@incollection{BaselgiaFoellmi2023,
  title = {Inequality and Growth},
  booktitle = {Handbook of Labor, Human Resources and Population Economics},
  author = {Baselgia, Enea and Foellmi, Reto},
  editor = {Zimmerman, Klaus F.},
  year = {2023},
  publisher = {Springer International Publishing},
  address = {Cham},
  doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-57365-6_332-2},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57365-6_332-2},
  isbn = {978-3-319-57365-6},
  keywords = {Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

@techreport{Nakajima2023,
  type = {Working {{Paper}}},
  title = {Monetary Policy with Racial Inequality},
  author = {Nakajima, Makoto},
  year = {2023},
  month = may,
  number = {23-09},
  institution = {Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia},
  doi = {10.21799/frbp.wp.2023.09},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.21799/frbp.wp.2023.09},
  abstract = {I develop a heterogeneous-agent New-Keynesian model featuring racial inequality in income and wealth, and studies interactions between racial inequality and monetary policy. Black and Hispanic workers gain more from accommodative monetary policy than White workers mainly due to higher labor market risks. Their gains are larger also because of a larger proportion of them are hand-to-mouth, while wealthy White workers gain more from asset price appreciation. Monetary and fiscal policies are substitutes in providing insurance against cyclical labor market risks. Racial minorities gain even more from an accommodative monetary policy in the absence of income-dependent fiscal transfers.},
  keywords = {Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

I develop a heterogeneous-agent New-Keynesian model featuring racial inequality in income and wealth, and studies interactions between racial inequality and monetary policy. Black and Hispanic workers gain more from accommodative monetary policy than White workers mainly due to higher labor market risks. Their gains are larger also because of a larger proportion of them are hand-to-mouth, while wealthy White workers gain more from asset price appreciation. Monetary and fiscal policies are substitutes in providing insurance against cyclical labor market risks. Racial minorities gain even more from an accommodative monetary policy in the absence of income-dependent fiscal transfers.

@article{Fisheretal2022,
  title = {Inequality in 3-{{D}}: Income, Consumption, and Wealth},
  author = {Fisher, Jonathan D. and Johnson, David S. and Smeeding, Timothy M. and Thompson, Jeffrey P.},
  year = {2022},
  journal = {Review of Income and Wealth},
  volume = {68},
  number = {1},
  pages = {16--42},
  doi = {10.1111/roiw.12509},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/roiw.12509},
  abstract = {We do not need to and should not have to choose amongst income, consumption, or wealth as the superior measure of well-being. All three individually and jointly determine well-being. We are the first to study inequality in three conjoint dimensions for the same households, using income, consumption, and wealth from the 1989--2016 Surveys of Consumer Finances (SCF). The paper focuses on two questions. What does inequality in two and three dimensions look like? Has inequality in multiple dimensions increased by less, by more, or by about the same as inequality in any one dimension? We find an increase in inequality in two dimensions and in three dimensions, with a faster increase in multi-dimensional inequality than in one-dimensional inequality. Viewing inequality through one dimension greatly understates the level and the growth in inequality in two and three dimensions. The U.S. is becoming more economically unequal than is generally understood.},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality,Methods of Estimation of Wealth Inequality}
}

We do not need to and should not have to choose amongst income, consumption, or wealth as the superior measure of well-being. All three individually and jointly determine well-being. We are the first to study inequality in three conjoint dimensions for the same households, using income, consumption, and wealth from the 1989–2016 Surveys of Consumer Finances (SCF). The paper focuses on two questions. What does inequality in two and three dimensions look like? Has inequality in multiple dimensions increased by less, by more, or by about the same as inequality in any one dimension? We find an increase in inequality in two dimensions and in three dimensions, with a faster increase in multi-dimensional inequality than in one-dimensional inequality. Viewing inequality through one dimension greatly understates the level and the growth in inequality in two and three dimensions. The U.S. is becoming more economically unequal than is generally understood.

@article{GallusserKrapf2022,
  title = {Joint Income-Wealth Inequality: Evidence from {{Lucerne}} Tax Data},
  author = {Gallusser, David and Krapf, Matthias},
  year = {2022},
  month = aug,
  journal = {Social Indicators Research},
  volume = {163},
  number = {1},
  pages = {251--295},
  doi = {10.1007/s11205-022-02887-9},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-022-02887-9},
  abstract = {Using tax data from the Swiss canton of Lucerne, we study how measures of economic inequality change if they account for income and wealth rather than income alone. Joint income-wealth, the sum of labor income and annuitized wealth, serves as a measure of combined inequality of income and wealth. Inequality measured using joint income-wealth is higher than measured using income alone. We refine existing annuitization techniques by introducing heterogeneous returns. The joint distribution of labor income and annuitized wealth displays strong tail dependence at the top and a negative association for negative annuitized wealth. A decomposition shows that the underlying marginal distributions of labor income and annuitized wealth account for most of joint income-wealth inequality, whereas their association matters only in the tails.},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

Using tax data from the Swiss canton of Lucerne, we study how measures of economic inequality change if they account for income and wealth rather than income alone. Joint income-wealth, the sum of labor income and annuitized wealth, serves as a measure of combined inequality of income and wealth. Inequality measured using joint income-wealth is higher than measured using income alone. We refine existing annuitization techniques by introducing heterogeneous returns. The joint distribution of labor income and annuitized wealth displays strong tail dependence at the top and a negative association for negative annuitized wealth. A decomposition shows that the underlying marginal distributions of labor income and annuitized wealth account for most of joint income-wealth inequality, whereas their association matters only in the tails.

@techreport{Garbintietal2022,
  type = {{{CREST Working Papers Series}}},
  title = {Wealth Heterogeneity and the Marginal Propensity to Consume out of Wealth},
  author = {Garbinti, Bertrand and Lamarche, Pierre and Savignac, Fred{\'e}rique},
  year = {2022},
  month = jan,
  number = {2022-02},
  institution = {{Center for Research in Economics and Statistics}},
  url = {https://ideas.repec.org/p/crs/wpaper/2022-02.html},
  urldate = {2022-02-23},
  abstract = {We study how the marginal propensity to consume out of wealth (MPC) varies across households depending on the level and composition of their wealth. We build a unique household-level panel dataset which combines wealth and consumption surveys for five European countries to estimate country-specific marginal propensity to consume out wealth. We use instrumented household-level panel regressions. First, we show that the MPC out of total wealth is higher for lowwealth households, whatever the country. Second, we find that the MPC out of housing assets is significant and decreasing along the wealth distribution in all countries. Third, we show that the observed cross-country heterogeneity in MPC is strongly correlated with the use of mortgages, suggesting a collateral channel. Finally, we conduct a simulation exercise to investigate to what extent heterogeneous MPC and wealth inequality affect consumption inequality.},
  keywords = {Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

We study how the marginal propensity to consume out of wealth (MPC) varies across households depending on the level and composition of their wealth. We build a unique household-level panel dataset which combines wealth and consumption surveys for five European countries to estimate country-specific marginal propensity to consume out wealth. We use instrumented household-level panel regressions. First, we show that the MPC out of total wealth is higher for lowwealth households, whatever the country. Second, we find that the MPC out of housing assets is significant and decreasing along the wealth distribution in all countries. Third, we show that the observed cross-country heterogeneity in MPC is strongly correlated with the use of mortgages, suggesting a collateral channel. Finally, we conduct a simulation exercise to investigate to what extent heterogeneous MPC and wealth inequality affect consumption inequality.

