbinti, Bertrand and Piketty, Thomas},
  year = {2017},
  journal = {Economica},
  volume = {84},
  number = {334},
  pages = {239--260},
  doi = {10.1111/ecca.12233},
  url = {http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/ecca.12233},
  abstract = {This paper provides historical series on the evolution of the share of inherited wealth in aggregate private wealth in Europe (France, the UK, Germany, Sweden) and the USA over the 1900--2010 period. Until 1910, the inheritance share was very high in Europe (70--80\%). It then fell abruptly following the 1914--45 shocks, down to about 30--40\% during the 1950--80 period, and is back to 50--60\% (and rising) since around 2010. The US pattern also appears to be U-shaped, albeit less marked, and with significant uncertainty regarding recent trends, due to data limitations. We discuss possible interpretations for these long-run patterns.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Intergenerational Wealth}
}

The Chartbook of Economic Inequality. Atkinson, A. B.; Hasell, Joe; Morelli, Salvatore; and Roser, Max. May 2017.

link

@misc{Atkinsonetal2017,
  title = {The Chartbook of Economic Inequality},
  author = {Atkinson, A. B. and Hasell, Joe and Morelli, Salvatore and Roser, Max},
  year = {2017},
  month = {may},
  url = {https://www.chartbookofeconomicinequality.com/},
  urldate = {2022-02-25},
  abstract = {The Chartbook summarizes the evidence about long-run changes in five different dimensions of economic inequality -- overall and top income inequality, poverty, earnings dispersion, and wealth inequality -- for 25 countries covering more than one hundred years. The evidence represents an update and extension of the work done by Atkinson and Morelli (2014). The results are presented in 25 charts, one for each country, together with a full description of the method and sources. Series, sources and graphs can be downloaded at www.chartbookofeconomicinequality.com.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  note = {Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School}
}

How Inheritances Shape Wealth Distributions: An International Comparison. Bönke, Timm; Werder, Marten V.; and Westermeier, Christian. Economics Letters, 159: 217–220. October 2017.

link doi

@article{Bonkeetal2017,
  title = {How Inheritances Shape Wealth Distributions: {{An}} International Comparison},
  author = {B{\"o}nke, Timm and Werder, Marten V. and Westermeier, Christian},
  year = {2017},
  month = {oct},
  journal = {Economics Letters},
  volume = {159},
  pages = {217--220},
  doi = {10.1016/j.econlet.2017.08.007},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2017.08.007},
  abstract = {We use data from the European Household Finance and Consumption Survey in order to examine the distributional effect of intergenerational wealth transfers on the net worth distribution in 8 European countries and compare it to recent findings for the US. To do so, we resort to the decomposition of the coefficient of variation as suggested and applied by Wolff (1987, 2002, 2015) and Wolff and Gittleman (2014). The results seem to imply that inheritances and gifts have a vastly equalizing effect on inequality in household wealth in all 8 countries.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Intergenerational Wealth}
}

Wealth, Top Incomes and Inequality. Cowell, Frank; Nolan, Brian; Olivera, Javier; and Van Kerm, Philippe. National Wealth: What Is Missing, Why It Matters, pp. 175–204. 2017.

link

@incollection{Cowelletal2017,
  title = {Wealth, Top Incomes and Inequality},
  author = {Cowell, Frank and Nolan, Brian and Olivera, Javier and Van Kerm, Philippe},
  year = {2017},
  booktitle = {National Wealth: What Is Missing, Why It Matters},
  pages = {175--204},
  publisher = {Oxford University Press},
  url = {https://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/oso/9780198803720.001.0001/oso-9780198803720},
  abstract = {Although it is heartening to see wealth inequality being taken seriously, key concepts are often muddled, including the distinction between income and wealth, what is included in "wealth", and facts about wealth distributions. This chapter highlights issues that arise in making ideas and facts about wealth inequality precise, and employs newly-available data to take a fresh look at wealth and wealth inequality in a comparative perspective. The composition of wealth is similar across countries, with housing wealth being the key asset. Wealth is considerably more unequally distributed than income, and it is distinctively so in the United States. Extending definitions to include pension wealth however reduces inequality substantially. Analysis also sheds light on life-cycle patterns and the role of inheritance. Discussion of the joint distributions of income and wealth suggests that interactions between increasing top income shares and the concentration of wealth and income from wealth towards the top is critical.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Intergenerational Wealth,Methods of Estimation of Wealth Inequality},
  chapter = {Ch. 8},
  editor = {Hepburn, Cameron and Hamilton, Kirk}
}

Inheritances and the Accumulation of Wealth in the Eurozone. Humer, Stefan; Moser, Mathias; and Schnetzer, Matthias. Institute for Comprehensive Analysis of the Economy. 2017.

link

@techreport{Humeretal2017,
  title = {Inheritances and the Accumulation of Wealth in the {{Eurozone}}},
  author = {Humer, Stefan and Moser, Mathias and Schnetzer, Matthias},
  year = {2017},
  number = {73},
  institution = {Institute for Comprehensive Analysis of the Economy},
  url = {https://hdl.handle.net/10419/179436},
  abstract = {This paper empirically compares the contribution of the two major wealth accumulation factors - earned income and inheritances - to the within country net wealth position of Eurozone households with HFCS data. Using unconditional quantile regressions, we show the varying importance of earned income and inheritances at different parts of the per country distributions and compare them to Eurozone averages. The elasticities of both wealth sources are overly non-linear and display an inverted "U" shape pattern. Around the median household, an additional percentile in the income distribution corresponds to an increase in the net wealth distribution of as much as 0:5 percentiles, while an additional percentile in the inheritance distribution yields up to 1:3 percentiles. At the bottom of the wealth distribution, households have to climb less than two percentiles in the income distribution to compensate a one percentile increase in the inheritance distribution, whereas this ratio surges to almost four percentiles at the top tail and varies distinctively between different countries. These results emphasize the relative importance of inheritances versus income from employment for private wealth creation and question common perceptions of meritocracy.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Intergenerational Wealth,Wealth Taxation},
  type = {{{ICAE Working Paper Series}}}
}

Increasing Capital Income Share and Its Effect on Personal Income Inequality. Milanovic, Branko. After Piketty: The Agenda for Economics and Inequality. 2017.

link

@incollection{Milanovic2017,
  title = {Increasing Capital Income Share and Its Effect on Personal Income Inequality},
  author = {Milanovic, Branko},
  year = {2017},
  booktitle = {After {{Piketty}}: The Agenda for Economics and Inequality},
  publisher = {Harvard University Press},
  url = {https://stonecenter.gc.cuny.edu/research/increasing-capital-income-share-and-its-effect-on-personal-income-inequality/},
  urldate = {2022-02-28},
  abstract = {We tend to assume that those with high incomes from capital are also those who are the richest overall; that is, that the association between being capital-rich and overall-income-rich is very close. This is implicit in Piketty's analysis. He argues that as the share of capital in national income rises, interpersonal inequality will also rise. In our first chapter addressing the dimensions of inequality, economist Branko Milanovic asks under what conditions this is likely to be true. Milanovic imagines three kinds of societies: socialist, where there is an equal per capita distribution of capital assets; classical capitalist, where workers draw their entire income from labor and capitalists derive their entire income from capital; and ``new'' capitalist, where everyone receives income from both labor and capital. He uses these archetypes to examine what happens to the inequality---as measured by the Gini coefficient of interpersonal income inequality---if Piketty's {$\alpha$}---the share of capital in net income---rises. Unsurprisingly, he finds that the institutional setup matters. The way the rising share of capital income gets transmitted into greater interpersonal inequality varies between different social systems as a function of the underlying asset distribution. In new capitalism, a rising share of capital income almost directly translates into a higher Gini, while in classical capitalism, this is true once the share of capitalists becomes sufficiently high. In a socialist world, however, a rising capital share does not imply rising interpersonal Gini.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  address = {Cambridge, MA},
  chapter = {10},
  editor = {Boushey, Heather and DeLong, J. Bradford and Steinbaum, Marshall},
  isbn = {978-0-674-97819-5}
}