@article{HallstenThaning2022,
  title = {Wealth as One of the ``Big Four'' {{SES}} Dimensions in Intergenerational Transmissions},
  author = {H{\"a}llsten, Martin and Thaning, Max},
  year = {2022},
  month = jun,
  journal = {Social Forces},
  volume = {100},
  number = {4},
  pages = {1533--1560},
  doi = {10.1093/sf/soab080},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soab080},
  abstract = {Recent scholarship on mobility has increasingly incorporated wealth. We ask if wealth brings anything new to mobility research or is just a standard socioeconomic status (SES) dimension in disguise. We exploit Swedish administrative registers, which contain rich SES measures over individuals' lives for both parents' and children's generations. Using sibling correlations to estimate a baseline of shared family background influence, we then perform a total decomposition for each SES dimension and their overlaps. We find that wealth is a distinct dimension of SES that is very different from education, occupation, and income. Parental wealth cannot be substituted for other SES dimensions in understanding child's wealth attainment. Moreover, parental wealth substantially moderates intergenerational reproduction in other dimensions: The wealthiest have higher reproduction rates in all child outcomes, but in particular for children's income and wealth. Excluding wealth leads to underestimating intergenerational inequality, aggravated by its qualitatively unique status as an SES resource. We conclude that---alongside the SES resources education, occupation, and income---wealth emerges as an integral and unique dimension of what we choose to call the ``big four'' of social stratification.},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality,Intergenerational Wealth,Methods of Estimation of Wealth Inequality}
}

Recent scholarship on mobility has increasingly incorporated wealth. We ask if wealth brings anything new to mobility research or is just a standard socioeconomic status (SES) dimension in disguise. We exploit Swedish administrative registers, which contain rich SES measures over individuals' lives for both parents' and children's generations. Using sibling correlations to estimate a baseline of shared family background influence, we then perform a total decomposition for each SES dimension and their overlaps. We find that wealth is a distinct dimension of SES that is very different from education, occupation, and income. Parental wealth cannot be substituted for other SES dimensions in understanding child's wealth attainment. Moreover, parental wealth substantially moderates intergenerational reproduction in other dimensions: The wealthiest have higher reproduction rates in all child outcomes, but in particular for children's income and wealth. Excluding wealth leads to underestimating intergenerational inequality, aggravated by its qualitatively unique status as an SES resource. We conclude that—alongside the SES resources education, occupation, and income—wealth emerges as an integral and unique dimension of what we choose to call the ``big four'' of social stratification.

@article{Fagerengetal2021,
  title = {{{MPC}} Heterogeneity and Household Balance Sheets},
  author = {Fagereng, Andreas and Holm, Martin B. and Natvik, Gisle J.},
  year = {2021},
  month = oct,
  journal = {American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics},
  volume = {13},
  number = {4},
  pages = {1--54},
  doi = {10.1257/mac.20190211},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1257/mac.20190211},
  abstract = {We use sizable lottery prizes in Norwegian administrative panel data to explore how transitory income shocks are spent and saved over time and how households' marginal propensities to consume (MPCs) vary with household characteristics and shock size. We find that spending peaks in the year of winning and gradually reverts to normal within five years. Controlling for all items on households' balance sheets and characteristics such as education and income, it is the amount won, age, and liquid assets that vary systematically with MPCs. Low-liquidity winners of the smallest prizes (around US\$1,500) are estimated to spend all within the year of winning. The corresponding estimate for high-liquidity winners of large prizes (US\$8,300--150,000) is slightly below one-half. While conventional models will struggle to account for such high MPC levels, we show that a two-asset life cycle model with a realistic earnings profile and a luxury bequest motive can account for  both the time profile of consumption responses and their systematic covariation with observables.},
  keywords = {Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

We use sizable lottery prizes in Norwegian administrative panel data to explore how transitory income shocks are spent and saved over time and how households' marginal propensities to consume (MPCs) vary with household characteristics and shock size. We find that spending peaks in the year of winning and gradually reverts to normal within five years. Controlling for all items on households' balance sheets and characteristics such as education and income, it is the amount won, age, and liquid assets that vary systematically with MPCs. Low-liquidity winners of the smallest prizes (around US$1,500) are estimated to spend all within the year of winning. The corresponding estimate for high-liquidity winners of large prizes (US$8,300–150,000) is slightly below one-half. While conventional models will struggle to account for such high MPC levels, we show that a two-asset life cycle model with a realistic earnings profile and a luxury bequest motive can account for both the time profile of consumption responses and their systematic covariation with observables.

@article{MichaillatSaez2021,
  title = {Resolving New {{Keynesian}} Anomalies with Wealth in the Utility Function},
  author = {Michaillat, Pascal and Saez, Emmanuel},
  year = {2021},
  month = may,
  journal = {The Review of Economics and Statistics},
  volume = {103},
  number = {2},
  pages = {197--215},
  doi = {10.1162/rest_a_00893},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1162/rest_a_00893},
  abstract = {At the zero lower bound, the New Keynesian model predicts that output and inflation collapse to implausibly low levels and that government spending and forward guidance have implausibly large effects. To resolve these anomalies, we introduce wealth into the utility function; the justification is that wealth is a marker of social status, and people value status. Since people partly save to accrue social status, the Euler equation is modified. As a result, when the marginal utility of wealth is sufficiently large, the dynamical system representing the zero-lower-bound equilibrium transforms from a saddle to a source, which resolves all the anomalies.},
  keywords = {Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

At the zero lower bound, the New Keynesian model predicts that output and inflation collapse to implausibly low levels and that government spending and forward guidance have implausibly large effects. To resolve these anomalies, we introduce wealth into the utility function; the justification is that wealth is a marker of social status, and people value status. Since people partly save to accrue social status, the Euler equation is modified. As a result, when the marginal utility of wealth is sufficiently large, the dynamical system representing the zero-lower-bound equilibrium transforms from a saddle to a source, which resolves all the anomalies.

@article{StortiDagnes2021,
  title = {The Super-Rich: Origin, Reproduction, and Social Acceptance},
  author = {Storti, Luca and Dagnes, Joselle},
  year = {2021},
  month = sep,
  journal = {Sociologica},
  volume = {15},
  number = {2},
  pages = {5--23},
  doi = {10.6092/issn.1971-8853/13546},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1971-8853/13546},
  abstract = {What is the sociological understanding of the super-rich? To address this question, we propose and further elaborate three interconnected lines of investigation. After highlighting some plausible criteria for identifying the super-rich, we deal first with the generative and reproductive mechanisms underpinning the huge wealth concentration emerging over the last decades. Second, we dissect the nexus between the super-rich and places, i.e., how the super-rich shape the~spaces to implement their housing strategies, consumption patterns, and lifestyle. By doing so, we will also show how the super-rich transform spaces into social arenas in which they stand out through an original form of distinction made up of recognition and invisibility. Third, we will focus on the dynamics and the behaviours that help the super-rich gain social acceptance. This three-step analysis allows us to pinpoint in the conclusions some regressive outcomes in economic, social, and political terms fostered by the increasing concentration of private wealth.},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

What is the sociological understanding of the super-rich? To address this question, we propose and further elaborate three interconnected lines of investigation. After highlighting some plausible criteria for identifying the super-rich, we deal first with the generative and reproductive mechanisms underpinning the huge wealth concentration emerging over the last decades. Second, we dissect the nexus between the super-rich and places, i.e., how the super-rich shape the spaces to implement their housing strategies, consumption patterns, and lifestyle. By doing so, we will also show how the super-rich transform spaces into social arenas in which they stand out through an original form of distinction made up of recognition and invisibility. Third, we will focus on the dynamics and the behaviours that help the super-rich gain social acceptance. This three-step analysis allows us to pinpoint in the conclusions some regressive outcomes in economic, social, and political terms fostered by the increasing concentration of private wealth.

@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}
}

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.

@article{IaconoRanaldi2020,
  title = {The Wage Curve across the Wealth Distribution},
  author = {Iacono, Roberto and Ranaldi, Marco},
  year = {2020},
  month = nov,
  journal = {Economics Letters},
  volume = {196},
  doi = {10.1016/j.econlet.2020.109580},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2020.109580},
  abstract = {This paper studies the relationship between wages and the unemployment rate across the wealth distribution. Using microdata from Norway covering the entire population of residents between 2000 and 2015, we introduce four novel findings on this relationship. First, the share of unemployed individuals belonging to the bottom decile of the gross wealth distribution is tenfold larger than that belonging to the top decile (34\% and 3.2\%, respectively). Second, the share of unemployed individuals belonging to the bottom decile of the gross wealth distribution moves in the opposite manner to that of the top decile. Third, the negative slope of the wage curve is confirmed. Fourth, the wage-to-unemployment ratio increases monotonically with gross wealth.},
  keywords = {Impacts of Wealth Inequality},
  note = {109580}
}

This paper studies the relationship between wages and the unemployment rate across the wealth distribution. Using microdata from Norway covering the entire population of residents between 2000 and 2015, we introduce four novel findings on this relationship. First, the share of unemployed individuals belonging to the bottom decile of the gross wealth distribution is tenfold larger than that belonging to the top decile (34% and 3.2%, respectively). Second, the share of unemployed individuals belonging to the bottom decile of the gross wealth distribution moves in the opposite manner to that of the top decile. Third, the negative slope of the wage curve is confirmed. Fourth, the wage-to-unemployment ratio increases monotonically with gross wealth.

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

@article{Ford2019,
  title = {The Need for a Wealth Inequality Amendment},
  author = {Ford, Stuart},
  year = {2019},
  journal = {West Virginia Law Review},
  number = {Forthcoming},
  pages = {1--44},
  url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3340205##},
  abstract = {Wealth and income inequality have been studied across a number of fields, including economics, political science, sociology, psychology, and public health. This Article surveys and synthesizes the most recent findings across these fields to better understand the effects of high inequality on society. Those consequences are profound. High rates of inequality do not just mean that some people have more money than others. Highly unequal societies have slower economic growth than more equal societies. They have a variety of health problems, including lower life expectancies, higher infant mortality rates, and higher rates of mental illness. High levels of inequality are also associated with various social problems, including lower rates of trust and social cohesion, lower levels of life satisfaction, and higher rates of crime. And finally, high levels of inequality undermine democracy by decreasing voter turnout, increasing corruption, and undermining the rule of law. Unsurprisingly, given that the United States is the most unequal advanced democracy, the U.S. is suffering from all of these problems. We have high crime rates, high infant mortality rates, low life expectancies, and low overall rates of life satisfaction. By most measures, living in America today is more like living in a country like Russia or Chile than it is like living in Norway or Denmark. The consequences of high levels of inequality represent an existential threat to both our society and our democracy. It is for this reason, that this Article proposes a constitutional amendment designed to limit wealth inequality. The amendment would prohibit the U.S. government from passing laws or rules that increase wealth inequality unless the government can demonstrate that they are narrowly tailored to accomplish an important governmental goal. It is not designed to eliminate all inequality, but there are good reasons to believe it would eventually reduce inequality in our society. This would lead to greater trust in government and society, better public health, and greater economic growth. These changes would make the United States a better place to live for everyone.},
  keywords = {Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

Wealth and income inequality have been studied across a number of fields, including economics, political science, sociology, psychology, and public health. This Article surveys and synthesizes the most recent findings across these fields to better understand the effects of high inequality on society. Those consequences are profound. High rates of inequality do not just mean that some people have more money than others. Highly unequal societies have slower economic growth than more equal societies. They have a variety of health problems, including lower life expectancies, higher infant mortality rates, and higher rates of mental illness. High levels of inequality are also associated with various social problems, including lower rates of trust and social cohesion, lower levels of life satisfaction, and higher rates of crime. And finally, high levels of inequality undermine democracy by decreasing voter turnout, increasing corruption, and undermining the rule of law. Unsurprisingly, given that the United States is the most unequal advanced democracy, the U.S. is suffering from all of these problems. We have high crime rates, high infant mortality rates, low life expectancies, and low overall rates of life satisfaction. By most measures, living in America today is more like living in a country like Russia or Chile than it is like living in Norway or Denmark. The consequences of high levels of inequality represent an existential threat to both our society and our democracy. It is for this reason, that this Article proposes a constitutional amendment designed to limit wealth inequality. The amendment would prohibit the U.S. government from passing laws or rules that increase wealth inequality unless the government can demonstrate that they are narrowly tailored to accomplish an important governmental goal. It is not designed to eliminate all inequality, but there are good reasons to believe it would eventually reduce inequality in our society. This would lead to greater trust in government and society, better public health, and greater economic growth. These changes would make the United States a better place to live for everyone.

@article{PfefferKillewald2019,
  title = {Intergenerational Wealth Mobility and Racial Inequality},
  author = {Pfeffer, Fabian T. and Killewald, Alexandra},
  year = {2019},
  journal = {Socius},
  volume = {5},
  pages = {1--2},
  doi = {10.1177/2378023119831799},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1177/2378023119831799},
  abstract = {The black-white gap in household wealth is large and well documented. Here, we visualize how this racial wealth gap persists across generations. Animating the flow of individuals between the relative wealth position of parents and their adult children, we show that the disadvantage of black families is a consequence both of wealth inequality in prior generations and race differences in the transmission of wealth positions across generations: Black children both have less wealthy parents on average and are far more likely to be downwardly mobile in household wealth. By displaying intergenerational movements between parental and offspring wealth quintiles, we underline how intergenerational fluctuation coexists with the maintenance of a severely racialized wealth structure.},
  keywords = {Impacts of Wealth Inequality,Intergenerational Wealth}
}

The black-white gap in household wealth is large and well documented. Here, we visualize how this racial wealth gap persists across generations. Animating the flow of individuals between the relative wealth position of parents and their adult children, we show that the disadvantage of black families is a consequence both of wealth inequality in prior generations and race differences in the transmission of wealth positions across generations: Black children both have less wealthy parents on average and are far more likely to be downwardly mobile in household wealth. By displaying intergenerational movements between parental and offspring wealth quintiles, we underline how intergenerational fluctuation coexists with the maintenance of a severely racialized wealth structure.

@article{Pikettyetal2019,
  title = {Capital Accumulation, Private Property, and Rising Inequality in {{China}}, 1978--2015},
  author = {Piketty, Thomas and Yang, Li and Zucman, Gabriel},
  year = {2019},
  month = jul,
  journal = {American Economic Review},
  volume = {109},
  number = {7},
  pages = {2469--2496},
  doi = {10.1257/aer.20170973},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20170973},
  abstract = {We combine national accounts, surveys, and new tax data to study the accumulation and distribution of income and wealth in China from 1978 to 2015. The national wealth-income ratio increased from 350 percent in 1978 to 700 percent in 2015, while the share of public property in national wealth declined from 70 percent to 30 percent. We provide sharp upward revision of official inequality estimates. The top 10 percent income share rose from 27 percent to 41 percent between 1978 and 2015; the bottom 50 percent share dropped from 27 percent to 15 percent. China's inequality levels used to be close to Nordic countries and are now approaching US levels.},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Wealth Taxation},
  url_online_appendix = {https://bibbase.org/network/publication/piketty-yang-zucman-capitalaccumulationprivatepropertyandrisinginequalityinchina19782015onlineappendix-2018},
  url_data_files = {https://bibbase.org/network/publication/piketty-yang-zucman-capitalaccumulationprivatepropertyandrisinginequalityinchina19782015datafiles-2018}
}

We combine national accounts, surveys, and new tax data to study the accumulation and distribution of income and wealth in China from 1978 to 2015. The national wealth-income ratio increased from 350 percent in 1978 to 700 percent in 2015, while the share of public property in national wealth declined from 70 percent to 30 percent. We provide sharp upward revision of official inequality estimates. The top 10 percent income share rose from 27 percent to 41 percent between 1978 and 2015; the bottom 50 percent share dropped from 27 percent to 15 percent. China's inequality levels used to be close to Nordic countries and are now approaching US levels.