National Wealth: What Is Missing, Why It Matters. Oxford University Press. 2017.

link

@book{HepburnHamilton2017,
  title = {National Wealth: What Is Missing, Why It Matters},
  author = {Unknown},
  year = {2017},
  publisher = {Oxford University Press},
  url = {https://global.oup.com/academic/product/national-wealth-9780198803720?cc=us&lang=en&#:$\sim$:targetText=National Wealth%3A What is Missing,policy issues around national wealth.&targetText=Part one provides the political context and defines the key concepts.},
  abstract = {Why are some nations wealthy and others poor? How did the wealthy nations become rich? What are the components of wealth? How should nations manage their wealth for the future? These are among the most important questions in economics. They are also impossible to answer without defining wealth, and understanding how it can be created, destroyed, stored, and managed. National Wealth: What is Missing, Why it Matters assembles a collection of high-quality contributions to define the key concepts and address the economic and policy issues around national wealth. It considers insights from economic history, addresses the impacts of the changes to national accounting, and teases out the policy implications for both rich and poor countries and the institutions within them. Using expert analysis and theory backed by empirical work, this book evaluates the progress that has been made in measuring national wealth, as well as the recent developments in theory and practice which tell us that the change in real wealth (net saving) is an essential indicator of economic progress. Net national saving, measured comprehensively and adjusted to reflect the investment in and the depreciation of the full range of assets measured in national wealth, is an indicator of the change in future wellbeing. Governments can use this measure to answer a fundamental question: How much does the stream of future wellbeing of the population rise or fall as a result of policy actions today? The book is organized into four parts. Part one provides the political context and defines the key concepts. Part two examines the history of wealth creation and destruction. Part three provides a more detailed analysis of the individual components of wealth, and finally, part four examines the lessons for managing wealth for sustainable national prosperity.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Methods of Estimation of Wealth Inequality},
  editor = {Hepburn, Cameron and Hamilton, Kirk},
  isbn = {978-0-19-880372-0}
}

Wealth Inequality in the Netherlands, c. 1950-2015. the Paradox of a Northern European Welfare State. van Bavel, Bas; and Frankema, Ewout. TSEG - The Low Countries Journal of Social and Economic History, 14(2): 29–62. 2017.

link file doi

@article{vanBavelFrankema2017,
  title = {Wealth Inequality in the {{Netherlands}}, c. 1950-2015. the Paradox of a Northern {{European}} Welfare State},
  author = {{van Bavel}, Bas and Frankema, Ewout},
  year = {2017},
  journal = {TSEG - The Low Countries Journal of Social and Economic History},
  volume = {14},
  number = {2},
  pages = {29--62},
  doi = {10.18352/tseg.916},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.18352/tseg.916},
  abstract = {This paper reviews the available evidence on post-war trends in Dutch private wealth inequality using a range of scattered sources. Wealth tax records suggest a substantial decline in inequality to the 1970s and, more tentatively, a gradual rise thereafter. In the post-1990 years, Gini-coefficients of private wealth inequality range from 0.8 to 0.9, which is at the high end of the international comparison. Such high levels of private wealth inequality contrast with relatively low levels of net income inequality; a paradox that the Netherlands share with other Northern European welfare states. We hypothesise that publicly funded life-time income security limits the wealth-formation by ordinary Dutch households, while the redistributive taxes required to finance this system are targeting income rather than wealth.},
  keywords = {Data Sources: Wealth Inequality,Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  url_file = {vanBavelFrankema2017.pdf}
}

2016 (3)

The Origins of the Superrich: The Billionaire Characteristics Database. Freund, Caroline; and Oliver, Sarah. Peterson Institute for International Economics. February 2016.

link

@techreport{FreundOliver2016,
  title = {The Origins of the Superrich: The Billionaire Characteristics Database},
  author = {Freund, Caroline and Oliver, Sarah},
  year = {2016},
  month = {feb},
  number = {16-1},
  institution = {Peterson Institute for International Economics},
  url = {https://www.piie.com/publications/working-papers/origins-superrich-billionaire-characteristics-database},
  urldate = {2024-05-28},
  abstract = {This working paper presents a new dataset on the sources of billionaire wealth and uses it to describe changes in extreme wealth in the United States, Europe, and other advanced countries. Th e data classify wealth as either self-made or inherited and identify the company and industry from which it comes. Among self-made billionaires, individuals are further classifi ed as company founders, executives, politically-connected, or in finance. Data analysis shows that the superrich in the United States are more dynamic than in Europe. Just over half of European billionaires inherited their fortunes, as compared with one-third in the United States. The median age of a company of a European billionaire is nearly 20 years older than that of an American billionaire. Traditional sectors explain more than half of the rise in wealth in Europe; the financial sector and technology-related sectors together are largely responsible for the rise in US wealth. There is some evidence that rents are higher in the United States than Europe, as not only is the number of US billionaires expanding rapidly, but US billionaires are also getting richer on average over time, especially when wealth is connected to resources, nontradables, or finance.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Methods of Estimation of Wealth Inequality},
  type = {Working {{Papers}}}
}

Capital without Borders: Wealth Managers and the One Percent. Harrington, Brooke. Harvard University Press. 2016.

link

@book{Harrington2016,
  title = {Capital without Borders: Wealth Managers and the One Percent},
  author = {Harrington, Brooke},
  year = {2016},
  publisher = {Harvard University Press},
  url = {https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674743809},
  abstract = {Capital without Borders reveals how wealth managers use offshore banks, shell corporations, and trusts to shield billions in private wealth not only from taxation but from all manner of legal obligations. And it shows how practitioners justify their work, despite evidence that it erodes government authority and contributes to global inequality.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Wealth Taxation},
  isbn = {978-0-674-24477-1}
}

Drivers of Wealth Inequality in Euro Area Countries: The Effect of Inheritance and Gifts on Household Gross and Net Wealth Distribution Analysed by Applying the Shapley Value Approach to Decomposition. Leitner, Sebastian. European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies: Intervention, 13(1): 114–136. 2016.

link

@article{Leitner2016,
  title = {Drivers of Wealth Inequality in Euro Area Countries: The Effect of Inheritance and Gifts on Household Gross and Net Wealth Distribution Analysed by Applying the Shapley Value Approach to Decomposition},
  author = {Leitner, Sebastian},
  year = {2016},
  journal = {European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies: Intervention},
  volume = {13},
  number = {1},
  pages = {114--136},
  publisher = {Edward Elgar Publishing},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.4337/ejeep.2016.01.10},
  abstract = {This paper investigates the sources of inequality in household gross and net wealth across eight euro area countries applying the Shapley value approach to decomposition. The research draws on micro data from the Eurosystem Household Finance and Consumption Survey 2010. Dispersion in bequests and inter vivos transfers obtained by households are found to have a remarkable effect on wealth inequality that is stronger than that of income differences. In Austria, Germany and Cyprus the contribution of real and financial assets inherited or received as gifts to gross and net wealth inequality attains about 40 per cent. Nevertheless, the distribution of household characteristics (age, education, size, number of adults and children in the household, marital status) within countries also shapes the observed wealth dispersion.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality,Intergenerational Wealth,Methods of Estimation of Wealth Inequality}
}