@article{Zucman2019,
  title = {Global Wealth Inequality},
  author = {Zucman, Gabriel},
  year = {2019},
  month = aug,
  journal = {Annual Review of Economics},
  volume = {11},
  pages = {109--138},
  doi = {10.1146/annurev-economics-080218-025852},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-economics-080218-025852},
  abstract = {This article reviews the recent literature on the dynamics of global wealth inequality. I first reconcile available estimates of wealth inequality in the United States. Both surveys and tax data show that wealth inequality has increased dramatically since the 1980s, with a top 1\% wealth share of approximately 40\% in 2016 versus 25--30\% in the 1980s. Second, I discuss the fast-growing literature on wealth inequality across the world. Evidence points toward a rise in global wealth concentration: For China, Europe, and the United States combined, the top 1\% wealth share has increased from 28\% in 1980 to 33\% today, while the bottom 75\% share hovered around 10\%. Recent studies, however, may underestimate the level and rise of inequality, as financial globalization makes it increasingly hard to measure wealth at the top. I discuss how new data sources (leaks from financial institutions, tax amnesties, and macroeconomic statistics of tax havens) can be leveraged to better capture the wealth of the rich.},
  keywords = {Impacts of Wealth Inequality,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  url_data_file = {https://bibbase.org/network/publication/zucman-globalwealthinequalitydatafile-2019}
}

This article reviews the recent literature on the dynamics of global wealth inequality. I first reconcile available estimates of wealth inequality in the United States. Both surveys and tax data show that wealth inequality has increased dramatically since the 1980s, with a top 1% wealth share of approximately 40% in 2016 versus 25–30% in the 1980s. Second, I discuss the fast-growing literature on wealth inequality across the world. Evidence points toward a rise in global wealth concentration: For China, Europe, and the United States combined, the top 1% wealth share has increased from 28% in 1980 to 33% today, while the bottom 75% share hovered around 10%. Recent studies, however, may underestimate the level and rise of inequality, as financial globalization makes it increasingly hard to measure wealth at the top. I discuss how new data sources (leaks from financial institutions, tax amnesties, and macroeconomic statistics of tax havens) can be leveraged to better capture the wealth of the rich.

@article{Elinderetal2018,
  title = {Inheritance and Wealth Inequality: Evidence from Population Registers},
  author = {Elinder, Mikael and Erixson, Oscar and Waldenstr{\"o}m, Daniel},
  year = {2018},
  journal = {Journal of Public Economics},
  volume = {165},
  pages = {17--30},
  doi = {10.1016/J.JPUBECO.2018.06.012},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2018.06.012},
  abstract = {This paper uses population register data on inheritances and wealth in Sweden to estimate the causal impact of inheritances on wealth inequality. We find that inheritances reduce wealth inequality, as measured by the Gini coefficient or top wealth shares, but that they increase absolute dispersion. This duality in effects stems from the fact that even though richer heirs inherit larger amounts, the relative importance of the inheritance is larger for less wealthy heirs, who inherit more relative to their pre-inheritance wealth. This is in part driven by the fact that heirs do not inherit debts, which makes the distribution of inheritances more equal than the distribution of wealth among the heirs. Behavioral adjustments seem to mitigate the equalizing effect of inheritances, possibly through higher consumption among the poorer heirs. Inheritance taxation counteracts the equalizing inheritance effect, but redistribution of inheritance tax revenues can reverse this result and make the inheritance tax equalizing. Finally, we also find that inheritances increase intragenerational wealth mobility, but the effect is short-lived.},
  keywords = {Impacts of Wealth Inequality,Intergenerational Wealth,Methods of Estimation of Wealth Inequality,Wealth Taxation}
}

This paper uses population register data on inheritances and wealth in Sweden to estimate the causal impact of inheritances on wealth inequality. We find that inheritances reduce wealth inequality, as measured by the Gini coefficient or top wealth shares, but that they increase absolute dispersion. This duality in effects stems from the fact that even though richer heirs inherit larger amounts, the relative importance of the inheritance is larger for less wealthy heirs, who inherit more relative to their pre-inheritance wealth. This is in part driven by the fact that heirs do not inherit debts, which makes the distribution of inheritances more equal than the distribution of wealth among the heirs. Behavioral adjustments seem to mitigate the equalizing effect of inheritances, possibly through higher consumption among the poorer heirs. Inheritance taxation counteracts the equalizing inheritance effect, but redistribution of inheritance tax revenues can reverse this result and make the inheritance tax equalizing. Finally, we also find that inheritances increase intragenerational wealth mobility, but the effect is short-lived.

@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}
}

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.

@article{Novokmetetal2018,
  title = {From {{Soviets}} to Oligarchs: Inequality and Property in {{Russia}} 1905-2016},
  author = {Novokmet, Filip and Piketty, Thomas and Zucman, Gabriel},
  year = {2018},
  journal = {Journal of Economic Inequality},
  volume = {16},
  number = {2},
  pages = {189--223},
  doi = {10.1007/s10888-018-9383-0},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s10888-018-9383-0},
  abstract = {This paper combines national accounts, survey, wealth and fiscal data (including recently released tax data on high-income taxpayers) in order to provide consistent series on the accumulation and distribution of income and wealth in Russia from the Soviet period until the present day. We find that official survey-based measures vastly under-estimate the rise of inequality since 1990. According to our benchmark estimates, top income shares are now similar to (or higher than) the levels observed in the United States. We also find that inequality has increased substantially more in Russia than in China and other ex-communist countries in Eastern Europe. We relate this finding to the specific transition strategy followed in Russia. According to our benchmark estimates, the wealth held offshore by rich Russians is about three times larger than official net foreign reserves, and is comparable in magnitude to total household financial assets held in Russia.},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality,Methods of Estimation of Wealth Inequality,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  url_working_paper = {https://bibbase.org/network/publication/novokmet-piketty-zucman-fromsovietstooligarchsinequalityandpropertyinrussia19052016workingpaper-2018},
  url_appendix = {https://bibbase.org/network/publication/novokmet-piketty-zucman-fromsovietstooligarchsinequalityandpropertyinrussia19052016appendix-2017},
  url_main_figures_and_tables = {https://bibbase.org/network/publication/novokmet-piketty-zucman-fromsovietstooligarchsinequalityandpropertyinrussia19052016mainfiguresandtables-2018}
}

This paper combines national accounts, survey, wealth and fiscal data (including recently released tax data on high-income taxpayers) in order to provide consistent series on the accumulation and distribution of income and wealth in Russia from the Soviet period until the present day. We find that official survey-based measures vastly under-estimate the rise of inequality since 1990. According to our benchmark estimates, top income shares are now similar to (or higher than) the levels observed in the United States. We also find that inequality has increased substantially more in Russia than in China and other ex-communist countries in Eastern Europe. We relate this finding to the specific transition strategy followed in Russia. According to our benchmark estimates, the wealth held offshore by rich Russians is about three times larger than official net foreign reserves, and is comparable in magnitude to total household financial assets held in Russia.

@techreport{Novokmetetal2018a,
  type = {{{WID}}.World {{Working Paper}}},
  title = {From {{Soviets}} to Oligarchs: Inequality and Property in {{Russia}} 1905-2016 [Working Paper]},
  author = {Novokmet, Filip and Piketty, Thomas and Zucman, Gabriel},
  year = {2018},
  month = apr,
  number = {2017/09},
  institution = {World Inequality Database},
  url = {https://wid.world/document/soviets-oligarchs-inequality-property-russia-1905-2016/},
  urldate = {2024-05-30},
  abstract = {This paper combines national accounts, survey, wealth and fiscal data (including recently released tax data on high-income taxpayers) in order to provide consistent series on the accumulation and distribution of income and wealth in Russia from the Soviet period until the present day. We find that official survey-based measures vastly under-estimate the rise of inequality since 1990. According to our benchmark estimates, top income shares are now similar to (or higher than) the levels observed in the United States. We also find that inequality has increased substantially more in Russia than in China and other ex-communist countries in Eastern Europe. We relate this finding to the specific transition strategy followed in Russia. According to our benchmark estimates, the wealth held offshore by rich Russians is about three times larger than official net foreign reserves, and is comparable in magnitude to total household financial assets held in Russia.},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality,Methods of Estimation of Wealth Inequality},
  url_published_version = {https://bibbase.org/network/publication/novokmet-piketty-zucman-fromsovietstooligarchsinequalityandpropertyinrussia19052016-2018},
  url_appendix = {https://bibbase.org/network/publication/novokmet-piketty-zucman-fromsovietstooligarchsinequalityandpropertyinrussia19052016appendix-2017},
  url_main_figures_and_tables = {https://bibbase.org/network/publication/novokmet-piketty-zucman-fromsovietstooligarchsinequalityandpropertyinrussia19052016mainfiguresandtables-2018}
}

This paper combines national accounts, survey, wealth and fiscal data (including recently released tax data on high-income taxpayers) in order to provide consistent series on the accumulation and distribution of income and wealth in Russia from the Soviet period until the present day. We find that official survey-based measures vastly under-estimate the rise of inequality since 1990. According to our benchmark estimates, top income shares are now similar to (or higher than) the levels observed in the United States. We also find that inequality has increased substantially more in Russia than in China and other ex-communist countries in Eastern Europe. We relate this finding to the specific transition strategy followed in Russia. According to our benchmark estimates, the wealth held offshore by rich Russians is about three times larger than official net foreign reserves, and is comparable in magnitude to total household financial assets held in Russia.

@article{Pfeffer2018,
  title = {Growing Wealth Gaps in Education},
  author = {Pfeffer, Fabian T.},
  year = {2018},
  month = jun,
  journal = {Demography},
  volume = {55},
  number = {3},
  pages = {1033--1068},
  doi = {10.1007/s13524-018-0666-7},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-018-0666-7},
  abstract = {Prior research on trends in educational inequality has focused chiefly on changing gaps in educational attainment by family income or parental occupation. In contrast, this contribution provides the first assessment of trends in educational attainment by family wealth and suggests that we should be at least as concerned about growing wealth gaps in education. Despite overall growth in educational attainment and some signs of decreasing wealth gaps in high school attainment and college access, I find a large and rapidly increasing wealth gap in college attainment between cohorts born in the 1970s and 1980s, respectively. This growing wealth gap in higher educational attainment co-occurred with a rise in inequality in children's wealth backgrounds, although the analyses also suggest that the latter does not fully account for the former. Nevertheless, the results reported here raise concerns about the distribution of educational opportunity among today's children who grow up in a context of particularly extreme wealth inequality.},
  keywords = {Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

Prior research on trends in educational inequality has focused chiefly on changing gaps in educational attainment by family income or parental occupation. In contrast, this contribution provides the first assessment of trends in educational attainment by family wealth and suggests that we should be at least as concerned about growing wealth gaps in education. Despite overall growth in educational attainment and some signs of decreasing wealth gaps in high school attainment and college access, I find a large and rapidly increasing wealth gap in college attainment between cohorts born in the 1970s and 1980s, respectively. This growing wealth gap in higher educational attainment co-occurred with a rise in inequality in children's wealth backgrounds, although the analyses also suggest that the latter does not fully account for the former. Nevertheless, the results reported here raise concerns about the distribution of educational opportunity among today's children who grow up in a context of particularly extreme wealth inequality.

@article{Carrolletal2017,
  title = {The Distribution of Wealth and the Marginal Propensity to Consume},
  author = {Carroll, Christopher and Slacalek, Jiri and Tokuoka, Kiichi and White, Matthew N.},
  year = {2017},
  journal = {Quantitative Economics},
  volume = {8},
  number = {3},
  pages = {977--1020},
  doi = {10.3982/qe694},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.3982/QE694},
  abstract = {In a model calibrated to match micro- and macroeconomic evidence on house- hold income dynamics, we show that a modest degree of heterogeneity in house- hold preferences or beliefs is sufficient to match empirical measures of wealth inequality in the United States. The heterogeneity-augmented model's predic- tions are consistent with microeconomic evidence that suggests that the annual marginal propensity to consume (MPC) is much larger than the roughly 0?04 im- plied by commonly used macroeconomic models (even ones including some het- erogeneity). The high MPC arises because many consumers hold little wealth de- spite having a strong precautionary motive. Our model also plausibly predicts that the aggregate MPC can differ greatly depending on how the shock is distributed across households (depending, e.g., on their wealth, or employment status).},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

In a model calibrated to match micro- and macroeconomic evidence on house- hold income dynamics, we show that a modest degree of heterogeneity in house- hold preferences or beliefs is sufficient to match empirical measures of wealth inequality in the United States. The heterogeneity-augmented model's predic- tions are consistent with microeconomic evidence that suggests that the annual marginal propensity to consume (MPC) is much larger than the roughly 0?04 im- plied by commonly used macroeconomic models (even ones including some het- erogeneity). The high MPC arises because many consumers hold little wealth de- spite having a strong precautionary motive. Our model also plausibly predicts that the aggregate MPC can differ greatly depending on how the shock is distributed across households (depending, e.g., on their wealth, or employment status).

@article{Cesarinietal2017,
  title = {The Effect of Wealth on Individual and Household Labor Supply: Evidence from {{Swedish}} Lotteries},
  author = {Cesarini, David and Lindqvist, Erik and Notowidigdo, Matthew J. and {\"O}stling, Robert},
  year = {2017},
  journal = {American Economic Review},
  volume = {107},
  number = {12},
  pages = {3917--3946},
  doi = {10.1257/aer.20151589},
  url = {http://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20151589},
  abstract = {We study the effect of wealth on labor supply using the randomized assignment of monetary prizes in a large sample of Swedish lottery players. Winning a lottery prize modestly reduces earnings, with the reduction being immediate, persistent, and quite similar by age, education, and sex. A calibrated dynamic model implies lifetime marginal propensities to earn out of unearned income from -0.17 at age 20 to -0.04 at age 60, and labor supply elasticities in the lower range of previously reported estimates. The earnings response is stronger for winners than their spouses, which is inconsistent with unitary household labor supply models.},
  keywords = {Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

We study the effect of wealth on labor supply using the randomized assignment of monetary prizes in a large sample of Swedish lottery players. Winning a lottery prize modestly reduces earnings, with the reduction being immediate, persistent, and quite similar by age, education, and sex. A calibrated dynamic model implies lifetime marginal propensities to earn out of unearned income from -0.17 at age 20 to -0.04 at age 60, and labor supply elasticities in the lower range of previously reported estimates. The earnings response is stronger for winners than their spouses, which is inconsistent with unitary household labor supply models.