2015 (2)

Wealth and Inheritance in the Long Run. Piketty, Thomas; and Zucman, Gabriel. Handbook of Income Distribution, 2: 1303–1368. 2015.

link doi

@incollection{PikettyZucman2015,
  title = {Wealth and Inheritance in the Long Run},
  author = {Piketty, Thomas and Zucman, Gabriel},
  year = {2015},
  booktitle = {Handbook of Income Distribution},
  volume = {2},
  pages = {1303--1368},
  doi = {10.1016/B978-0-444-59429-7.00016-9},
  url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-59429-7.00016-9},
  abstract = {This chapter offers an overview of the empirical and theoretical research on the long-run evolution of wealth and inheritance. Wealth-income ratios, inherited wealth, and wealth inequalities were high in the eighteenth to nineteenth centuries up until World War I, then sharply dropped during the twentieth century following World War shocks, and have been rising again in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. We discuss the models that can account for these facts. We show that over a wide range of models, the long-run magnitude and concentration of wealth and inheritance are an increasing function of r--g where r- is the net-of-tax rate of return on wealth and g is the economy's growth rate. This suggests that current trends toward rising wealth-income ratios and wealth inequality might continue during the twenty-first century, both because of the slowdown of population and productivity growth, and because of rising international competition to attract capital.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Intergenerational Wealth,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  chapter = {Ch. 15},
  isbn = {978-0-444-59429-7}
}

Long-Run Trends in the Distribution of Income and Wealth. Roine, Jesper; and Waldenström, Daniel. Handbook of Income Distribution, 2: 469–592. 2015.

link data files doi

@incollection{RoineWaldenstrom2015,
  title = {Long-Run Trends in the Distribution of Income and Wealth},
  author = {Roine, Jesper and Waldenstr{\"o}m, Daniel},
  year = {2015},
  booktitle = {Handbook of Income Distribution},
  volume = {2},
  pages = {469--592},
  publisher = {North-Holland},
  doi = {10.1016/B978-0-444-59428-0.00008-4},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-59428-0.00008-4},
  abstract = {This chapter reviews the long-run developments in the distribution of personal income and wealth. It also discusses suggested explanations for the observed patterns. We try to answer questions such as: What do we know, and how do we know, about the distribution of income and wealth over time? Are there common trends across countries or over the path of development? How do the facts relate to proposed theories about changes in inequality? We present the main inequality trends, in some cases starting as early as in the late eighteenth century, combining previous research with recent findings in the so-called top income literature and new evidence on wealth concentration. The picture that emerges shows that inequality was historically high almost everywhere at the beginning of the twentieth century. In some countries this situation was preceded by increasing concentration, but in most cases inequality seems to have been relatively constant at a high level in the nineteenth century. Over the twentieth century inequality decreased almost everywhere for the first 80 years, largely due to decreasing wealth concentration and decreasing capital incomes in the top of the distribution. Thereafter trends became more divergent across countries and also different across income and wealth distributions. Econometric evidence over the long run suggests that top shares increase in periods of above-average growth, whereas democracy and high marginal tax rates are associated with lower top shares.},
  keywords = {Data Sources: Wealth Inequality,Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Methods of Estimation of Wealth Inequality,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  address = {Amsterdam},
  chapter = {7},
  editor = {Atkinson, Anthony B. and Bourguignon, Fran{\c c}ois},
  isbn = {978-0-444-59430-3},
  url_data_files = {https://bibbase.org/network/publication/roine-waldenstrm-longruntrendsinthedistributionofincomeandwealthdatafiles-2015}
}

2014 (3)

Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Piketty, Thomas. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. 2014.

link

@book{Piketty2014,
  title = {Capital in the Twenty-First Century},
  author = {Piketty, Thomas},
  year = {2014},
  publisher = {The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press},
  url = {http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/en/capital21c2},
  urldate = {2022-02-25},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality,Intergenerational Wealth,Methods of Estimation of Wealth Inequality,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Wealth Taxation},
  address = {Cambridge, MA},
  isbn = {978-0-674-24507-5},
  translator = {Goldhammer, Arthur}
}

Inequality in the Long Run. Piketty, Thomas; and Saez, Emmanuel. Science, 344(6186): 838–843. 2014.

link doi

@article{PikettySaez2014,
  title = {Inequality in the Long Run},
  author = {Piketty, Thomas and Saez, Emmanuel},
  year = {2014},
  journal = {Science},
  volume = {344},
  number = {6186},
  pages = {838--843},
  publisher = {American Association for the Advancement of Science},
  doi = {10.1126/science.1251936},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1251936},
  abstract = {This Review presents basic facts regarding the long-run evolution of income and wealth inequality in Europe and the United States. Income and wealth inequality was very high a century ago, particularly in Europe, but dropped dramatically in the first half of the 20th century. Income inequality has surged back in the United States since the 1970s so that the United States is much more unequal than Europe today. We discuss possible interpretations and lessons for the future.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Methods of Estimation of Wealth Inequality,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  pmid = {24855258}
}

National Patterns of Income and Wealth Inequality. Skopek, Nora; Buchholz, Sandra; and Blossfeld, Hans-Peter. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 55(6): 463–488. December 2014.

link doi

@article{Skopeketal2014,
  title = {National Patterns of Income and Wealth Inequality},
  author = {Skopek, Nora and Buchholz, Sandra and Blossfeld, Hans-Peter},
  year = {2014},
  month = {dec},
  journal = {International Journal of Comparative Sociology},
  volume = {55},
  number = {6},
  pages = {463--488},
  doi = {10.1177/0020715214565674},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1177/0020715214565674},
  abstract = {The aim of this article is to show that wealth must be treated as a distinct dimension of social stratification alongside income. In a first step, we explain why social stratification researchers have largely overlooked wealth in the past and present a detailed definition of wealth by differentiating it from income. In the empirical part of the article, we analyze the distribution of wealth across 18 countries, and we describe and compare national patterns of wealth inequality to those of income inequality making use of different data sources. Our results show -- first -- that there is strong variation in the distribution of wealth between these 18 countries, and -- second -- that levels of wealth inequality significantly differ from levels of income inequality in about half of the countries analyzed. Surprisingly high levels of wealth inequality we find in Sweden and Denmark, two countries widely considered being highly egalitarian societies. Conversely, the Southern European countries -- where income inequality is relatively high -- exhibit comparatively low levels of wealth inequality.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons}
}

2013 (9)

The Top 1 Percent in International and Historical Perspective. Alvaredo, Facundo; Atkinson, A. B.; Piketty, Thomas; and Saez, Emmanuel. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 27(3): 3–20. 2013.

link doi

@article{Alvaredoetal2013,
  title = {The Top 1 Percent in International and Historical Perspective},
  author = {Alvaredo, Facundo and Atkinson, A. B. and Piketty, Thomas and Saez, Emmanuel},
  year = {2013},
  journal = {Journal of Economic Perspectives},
  volume = {27},
  number = {3},
  pages = {3--20},
  doi = {10.1257/jep.27.3.3},
  url = {http://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/10.1257/jep.27.3.3},
  abstract = {The top 1 percent income share has more than doubled in the United States over the last 30 years, drawing much public attention in recent years. While other English-speaking countries have also experienced sharp increases in the top 1 percent income share, many high-income countries such as Japan, France, or Germany have seen much less increase in top income shares. Hence, the explanation cannot rely solely on forces common to advanced countries, such as the impact of new technologies and globalization on the supply and demand for skills. Moreover, the explanations have to accommodate the falls in top income shares earlier in the twentieth century experienced in virtually all high-income countries. We highlight four main factors. The first is the impact of tax policy, which has varied over time and differs across countries. Top tax rates have moved in the opposite direction from top income shares. The effects of top rate cuts can operate in conjunction with other mechanisms. The second factor is a richer view of the labor market, where we contrast the standard supply-side model with one where pay is determined by bargaining and the reactions to top rate cuts may lead simply to a redistribution of surplus. Indeed, top rate cuts may lead managerial energies to be diverted to increasing their remuneration at the expense of enterprise growth and employment. The third factor is capital income. Overall, private wealth (relative to income) has followed a U-shaped path over time, particularly in Europe, where inherited wealth is, in Europe if not in the United States, making a return. The fourth, little investigated, element is the correlation between earned income and capital income, which has substantially increased in recent decades in the United States.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality}
}