@article{Daviesetal2017a,
  title = {Wealth Inequality: Theory, Measurement and Decomposition},
  author = {Davies, James B. and Fortin, Nicole and Lemieux, Thomas},
  year = {2017},
  journal = {Canadian Journal of Economics / Revue canadienne d'{\'e}conomique},
  volume = {50},
  number = {5},
  pages = {1224--1261},
  doi = {10.1111/caje.12313},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/caje.12313},
  abstract = {This paper reviews the basic principles of inequality measurement, underlining the advantages and shortcomings of alternative measures from a theoretical standpoint and in the context of the study of the distribution of wealth. Adopting the two most popular measures, the Gini index and the P-shares, the paper documents wealth inequality in Canada using the 1999, 2005 and 2012 Survey of Financial Security (SFS). It carries out several decompositions with covariates, featuring DFL-type reweighting methods and Gini and P-shares RIF regressions. The latter parallel decompositions deepen our understanding of how changes in socio-demographic characteristics, including the compensating role of family formation and human capital, impact wealth inequality.},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality,Methods of Estimation of Wealth Inequality}
}

This paper reviews the basic principles of inequality measurement, underlining the advantages and shortcomings of alternative measures from a theoretical standpoint and in the context of the study of the distribution of wealth. Adopting the two most popular measures, the Gini index and the P-shares, the paper documents wealth inequality in Canada using the 1999, 2005 and 2012 Survey of Financial Security (SFS). It carries out several decompositions with covariates, featuring DFL-type reweighting methods and Gini and P-shares RIF regressions. The latter parallel decompositions deepen our understanding of how changes in socio-demographic characteristics, including the compensating role of family formation and human capital, impact wealth inequality.

@article{HallstenPfeffer2017,
  title = {Grand Advantage: Family Wealth and Grandchildren's Educational Achievement in {{Sweden}}},
  author = {H{\"a}llsten, Martin and Pfeffer, Fabian T.},
  year = {2017},
  month = apr,
  journal = {American Sociological Review},
  volume = {82},
  number = {2},
  pages = {328--360},
  doi = {10.1177/0003122417695791},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122417695791},
  abstract = {We study the role of family wealth for children's educational achievement using novel Swedish register data. In particular, we focus on the relationship between grandparents' wealth and their grandchildren's educational achievement. Doing so allows us to reliably establish the independent role of wealth in contributing to long-term inequalities in opportunity. We use regression models with extensive controls to account for observed socioeconomic characteristics of families, cousin fixed effects to net out potentially unobserved grandparent effects, and marginal structural models to account for endogenous selection. We find substantial associations between grandparents' wealth and their grandchildren's grade point averages (GPA) in the 9th grade that are only partly mediated by parents' socioeconomic characteristics and wealth. Our findings indicate that family wealth inequality---even in a comparatively egalitarian context like Sweden---has profound consequences for the distribution of opportunity across multiple generations. We posit that our estimates of the long-term consequences of wealth inequality may be conservative for nations other than Sweden, like the United States, where family wealth---in addition to its insurance and normative functions---allows the direct purchase of educational quality and access.},
  keywords = {Impacts of Wealth Inequality,Intergenerational Wealth}
}

We study the role of family wealth for children's educational achievement using novel Swedish register data. In particular, we focus on the relationship between grandparents' wealth and their grandchildren's educational achievement. Doing so allows us to reliably establish the independent role of wealth in contributing to long-term inequalities in opportunity. We use regression models with extensive controls to account for observed socioeconomic characteristics of families, cousin fixed effects to net out potentially unobserved grandparent effects, and marginal structural models to account for endogenous selection. We find substantial associations between grandparents' wealth and their grandchildren's grade point averages (GPA) in the 9th grade that are only partly mediated by parents' socioeconomic characteristics and wealth. Our findings indicate that family wealth inequality—even in a comparatively egalitarian context like Sweden—has profound consequences for the distribution of opportunity across multiple generations. We posit that our estimates of the long-term consequences of wealth inequality may be conservative for nations other than Sweden, like the United States, where family wealth—in addition to its insurance and normative functions—allows the direct purchase of educational quality and access.

@article{Killewaldetal2017,
  title = {Wealth Inequality and Accumulation},
  author = {Killewald, Alexandra and Pfeffer, Fabian T. and Schachner, Jared N.},
  year = {2017},
  journal = {Annual Review of Sociology},
  volume = {43},
  number = {1},
  pages = {379--404},
  doi = {10.1146/annurev-soc-060116-053331},
  url = {http://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-060116-053331},
  abstract = {Research on wealth inequality and accumulation and the data upon which it relies have expanded substantially in the twenty-first century. Although the field has experienced rapid growth, conceptual and methodological challenges remain. We begin by discussing two major unresolved methodological concerns facing wealth research: how to address challenges to causal inference posed by wealth's cumulative nature and how to operationalize net worth given its highly skewed distribution. Next, we provide an overview of data sources available for wealth research. To underscore the need for continued empirical attention to net worth, we review trends in wealth levels and inequality and evaluate wealth's distinctiveness as an indicator of social stratification. We then review recent empirical evidence on the effects of wealth on other social outcomes, as well as research on the determinants of wealth. We close with a list of promising avenues for future research on wealth, its causes, and its consequences.},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality,Methods of Estimation of Wealth Inequality}
}

Research on wealth inequality and accumulation and the data upon which it relies have expanded substantially in the twenty-first century. Although the field has experienced rapid growth, conceptual and methodological challenges remain. We begin by discussing two major unresolved methodological concerns facing wealth research: how to address challenges to causal inference posed by wealth's cumulative nature and how to operationalize net worth given its highly skewed distribution. Next, we provide an overview of data sources available for wealth research. To underscore the need for continued empirical attention to net worth, we review trends in wealth levels and inequality and evaluate wealth's distinctiveness as an indicator of social stratification. We then review recent empirical evidence on the effects of wealth on other social outcomes, as well as research on the determinants of wealth. We close with a list of promising avenues for future research on wealth, its causes, and its consequences.

@article{EadsTach2016,
  title = {Wealth and Inequality in the Stability of Romantic Relationships},
  author = {Eads, Alicia and Tach, Laura},
  year = {2016},
  journal = {RSF: Russell Sage Foundation Journal of Social Sciences},
  volume = {2},
  number = {6},
  pages = {197--224},
  doi = {10.7758/RSF.2016.2.6.10},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.7758/RSF.2016.2.6.10},
  abstract = {The family is a key institution that transmits inequality, and racial and socioeconomic inequalities in family life have grown markedly. We use data from the 1996 to 2008 panels of the Survey of Income and Program Participation to offer a comprehensive account of how wealth relates to family stability and how that relationship varies by union type, age cohort, and both type and amount of wealth. We find that liquid and illiquid assets and secured debts are associated with a decrease in the likelihood of dissolution, and that large unsecured debts are associated with an increase. These associations do not differ significantly for married and cohabiting couples. We find evidence of both the material and the symbolic importance of wealth for stability. We also find that wealth explains a significant degree of the racial inequality in family stability.},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

The family is a key institution that transmits inequality, and racial and socioeconomic inequalities in family life have grown markedly. We use data from the 1996 to 2008 panels of the Survey of Income and Program Participation to offer a comprehensive account of how wealth relates to family stability and how that relationship varies by union type, age cohort, and both type and amount of wealth. We find that liquid and illiquid assets and secured debts are associated with a decrease in the likelihood of dissolution, and that large unsecured debts are associated with an increase. These associations do not differ significantly for married and cohabiting couples. We find evidence of both the material and the symbolic importance of wealth for stability. We also find that wealth explains a significant degree of the racial inequality in family stability.

@article{HiltRahn2016,
  title = {Turning Citizens into Investors: Promoting Savings with Liberty Bonds during World War {{I}}},
  author = {Hilt, Eric and Rahn, Wendy M},
  year = {2016},
  journal = {RSF: Russell Sage Foundation Journal of Social Sciences},
  volume = {2},
  number = {6},
  pages = {23},
  doi = {10.7758/rsf.2016.2.6.05},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.7758/RSF.2016.2.6.05},
  abstract = {Increasing savings rates among households of modest incomes would strengthen their balance sheets and reduce wealth inequality. This paper analyzes one of the largest and most successful efforts to increase the savings of ordinary households in American history. The Liberty Bond drives of World War I persuaded tens of millions of Americans to buy government bonds, which were sold in denominations as low as \$50, and could be purchased in installment plans. Using newly collected data on the sales of Liberty Bonds at the county level, we analyze the factors that influenced the degree to which the bond drives were successful. The results highlight the importance of the participation of civil society organizations and local banks in market- ing the bonds. We discuss the implications of these findings for the design of modern programs to increase savings.},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

Increasing savings rates among households of modest incomes would strengthen their balance sheets and reduce wealth inequality. This paper analyzes one of the largest and most successful efforts to increase the savings of ordinary households in American history. The Liberty Bond drives of World War I persuaded tens of millions of Americans to buy government bonds, which were sold in denominations as low as $50, and could be purchased in installment plans. Using newly collected data on the sales of Liberty Bonds at the county level, we analyze the factors that influenced the degree to which the bond drives were successful. The results highlight the importance of the participation of civil society organizations and local banks in market- ing the bonds. We discuss the implications of these findings for the design of modern programs to increase savings.

@article{KillewaldBryan2016,
  title = {Does Your Home Make You Wealthy?},
  author = {Killewald, Alexandra and Bryan, Brielle},
  year = {2016},
  journal = {RSF: Russell Sage Foundation Journal of Social Sciences},
  volume = {2},
  number = {6},
  pages = {110--128},
  doi = {10.7758/rsf.2016.2.6.06},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.7758/RSF.2016.2.6.06},
  abstract = {Estimating the lifetime wealth consequences of homeownership is complicated by ongoing events, such as divorce or inheritance, that may shape both homeownership decisions and later-life wealth. We argue that prior research that has not accounted for these dynamic selection processes has overstated the causal effect of homeownership on wealth. Using NLSY79 data and marginal structural models, we find that each ad-ditional year of homeownership increases midlife wealth in 2008 by about \$6,800, more than 25 percent less than estimates from models that do not account for dynamic selection. Hispanic and African American wealth benefits from each homeownership year are 62 percent and 48 percent as large as those of whites, respectively. Homeownership remains wealth-enhancing in 2012, but shows smaller returns. Our results confirm homeownership's role in wealth accumulation and that variation in both homeownership rates and the wealth benefits of homeownership contribute to racial and ethnic disparities in midlife wealth holdings.},
  keywords = {Impacts of Wealth Inequality,Methods of Estimation of Wealth Inequality}
}

Estimating the lifetime wealth consequences of homeownership is complicated by ongoing events, such as divorce or inheritance, that may shape both homeownership decisions and later-life wealth. We argue that prior research that has not accounted for these dynamic selection processes has overstated the causal effect of homeownership on wealth. Using NLSY79 data and marginal structural models, we find that each ad-ditional year of homeownership increases midlife wealth in 2008 by about $6,800, more than 25 percent less than estimates from models that do not account for dynamic selection. Hispanic and African American wealth benefits from each homeownership year are 62 percent and 48 percent as large as those of whites, respectively. Homeownership remains wealth-enhancing in 2012, but shows smaller returns. Our results confirm homeownership's role in wealth accumulation and that variation in both homeownership rates and the wealth benefits of homeownership contribute to racial and ethnic disparities in midlife wealth holdings.

@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}
}

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.

@article{PfefferSchoeni2016,
  title = {How Wealth Inequality Shapes Our Future},
  author = {Pfeffer, Fabian T. and Schoeni, Robert F.},
  year = {2016},
  journal = {RSF: Russell Sage Foundation Journal of Social Sciences},
  volume = {2},
  number = {6},
  pages = {2--22},
  doi = {10.7758/RSF.2016.2.6.01},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.7758/RSF.2016.2.6.01},
  abstract = {The experiences of Lakesha, Liz, Mike, Mary, and Howard---and the papers in this volume--- illustrate that wealth and wealth inequality are intertwined with almost all aspects of social and economic life: child development, educa- tion and human capital, success in the labor market, marriage and divorce, health, con- sumption, retirement decisions and policies, macroeconomic conditions, and historical events. One goal of this volume is to address many of these dimensions together in one pub- lication to underscore the broad set of causes and consequences of wealth inequality. To that end, the authors bring perspectives from a range of academic disciplines, including eco- nomics, sociology, political science, history, demography, and health sciences. The ten manuscripts were identified through an open competition sponsored by the Russell Sage Foundation. Proposals were reviewed and each manuscript went through the normal peer review process. Although all of the ten articles are described here, the goal of this in- troduction is not to simply summarize the findings of those manuscripts. Instead, it is intended as a broad and hopefully accessible overview of relevant research and provides as well some original analyses to describe why wealth inequality is a central factor influencing the nation's economic, social, and political outcomes and processes and why it therefore deserves the increased attention of scholars, policymakers, and the public.},
  keywords = {Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

The experiences of Lakesha, Liz, Mike, Mary, and Howard—and the papers in this volume— illustrate that wealth and wealth inequality are intertwined with almost all aspects of social and economic life: child development, educa- tion and human capital, success in the labor market, marriage and divorce, health, con- sumption, retirement decisions and policies, macroeconomic conditions, and historical events. One goal of this volume is to address many of these dimensions together in one pub- lication to underscore the broad set of causes and consequences of wealth inequality. To that end, the authors bring perspectives from a range of academic disciplines, including eco- nomics, sociology, political science, history, demography, and health sciences. The ten manuscripts were identified through an open competition sponsored by the Russell Sage Foundation. Proposals were reviewed and each manuscript went through the normal peer review process. Although all of the ten articles are described here, the goal of this in- troduction is not to simply summarize the findings of those manuscripts. Instead, it is intended as a broad and hopefully accessible overview of relevant research and provides as well some original analyses to describe why wealth inequality is a central factor influencing the nation's economic, social, and political outcomes and processes and why it therefore deserves the increased attention of scholars, policymakers, and the public.

@article{Rauscher2016,
  title = {Passing It on: Parent-to-Adult Child Financial Transfers for School and Socioeconomic Attainment},
  author = {Rauscher, Emily},
  year = {2016},
  journal = {RSF: Russell Sage Foundation Journal of Social Sciences},
  volume = {2},
  number = {6},
  pages = {172--196},
  doi = {10.7758/RSF.2016.2.6.09},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.7758/RSF.2016.2.6.09},
  abstract = {As wealth inequality increases, the importance of parental financial transfers for socioeconomic attainment may also rise. Using data from the 2013 Panel Study of Income Dynamics Rosters and Transfers Module, this study investigates two questions: how parental financial transfers for education have changed over time, and what the relationship is between these transfers and adult socioeconomic outcomes. Results suggest that transfers for education have increased, have become more commonplace, and have become more dependent on parental wealth over time. Holding constant several individual and parental measures, the relationship between parental transfers for school and adult socioeconomic attainment is positive. This relationship holds when using three-stage least squares models to account for potential endogeneity of financial transfers for school. Overall, results support arguments that parental financial transfers for education facilitate the intergenerational transmission of socioeconomic standing.},
  keywords = {Impacts of Wealth Inequality,Intergenerational Wealth}
}

As wealth inequality increases, the importance of parental financial transfers for socioeconomic attainment may also rise. Using data from the 2013 Panel Study of Income Dynamics Rosters and Transfers Module, this study investigates two questions: how parental financial transfers for education have changed over time, and what the relationship is between these transfers and adult socioeconomic outcomes. Results suggest that transfers for education have increased, have become more commonplace, and have become more dependent on parental wealth over time. Holding constant several individual and parental measures, the relationship between parental transfers for school and adult socioeconomic attainment is positive. This relationship holds when using three-stage least squares models to account for potential endogeneity of financial transfers for school. Overall, results support arguments that parental financial transfers for education facilitate the intergenerational transmission of socioeconomic standing.