The Fourth Retirement Pillar in Rich Countries. Bradbury, Bruce. Income Inequality: Economic Disparities and the Middle Class in Affluent Countries, pp. 334–361. 2013.

link doi

@incollection{Bradbury2013,
  title = {The Fourth Retirement Pillar in Rich Countries},
  author = {Bradbury, Bruce},
  year = {2013},
  booktitle = {Income Inequality: Economic Disparities and the Middle Class in Affluent Countries},
  pages = {334--361},
  publisher = {Stanford University Press},
  doi = {10.1515/9780804786751-016},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1515/9780804786751-016},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  address = {Stanford, CA},
  chapter = {12},
  editor = {Gornick, Janet C. and J{\"a}ntti, Markus},
  isbn = {978-0-8047-8675-1},
  series = {Studies in Social Inequality}
}

A Cross-Country Comparison of Household Income, Consumption and Wealth between Micro Sources and National Accounts Aggregates. Fesseau, Maryse; Wolff, Florence; and Mattonetti, Maria Liviana. OECD. November 2013.

link doi

@techreport{Fesseauetal2013,
  title = {A Cross-Country Comparison of Household Income, Consumption and Wealth between Micro Sources and National Accounts Aggregates},
  author = {Fesseau, Maryse and Wolff, Florence and Mattonetti, Maria Liviana},
  year = {2013},
  month = {nov},
  number = {52},
  institution = {OECD},
  doi = {10.1787/5k3wdjrnh7mv-en},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1787/5k3wdjrnh7mv-en},
  abstract = {Much valuable information exists already on household economic resources (i.e. income, consumption and wealth). Indeed, the national accounts provide aggregate measures and micro sources (surveys, administrative records, and censuses) can be used to derive measures of the distribution across household groups. Over the years, however, macro and micro statisticians have tended to work separately leading to sometimes divergent results which can cause problem to users. In 2011, the OECD and Eurostat launched a joint Expert Group to carry out a study on the feasibility of compiling measures of the distribution of income, consumption and wealth across household groups that are consistent with national accounts definitions and totals. The first challenge of the Expert Group was to draw a detailed picture of the extent to which statistical information derived from micro sources can be aligned to three national accounts aggregates; 20 countries studied all (or part) of the components of adjusted disposable income, 21 all (or part) of the components of actual final consumption and 7 studied all (or part) of the components of household net worth. Results show that there are a number of identified reasons that can explain differences between micro and macro sources. Some of them were quantified and isolated showing finally that for most countries micro sources provide distributive information for most of the national accounts components but for some of them with quite significant gaps in total amounts. Overall, micro and macro totals are closer to each other for income components than for consumption and wealth components. The results also show that there is greater heterogeneity in results across countries for consumption components.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Methods of Estimation of Wealth Inequality},
  type = {Statistics {{Working Paper}}}
}

The Joint Distribution of Income and Wealth. Jäntti, Markus; Sierminska, Eva; and Van Kerm, Philippe. Income Inequality: Economic Disparities and the Middle Class in Affluent Countries, pp. 312–333. 2013.

link doi

@incollection{Janttietal2013,
  title = {The Joint Distribution of Income and Wealth},
  author = {J{\"a}ntti, Markus and Sierminska, Eva and Van Kerm, Philippe},
  year = {2013},
  booktitle = {Income Inequality: Economic Disparities and the Middle Class in Affluent Countries},
  pages = {312--333},
  publisher = {Stanford University Press},
  doi = {10.1515/9780804786751-015},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1515/9780804786751-015},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  address = {Stanford, CA},
  chapter = {11},
  editor = {Gornick, Janet C. and J{\"a}ntti, Markus},
  isbn = {978-0-8047-8675-1},
  series = {Studies in Social Inequality}
}

Taxation of Intergenerational Transfers and Wealth. Kopczuk, Wojciech. Handbook of Public Economics, pp. 329–390. 2013.

link doi

@incollection{Kopczuk2013a,
  title = {Taxation of Intergenerational Transfers and Wealth},
  author = {Kopczuk, Wojciech},
  year = {2013},
  booktitle = {Handbook of Public Economics},
  number = {4},
  pages = {329--390},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  doi = {10.1016/B978-0-444-53759-1.00006-6},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-53759-1.00006-6},
  abstract = {In this chapter, I review empirical and theoretical literature on taxation of intergenerational transfers (estates, bequests, inheritances, inter vivos gifts) and wealth. The main message may be summarized as follows. Empirical evidence on bequest motivations and responses to estate taxation is spotty and much remains be done, but what we know points in the direction of (1) mixed motives, (2) heterogeneity of preferences, and (3) importance of retaining control over wealth. These patterns are important for normative analysis of taxation toward the top of the distribution. Theoretical work should further focus on understanding implications of inequality of inherited wealth: the topic that has been neglected in the past, even though it is closely related to-more carefully studied, but arguably much less important in practice-externalities from giving. Potential externalities from wealth accumulation and concentration are yet to be seriously addressed. {\copyright} 2013 Elsevier B.V.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Estate Inheritance and Gift Taxes,Intergenerational Wealth},
  annotation = {volume 5},
  chapter = {Ch. 6},
  editor = {Auerbach, Alan J. and Chetty, Raj and Feldstein, Martin and Saez, Emmanuel}
}

Income and Wealth Inequality in Japan. McKenzie, Colin. Income Inequality: Economic Disparities and the Middle Class in Affluent Countries, pp. 389–415. 2013.

link doi

@incollection{McKenzie2013,
  title = {Income and Wealth Inequality in {{Japan}}},
  author = {McKenzie, Colin},
  year = {2013},
  booktitle = {Income Inequality: Economic Disparities and the Middle Class in Affluent Countries},
  pages = {389--415},
  publisher = {Stanford University Press},
  doi = {10.1515/9780804786751-018},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1515/9780804786751-018},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  address = {Stanford, CA},
  chapter = {14},
  editor = {Gornick, Janet C. and J{\"a}ntti, Markus},
  isbn = {978-0-8047-8675-1},
  series = {Studies in Social Inequality}
}

Tax Havens: How Globalization Really Works. Palan, Ronen; Murphy, Richard; and Chavagneux, Christian. Cornell University Press. 2013.

link doi

@book{Palanetal2013,
  title = {Tax Havens: How Globalization Really Works},
  author = {Palan, Ronen and Murphy, Richard and Chavagneux, Christian},
  year = {2013},
  publisher = {Cornell University Press},
  doi = {10.1111/j.1758-5899.2010.00062_3.x},
  url = {https://www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/book/9780801476129/tax-havens/},
  abstract = {From the Cayman Islands and the Isle of Man to the Principality of Liechtenstein and the state of Delaware, tax havens offer lower tax rates, less stringent regulations and enforcement, and promises of strict secrecy to individuals and corporations alike. In recent years government regulators, hoping to remedy economic crisis by diverting capital from hidden channels back into taxable view, have undertaken sustained and serious efforts to force tax havens into compliance. In Tax Havens, Ronen Palan, Richard Murphy, and Christian Chavagneux provide an up-to-date evaluation of the role and function of tax havens in the global financial system-their history, inner workings, impact, extent, and enforcement. They make clear that while, individually, tax havens may appear insignificant, together they have a major impact on the global economy. Holding up to \$13 trillion of personal wealth-the equivalent of the annual U.S. Gross National Product-and serving as the legal home of two million corporate entities and half of all international lending banks, tax havens also skew the distribution of globalization's costs and benefits to the detriment of developing economies. The first comprehensive account of these entities, this book challenges much of the conventional wisdom about tax havens. The authors reveal that, rather than operating at the margins of the world economy, tax havens are integral to it. More than simple conduits for tax avoidance and evasion, tax havens actually belong to the broad world of finance, to the business of managing the monetary resources of individuals, organizations, and countries. They have become among the most powerful instruments of globalization, one of the principal causes of global financial instability, and one of the large political issues of our times.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Wealth Taxation},
  isbn = {978-0-8014-6856-8}
}

Ways to Richness: Determination of Household Wealth in 16 Countries. Semyonov, Moshe; and Lewin-Epstein, Noah. European Sociological Review, 29(6): 1134–1148. December 2013.

link doi

@article{SemyonovLewin-Epstein2013,
  title = {Ways to Richness: Determination of Household Wealth in 16 Countries},
  author = {Semyonov, Moshe and {Lewin-Epstein}, Noah},
  year = {2013},
  month = {dec},
  journal = {European Sociological Review},
  volume = {29},
  number = {6},
  pages = {1134--1148},
  doi = {10.1093/esr/jct001},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jct001},
  abstract = {The study examines determination of wealth among older households from a cross-national comparative perspective. Data obtained from 16 national samples reveal that in all countries household wealth is accumulated through two major mechanisms: labor market income and inter-generational transfers. Higher income and reception of inheritance are likely to increase household net worth. Despite considerable cross-country variation in the distribution of wealth, the effects of income and inheritance on net worth are found to be uniform across societies. Further analysis does not detect any systematic association between household net worth and country-level characteristics or social and taxation policies. Nor does it detect any systematic association between country structural attributes and the ways that wealth is determined and accumulated. The findings are discussed in light of previous research and theory on the topic.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Intergenerational Wealth}
}

The Distribution of Assets and Debt. Sierminska, Eva; Smeeding, Timothy M.; and Allegrezza, Serge. Income Inequality: Economic Disparities and the Middle Class in Affluent Countries, pp. 285–311. 2013.

link doi

@incollection{Sierminskaetal2013,
  title = {The Distribution of Assets and Debt},
  author = {Sierminska, Eva and Smeeding, Timothy M. and Allegrezza, Serge},
  year = {2013},
  booktitle = {Income Inequality: Economic Disparities and the Middle Class in Affluent Countries},
  pages = {285--311},
  publisher = {Stanford University Press},
  doi = {10.1515/9780804786751-014},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1515/9780804786751-014},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  address = {Stanford, CA},
  chapter = {10},
  editor = {Gornick, Janet C. and J{\"a}ntti, Markus},
  isbn = {978-0-8047-8675-1},
  series = {Studies in Social Inequality}
}

2011 (4)

Inequality among the Wealthy. Cowell, Frank. LSE STICERD. June 2011.

link

@techreport{Cowell2011,
  title = {Inequality among the Wealthy},
  author = {Cowell, Frank},
  year = {2011},
  month = {jun},
  number = {CASE/150},
  institution = {LSE STICERD},
  url = {https://ssrn.com/abstract=1935759},
  urldate = {2024-05-28},
  abstract = {Using the evidence from the Luxembourg Wealth Study it appears that the distribution of wealth in the UK is considerably less than in Canada, the US or Sweden. But does this result come from an underestimate of inequality among the wealthy and of the wealth differential between the rich and the rest? Using a Pareto model for the upper tail of the distribution we can see that the inequality of comparisons of the UK with the other countries is indeed robust.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons},
  note = {Unpublished manuscript},
  type = {Research {{Paper}}}
}

The Level and Distribution of Global Household Wealth. Davies, James B.; Sandström, Susanna; Shorrocks, Anthony; and Wolff, Edward N. The Economic Journal, 121(551): 223–254. 2011.

link doi

@article{Daviesetal2011,
  title = {The Level and Distribution of Global Household Wealth},
  author = {Davies, James B. and Sandstr{\"o}m, Susanna and Shorrocks, Anthony and Wolff, Edward N.},
  year = {2011},
  journal = {The Economic Journal},
  volume = {121},
  number = {551},
  pages = {223--254},
  doi = {10.1111/j.1468-0297.2010.02391.x},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0297.2010.02391.x},
  abstract = {The level of average household wealth in all countries is estimated via the determinants of assets and debts for 39 countries which have balance sheet or survey data. The distribution of wealth in all countries is inferred from information on the pattern of wealth ownership for 20 countries (covering 59\% of world population). Combining the level and distribution figures suggests that median global wealth was PPP\$8,635 in the year 2000, and that PPP\$518,361 was needed to belong to the top percentile. The top decile owned 71\% of world wealth and the global Gini value was 0.802.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality}
}

Wealth and Economic Inequality. Davies, James B. The Oxford Handbook of Economic Inequality. 2011.

link doi

@incollection{Davies2011,
  title = {Wealth and Economic Inequality},
  author = {Davies, James B.},
  year = {2011},
  booktitle = {The Oxford Handbook of Economic Inequality},
  publisher = {Oxford University Press},
  doi = {10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199606061.013.0006},
  url = {http://oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199606061.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780199606061-e-6},
  abstract = {This article surveys the distribution of wealth and its relationship to economic inequality more broadly. It shows that wealth inequality is high and contributes significantly to inequality in income and consumption, although higher wealth inequality is not always an indicator of greater inequality in well-being. In particular, welfare state policies can improve the well-being of low income groups while at the same time reducing their incentive to save. This may lead to high observed wealth inequality in places where it would otherwise not be expected, such as some of the Scandinavian countries. More research is needed to better illuminate such connections between public policy and wealth inequality.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality},
  chapter = {6},
  isbn = {978-0-19-174362-7}
}

Building a Better America—One Wealth Quintile at a Time. Norton, Michael I.; and Ariely, Dan. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(1): 9–12. 2011.

link doi

@article{NortonAriely2011,
  title = {Building a Better America---One Wealth Quintile at a Time},
  author = {Norton, Michael I. and Ariely, Dan},
  year = {2011},
  journal = {Perspectives on Psychological Science},
  volume = {6},
  number = {1},
  pages = {9--12},
  doi = {10.1177/1745691610393524},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691610393524},
  abstract = {Disagreements about the optimal level of wealth inequality underlie policy debates ranging from taxation to welfare. We attempt to insert the desires of ``regular'' Americans into these debates, by asking a nationally representative online panel to estimate the current distribution of wealth in the United States and to ``build a better America'' by constructing distributions with their ideal level of inequality. First, respondents dramatically underestimated the current level of wealth inequality. Second, respondents constructed ideal wealth distributions that were far more equitable than even their erroneously low estimates of the actual distribution. Most important from a policy perspective, we observed a surprising level of consensus: All demographic groups---even those not usually associated with wealth redistribution such as Republicans and the wealthy---desired a more equal distribution of wealth than the status quo.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Methods of Estimation of Wealth Inequality}
}

2010 (1)

Wealth Inequality and Household Structure: U.S. vs. Spain. Bover, Olympia. Review of Income and Wealth, 56(2): 259–290. 2010.

link doi

@article{Bover2010,
  title = {Wealth Inequality and Household Structure: {{U}}.{{S}}. vs. Spain},
  author = {Bover, Olympia},
  year = {2010},
  journal = {Review of Income and Wealth},
  volume = {56},
  number = {2},
  pages = {259--290},
  doi = {10.1111/j.1475-4991.2010.00376.x},
  url = {http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1475-4991.2010.00376.x},
  abstract = {We study the link between culturally inherited household structure and wealth distribution in international comparisons using household data for the U.S. and Spain (the SCF and the EFF). We estimate counterfactual U.S. distributions relying on the Spanish household structure. Our results show that differences in household structure account for most of the differences in the lower part of the distribution between the two countries, but mask even larger differences in the upper part of the distribution. Imposing the Spanish household structure to the U.S. wealth distribution has little effect on the Gini coefficient and wealth top shares. However, this is the net result of reduced differences at the bottom and increased differences at the top. So there is distinct additional information in considering the whole distribution. Finally, we present results for the within-group differences between the two countries using quantile regressions and find a reversing pattern by age.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Methods of Estimation of Wealth Inequality}
}

2009 (1)

The Global Pattern of Household Wealth. Davies, James B.; Sandström, Susanna; Shorrocks, Anthony; and Wolff, Edward. Journal of International Development, 21(8): 1111–1124. 2009.

link doi

@article{Daviesetal2009,
  title = {The Global Pattern of Household Wealth},
  author = {Davies, James B. and Sandstr{\"o}m, Susanna and Shorrocks, Anthony and Wolff, Edward},
  year = {2009},
  journal = {Journal of International Development},
  volume = {21},
  number = {8},
  pages = {1111--1124},
  doi = {10.1002/jid.1648},
  url = {http://doi.org/10.1002/jid.1648},
  abstract = {We provide the first estimate of the level and distribution of global household wealth. The level of assets and debts for 39 countries are measured using household balance sheet and survey data centred on the year 2000. Average wealth holdings are imputed to countries lacking direct evidence. Microdata on household wealth distribution are assembled for 20 countries. Wealth inequality is imputed to other countries from the observed relation between wealth and income distribution in these countries. We find that the top 10 per cent owned 85 per cent of world wealth, and the Gini coefficient was 0.893, greater than that for the global distribution of income.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons}
}

2008 (2)

The World Distribution of Household Wealth. Davies, James B.; Sandström, Susanna; Shorrocks, Anthony; and Wolff, Edward N. Personal Wealth from a Global Perspective, pp. 395–418. 2008.

link doi

@incollection{Daviesetal2008,
  title = {The World Distribution of Household Wealth},
  author = {Davies, James B. and Sandstr{\"o}m, Susanna and Shorrocks, Anthony and Wolff, Edward N.},
  year = {2008},
  booktitle = {Personal Wealth from a Global Perspective},
  pages = {395--418},
  publisher = {Oxford University Press},
  doi = {10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199548880.003.0019},
  url = {http://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199548880.003.0019},
  abstract = {There has been much recent research on the world distribution of income, but also growing recognition of the importance of other contributions to well-being, including those of household wealth. Wealth is important in providing security and opportunity, particularly in poorer countries that lack full social safety nets and adequate facilities for borrowing and lending. This chapter finds, however, that it is precisely in the latter countries that household wealth is the lowest, both in absolute and relative terms. Globally, wealth is more concentrated than income, on both an individual and a national basis. Roughly 30 per cent of world wealth is found in each of North America, Europe, and the rich Asian-Pacific countries. These areas account for virtually all world's top 1\% of wealth holders. On an official exchange-rate basis, India accounts for about a quarter of the adults in the bottom three global wealth deciles, while China provides about a third of those in the fourth to eighth deciles. If current growth trends continue, India, China, and the transition countries will move up in the global distribution, and the lower deciles will be increasingly dominated by countries in Africa, Latin American, and poor parts of the Asian-Pacific region. Thus wealth may continue to be lowest in areas where it is needed the most.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  address = {Oxford},
  chapter = {19},
  editor = {Davies, James B.},
  isbn = {978-0-19-954888-0}
}

Personal Wealth from a Global Perspective. Oxford University Press. 2008.

link doi

@book{Davies2008,
  title = {Personal Wealth from a Global Perspective},
  author = {Unknown},
  year = {2008},
  publisher = {Oxford University Press},
  doi = {10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199548880.001.0001},
  url = {http://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199548880.001.0001},
  abstract = {There is great media fascination in the activities and lifestyles of the super-rich. But personal wealth is also important for those of more modest means as a store of potential consumption, as a cushion against emergencies, and as collateral for business and investment loans. This book studies household assets and debts. It documents not only the level, distribution, and trend of wealth holdings in rich nations, but also addresses developing countries like China and India. The situation in Latin America and Africa is given attention along with the experiences of Russia and other transition countries. Components of household wealth like financial assets, land, and property are examined, as well as the gender division. Worldwide, it is estimated that the richest 2\% own more than half of total global wealth, and that this elite group resides almost exclusively in North America, Western Europe, and rich Asia-Pacific countries.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  address = {Oxford},
  editor = {Davies, James B.},
  isbn = {978-0-19-954888-0}
}

2006 (1)

The Luxembourg Wealth Study – A Cross-Country Comparable Database for Household Wealth Research. Sierminska, Eva; Brandolini, Andrea; and Smeeding, Timothy M. The Journal of Economic Inequality, 4(3): 375–383. 2006.

link doi

@article{Sierminskaetal2006,
  title = {The {{Luxembourg}} Wealth Study -- {{A}} Cross-Country Comparable Database for Household Wealth Research},
  author = {Sierminska, Eva and Brandolini, Andrea and Smeeding, Timothy M.},
  year = {2006},
  journal = {The Journal of Economic Inequality},
  volume = {4},
  number = {3},
  pages = {375--383},
  doi = {10.1007/s10888-006-9030-z},
  url = {http://doi.org/10.1007/s10888-006-9030-z},
  abstract = {The paper describes the Luxembourg Wealth Study (LWS), an international project launched in 2003 by the Luxembourg Income Study and by institutions from Canada, Cyprus, Finland, Germany, Italy, Norway, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The aim of the project is to assemble and to harmonise existing micro-data on household wealth, in order to provide a sounder basis for comparative research on household net worth, portfolio composition, and wealth distributions.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

2005 (1)

Confronting Income Inequality in Japan. Tachibanaki, Toshiaki. MIT Press. November 2005.

link

@book{Tachibanaki2005,
  title = {Confronting Income Inequality in {{Japan}}},
  author = {Tachibanaki, Toshiaki},
  year = {2005},
  month = {nov},
  publisher = {MIT Press},
  url = {https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/confronting-income-inequality-japan},
  abstract = {Contrary to general belief, and to Japan's own self-image, inequality of income and wealth distribution in Japan has grown in the past two decades. In this well-written and accessible book, Toshiaki Tachibanaki analyzes the movement toward more income inequality in Japan and offers policy recommendations to counter the trend. Tachibanaki, Japan's leading expert on income distribution, draws on new statistical data covering wealth, inheritance, farm and business holdings, salary, and other relevant factors, to demonstrate that Japan can no longer be thought of as a "90 percent middle-class society." The book, updated and substantially expanded from Tachibanaki's 1998 Japanese bestseller, discusses the history and the causes of Japan's increasing income inequality and analyzes the effect on wealth distribution of intergenerational transfer. Employing cross-national comparisons to the United States and Europe throughout, Confronting Income Inequality in Japan examines the contrast between equality of opportunity and equality of outcome, evaluates equality of opportunity in terms of education and occupation, analyzes the relationship between income distribution and income growth, discusses the role of hierarchical positions in organizations, and considers the differences between welfare states and nonwelfare states. Concluding with policy recommendations, Tachibanaki argues against the belief of some economists that greater inequality is unavoidable if Japan is to achieve a strong economic recovery.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Estate Inheritance and Gift Taxes,Intergenerational Wealth,Methods of Estimation of Wealth Inequality,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  address = {Cambridge, MA},
  isbn = {0-262-20158-5}
}

2001 (1)

Secular Changes in Wealth Inequality and Inheritance. Laitner, John. The Economic Journal, 111(474): 691–721. 2001.

link doi

@article{Laitner2001,
  title = {Secular Changes in Wealth Inequality and Inheritance},
  author = {Laitner, John},
  year = {2001},
  journal = {The Economic Journal},
  volume = {111},
  number = {474},
  pages = {691--721},
  doi = {10.1111/1468-0297.00656},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0297.00656},
  abstract = {Data suggest that the distribution of wealth among households in the USA and UK has become more equal over the last century, though, at least for the USA, the pattern may have reversed recently. This paper shows that a model in which all households save for life-cycle reasons and some for dynastic purposes as well offers a possible or partial explanation: the model predicts rising cross-sectional equality of wealth when longevity increases. There may also be implications about very recent changes: expansion of social security programmes and government deficits can lead toward more wealth inequality. Slower growth may do the same.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality,Intergenerational Wealth,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality}
}

2000 (2)

The Distribution of Wealth. Davies, James B.; and Shorrocks, Anthony F. Handbook of Income Distribution, 1: 605–675. 2000.

link doi

@incollection{DaviesShorrocks2000,
  title = {The Distribution of Wealth},
  author = {Davies, James B. and Shorrocks, Anthony F.},
  year = {2000},
  booktitle = {Handbook of Income Distribution},
  volume = {1},
  pages = {605--675},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  doi = {10.1016/S1574-0056(00)80014-7},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/S1574-0056(00)80014-7},
  abstract = {This chapter is concerned with the distribution of personal wealth, which usually refers to the material assets that can be sold in the marketpace, although on occasion pension rights are also included. We summarise the available evidence on wealth distribution for a number of countries. This confirms the well known fact that wealth is more unequally distributed than income, and points to a long term downward trend in wealth inequality over most of the twentieth century. We also review the various theories that help account for these feature. Lifecycle accumulation is one popular explanation of wealth differences, but inheritance is also widely recognised as playing a major role, especially at the upper end of the wealth range. A recurrent theme in work on wealth distribution is the relative importance of these two sources of wealth differences. We discuss the results of studies that assess the contributions of inheritance and lifecycle factors, and give attention also to a variety of related issues, such as the link between wealth status across generations, and the possible motives for leaving bequests.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Intergenerational Wealth},
  chapter = {11},
  editor = {Atkinson, Anthony B. and Bourguignon, Fran{\c c}ois},
  isbn = {978-0-444-81631-3}
}

Three Centuries of Inequality in Britain and America. Lindert, Peter H. Handbook of Income Distribution, 1: 167–216. 2000.

link doi

@incollection{Lindert2000,
  title = {Three Centuries of Inequality in {{Britain}} and {{America}}},
  author = {Lindert, Peter H.},
  year = {2000},
  booktitle = {Handbook of Income Distribution},
  volume = {1},
  pages = {167--216},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  doi = {10.1016/S1574-0056(00)80006-8},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/S1574-0056(00)80006-8},
  abstract = {Income and wealth inequality rose over the first 150 years of US history. They rose in Britain before 1875, especially 1740--1810. The first half of the 20th century equalized pre-fisc incomes both in Britain and in America. From the 1970s to the 1990s inequality rose in both countries, reversing most or all of the previous equalization. Government redistribution explains part but not all of the reversals in inequality trends. Factor-market forces and economic growth would have produced a similar timing of rises and falls in income inequality even without shifts in the progressivity of redistribution through government. Redistribution toward the poor tends to happen least in those times and polities where it would seem most justified by the usual goals of welfare policy.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Methods of Estimation of Wealth Inequality,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  chapter = {Ch. 3},
  editor = {Atkinson, Anthony B. and Bourguignon, Fran{\c c}ois},
  isbn = {978-0-444-81631-3}
}

1996 (1)

International Comparisons of Wealth Inequality. Wolff, Edward N. Review of Income and Wealth, 42(4): 433–451. 1996.

link doi

@article{Wolff1996,
  title = {International Comparisons of Wealth Inequality},
  author = {Wolff, Edward N.},
  year = {1996},
  journal = {Review of Income and Wealth},
  volume = {42},
  number = {4},
  pages = {433--451},
  publisher = {John Wiley \& Sons, Ltd},
  doi = {10.1111/j.1475-4991.1996.tb00193.x},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4991.1996.tb00193.x},
  abstract = {This study presents reasonably comparable estimates of the size distribution of household or personal wealth for eight OECD countries---Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Japan, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States. In the mid-1980s, the U.S. ranked as the most unequal and Japan the least, while the other six countries had roughly comparable levels of wealth inequality. Moreover, while wealth inequality rose sharply in the U.S. during the 1980s, it increased modestly in Sweden and showed little change or a slight decline in Canada, France, and the U.K. A comparison of time trends for the U.K. and the U.S. suggests that the relatively high wealth inequality in the U.S. in the 1980s represents a marked turnaround from the 1950s, when the U.S. was considerably more equal in terms of wealth ownership than the U.K. Comparative results for the two countries hold for both conventional (marketable) wealth and for augmented wealth, which includes a valuation of public and private pension wealth.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality}
}

1995 (1)

Top Heavy: A Study of the Increasing Inequality of Wealth in America. Wolff, Edward N. Twentieth Century Fund Press. 1995.

link

@book{Wolff1995,
  title = {Top Heavy: {{A}} Study of the Increasing Inequality of Wealth in {{America}}},
  author = {Wolff, Edward N.},
  year = {1995},
  publisher = {Twentieth Century Fund Press},
  url = {https://www.brookings.edu/book/top-heavy/},
  abstract = {We Americans have always flattered ourselves that we have more of two good things than almost anyone else: democracy and opportunity. To be sure, neither is simple; American ethos is not static, nor is it without contradictions. We reinvent ourselves through immigration; our democracy suffers from low voter participation; our economy often seems to be in relative decline; our cities sometimes are viewed from the suburbs as if they were foreign nations. Still, in the past, the democratic foundation has held while economic opportunity has provided the glue that bound together American's oddly shaped parts. However, there is evidence that the ``glue'' that has provided economic stability and growth in the United States might be faltering. Over the last several years, many studies have established that the working population of the United Sates---especially men with less than a college education---no only are doing more poorly than their parents, but their real wages are declining. In the 1990s, American families in every income category enjoyed income growth---and the poorest families had the highest rate of all. However, the average was high because it was reflection of high income growth for the top 20 percent of families, and a significant fall in income for the poorest 20 percent. As a result, nearly half the families in the country today have lower real income than they did in 1973. In the pages that follow, Edward Wolff, adds data and provides analysis concerning wealth to our current knowledge about trends in income distribution. While wealth inequality always has been greater than income inequality, Wolff reports remarkable increases in wealth inequality in recent years. Startlingly, Wolff makes the assessment that the United States has gone from a position of less wealth inequality among its citizens than in Europe to greater wealth inequality than is found in those class ridden societies. From the data analysis, Wolff then moves to make significantly bold set of policy suggestions to help curb economic inequality and stimulate real economic growth. He suggests that we should ultimately ignore the growing inequality and exclude from consideration tax policy options that attempt to ameliorate the situation. But surely these subjects are worth discussing, of only to understand the forces that challenge democracy and economic opportunity. With a remarkably large segment of the population losing ground in wealth and income, the inevitably greater insecurity this group faces must be a root cause of the anger that is shaking the democratic system},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  address = {New York},
  isbn = {0-87078-360-2}
}

We Americans have always flattered ourselves that we have more of two good things than almost anyone else: democracy and opportunity. To be sure, neither is simple; American ethos is not static, nor is it without contradictions. We reinvent ourselves through immigration; our democracy suffers from low voter participation; our economy often seems to be in relative decline; our cities sometimes are viewed from the suburbs as if they were foreign nations. Still, in the past, the democratic foundation has held while economic opportunity has provided the glue that bound together American's oddly shaped parts. However, there is evidence that the "glue" that has provided economic stability and growth in the United States might be faltering. Over the last several years, many studies have established that the working population of the United Sates—especially men with less than a college education—no only are doing more poorly than their parents, but their real wages are declining. In the 1990s, American families in every income category enjoyed income growth—and the poorest families had the highest rate of all. However, the average was high because it was reflection of high income growth for the top 20 percent of families, and a significant fall in income for the poorest 20 percent. As a result, nearly half the families in the country today have lower real income than they did in 1973. In the pages that follow, Edward Wolff, adds data and provides analysis concerning wealth to our current knowledge about trends in income distribution. While wealth inequality always has been greater than income inequality, Wolff reports remarkable increases in wealth inequality in recent years. Startlingly, Wolff makes the assessment that the United States has gone from a position of less wealth inequality among its citizens than in Europe to greater wealth inequality than is found in those class ridden societies. From the data analysis, Wolff then moves to make significantly bold set of policy suggestions to help curb economic inequality and stimulate real economic growth. He suggests that we should ultimately ignore the growing inequality and exclude from consideration tax policy options that attempt to ameliorate the situation. But surely these subjects are worth discussing, of only to understand the forces that challenge democracy and economic opportunity. With a remarkably large segment of the population losing ground in wealth and income, the inevitably greater insecurity this group faces must be a root cause of the anger that is shaking the democratic system

1991 (1)

A Comparative Analysis of Household Wealth Patterns in France and the United States. Kessler, Denis; and Wolff, Edward N. Review of Income and Wealth, 37(3): 249–266. 1991.

link doi

@article{KesslerWolff1991,
  title = {A Comparative Analysis of Household Wealth Patterns in France and the United States},
  author = {Kessler, Denis and Wolff, Edward N.},
  year = {1991},
  journal = {Review of Income and Wealth},
  volume = {37},
  number = {3},
  pages = {249--266},
  doi = {10.1111/j.1475-4991.1991.tb00370.x},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4991.1991.tb00370.x},
  abstract = {We find that household wealth is distributed more unequally in the U.S. in 1983 than France in 1986. The Gini coefficient is 0.77 for the U.S. and 0.71 for France. There are also significant differences in the composition of wealth. Owner-occupied housing accounted for half of total assets in France, and only 30 percent in the U.S., while corporate stock and financial securities amounted to 19 percent in the U.S. and 8 percent in France. The debt-equity ratio was 0.13 in France and 0.20 in the U.S. The age-wealth profile in the two countries had the characteristic hump-shape predicted by the life-cycle model, but the profile was much flatter in France and peaked for families aged 50--59 in France, compared to 60--69 in the US.},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality}
}

1988 (1)

Reviewed Work: International Comparisons of the Distribution of Household Wealth by Edward N. Wolff. Jenkins, Stephen. The Economic Journal, 98(389): 204–206. 1988.

link doi

@article{Jenkins1988,
  title = {Reviewed Work: International Comparisons of the Distribution of Household Wealth by Edward {{N}}. Wolff},
  author = {Jenkins, Stephen},
  year = {1988},
  journal = {The Economic Journal},
  volume = {98},
  number = {389},
  pages = {204--206},
  doi = {10.2307/2233531},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.2307/2233531},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons}
}

1983 (1)

Income Distribution in New Zealand. Easton, Brian. New Zealand Institute of Economic Research. 1983.

link

@techreport{Easton1983,
  title = {Income Distribution in {{New Zealand}}},
  author = {Easton, Brian},
  year = {1983},
  number = {28},
  institution = {New Zealand Institute of Economic Research},
  url = {https://natlib.govt.nz/records/21732544?search%5Bi%5D%5Bcreator%5D=Easton%2C+B.+H.&search%5Bi%5D%5Bsubject%5D=Income+distribution+--+New+Zealand&search%5Bpath%5D=items},
  urldate = {2022-04-01},
  keywords = {Data Sources: Taxes on Wealth,Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  type = {{{NZIER Research Paper}}}
}

1981 (1)

Wealth Distribution in Finland in 1800. Soltow, Lee. Scandinavian Economic History Review, 29(1): 21–32. January 1981.

link doi

@article{Soltow1981,
  title = {Wealth Distribution in {{Finland}} in 1800},
  author = {Soltow, Lee},
  year = {1981},
  month = {jan},
  journal = {Scandinavian Economic History Review},
  volume = {29},
  number = {1},
  pages = {21--32},
  doi = {10.1080/03585522.1981.10407936},
  url = {http://doi.org/10.1080/03585522.1981.10407936},
  abstract = {An important source of data concerning wealth distribution for Finland in 1800 exists in the Royal Archives in Stockholm and in partial form in the National Archives at Helsinki and provincial archives throughout Finland. A major study of these records has been made by Eino Jutikkala; he particularly describes men of wealth in the urban areas and points out certain weaknesses in the records. His study gives us some grasp of the degree of inequality existing in Finland at the time by reporting the numbers of men in three wealth classes and, importantly, by telling us the occupations of Finland's urban rich. 1},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality}
}

1980 (1)

Taxing Wealth Inequalities. Pond, C.; Burghes, L.; and Smith, B. Fabian Society. January 1980.

link

@book{Pondetal1980,
  title = {Taxing Wealth Inequalities},
  author = {Pond, C. and Burghes, L. and Smith, B.},
  year = {1980},
  month = {jan},
  number = {466},
  publisher = {Fabian Society},
  url = {https://digital.library.lse.ac.uk/objects/lse:dir903zoz},
  urldate = {2022-02-02},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Estate Inheritance and Gift Taxes,Intergenerational Wealth,Wealth Taxation},
  isbn = {978-0-7163-0466-1},
  series = {Fabian {{Tract}}}
}

1905 (1)

The Inheritance Tax in the American Commonwealths. Millis, H. A. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 19(2): 288–308. February 1905.

link file

@article{Millis1905,
  title = {The Inheritance Tax in the {{American}} Commonwealths},
  author = {Millis, H. A.},
  year = {1905},
  month = {feb},
  journal = {The Quarterly Journal of Economics},
  volume = {19},
  number = {2},
  pages = {288--308},
  url = {https://www.jstor.org/stable/1882866},
  urldate = {2023-06-01},
  keywords = {Data Sources: Taxes on Wealth,Cross-National Comparisons,Estate Inheritance and Gift Taxes},
  eprint = {1882866},
  eprinttype = {jstor},
  url_file = {Millis1905.pdf}
}