@article{RosenthalAustin2016,
  title = {The Dwindling Taxable Share of {{U}}.{{S}}. Corporate Stock},
  author = {Rosenthal, Steven M. and Austin, Lydia S.},
  year = {2016},
  journal = {Tax Notes},
  volume = {151},
  number = {6},
  pages = {923--934},
  doi = {10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.008782},
  url = {https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/dwindling-taxable-share-us-corporate-stock},
  abstract = {In this report, Rosenthal and Austin demonstrate that the share of U.S. stocks held by taxable ac- counts has declined sharply over the last 50 years, and they urge lawmakers to carefully consider this shareholder base erosion when determining how best to tax corporate earnings.},
  isbn = {8175481358},
  keywords = {Impacts of Wealth Inequality,Wealth Taxation}
}

In this report, Rosenthal and Austin demonstrate that the share of U.S. stocks held by taxable ac- counts has declined sharply over the last 50 years, and they urge lawmakers to carefully consider this shareholder base erosion when determining how best to tax corporate earnings.

@article{SaezZucman2016,
  title = {Wealth Inequality in the {{United States}} since 1913: Evidence from Capitalized Income Tax Data},
  author = {Saez, Emmanuel and Zucman, Gabriel},
  year = {2016},
  month = may,
  journal = {The Quarterly Journal of Economics},
  volume = {131},
  number = {2},
  pages = {519--578},
  doi = {10.1093/qje/qjw004},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjw004},
  abstract = {This paper combines income tax returns with macroeconomic household balance sheets to estimate the distribution of wealth in the United States since 1913. We estimate wealth by capitalizing the incomes reported by individual taxpayers, accounting for assets that do not generate taxable income. We successfully test our capitalization method in three micro datasets where we can observe both income and wealth: the Survey of Consumer Finance, linked estate and income tax returns, and foundations' tax records. We find that wealth concentration was high in the beginning of the twentieth century, fell from 1929 to 1978, and has continuously increased since then. The top 0.1\% wealth share has risen from 7\% in 1978 to 22\% in 2012, a level almost as high as in 1929. Top wealth-holders are younger today than in the 1960s and earn a higher fraction of the economy's labor income. The bottom 90\% wealth share first increased up to the mid-1980s and then steadily declined. The increase in wealth inequality in recent decades is due to the upsurge of top incomes combined with an increase in saving rate inequality. We explain how our findings can be reconciled with Survey of Consumer Finances and estate tax data.},
  keywords = {Impacts of Wealth Inequality,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Wealth Taxation},
  url_working_paper = {https://bibbase.org/network/publication/saez-zucman-wealthinequalityintheunitedstatessince1913evidencefromcapitalizedincometaxdata-2014},
  url_online_appendix = {https://bibbase.org/network/publication/saez-zucman-onlineappendixofwealthinequalityintheunitedstatessince1913evidencefromcapitalizedincometaxdata-2015},
  url_main_data = {https://bibbase.org/network/publication/saez-zucman-wealthinequalityintheunitedstatessince1913evidencefromcapitalizedincometaxdatamaindata-2015}
}

This paper combines income tax returns with macroeconomic household balance sheets to estimate the distribution of wealth in the United States since 1913. We estimate wealth by capitalizing the incomes reported by individual taxpayers, accounting for assets that do not generate taxable income. We successfully test our capitalization method in three micro datasets where we can observe both income and wealth: the Survey of Consumer Finance, linked estate and income tax returns, and foundations' tax records. We find that wealth concentration was high in the beginning of the twentieth century, fell from 1929 to 1978, and has continuously increased since then. The top 0.1% wealth share has risen from 7% in 1978 to 22% in 2012, a level almost as high as in 1929. Top wealth-holders are younger today than in the 1960s and earn a higher fraction of the economy's labor income. The bottom 90% wealth share first increased up to the mid-1980s and then steadily declined. The increase in wealth inequality in recent decades is due to the upsurge of top incomes combined with an increase in saving rate inequality. We explain how our findings can be reconciled with Survey of Consumer Finances and estate tax data.

@article{Schwartz2016,
  title = {Wealth and Secular Stagnation: The Role of Industrial Organization and Intellectual Property Rights},
  author = {Schwartz, Herman Mark},
  year = {2016},
  journal = {RSF: Russell Sage Foundation Journal of Social Sciences},
  volume = {2},
  number = {6},
  pages = {226--249},
  doi = {10.7758/RSF.2016.2.6.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.7758/RSF.2016.2.6.11},
  abstract = {Changes in firm strategy and structure partially explain the sources and consequences of rising wealth inequality in America. Combining use of state-created monopolies around intellectual property rights (IPRs) for profitability and firm-level strategies to transform their industrial organization by pushing physical capital and noncore labor outside the boundaries of the firm leads to rising levels of wealth and income inequality among firms as well as individuals. Income inequality among firms in turn reduces growth in productive investment and thus in aggregate demand. Slower growth reflexively deters firms from new investment, aggravating the shortfall in aggregate demand. Decreased protection for IPRs and increased protection for subcontracted workers would help increase aggregate demand and thus push growth back to its prior level, as well as reducing wealth and income inequality among individuals.},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

Changes in firm strategy and structure partially explain the sources and consequences of rising wealth inequality in America. Combining use of state-created monopolies around intellectual property rights (IPRs) for profitability and firm-level strategies to transform their industrial organization by pushing physical capital and noncore labor outside the boundaries of the firm leads to rising levels of wealth and income inequality among firms as well as individuals. Income inequality among firms in turn reduces growth in productive investment and thus in aggregate demand. Slower growth reflexively deters firms from new investment, aggravating the shortfall in aggregate demand. Decreased protection for IPRs and increased protection for subcontracted workers would help increase aggregate demand and thus push growth back to its prior level, as well as reducing wealth and income inequality among individuals.

@article{SykesMaroto2016,
  title = {A Wealth of Inequalities: Mass Incarceration, Employment, and Racial Disparities in {{U}}.{{S}}. Household Wealth, 1996 to 2011},
  author = {Sykes, Bryan L. and Maroto, Michelle},
  year = {2016},
  journal = {RSF: Russell Sage Foundation Journal of Social Sciences},
  volume = {2},
  number = {6},
  pages = {129--152},
  doi = {10.7758/RSF.2016.2.6.07},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.7758/RSF.2016.2.6.07},
  abstract = {Despite the strong relationship between the rise in mass incarceration over the last forty years and racial inequality in employment and wages, few studies have examined the long-term consequences and spillover effects of criminal justice contact on the black-white wealth gap in the United States. In this paper, we investigate the mechanisms whereby the local and distal incarceration of a family member affects household wealth, focusing on wealth disparities by race and education. Using data from the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP), the Current Population Survey, and the Survey of Inmates in State and Federal Correctional Facilities and Local Jails, we apply fixed-effects and probit models to estimate how a family member's incarceration influences household assets and debt over panel waves. We find that having an incarcerated family member reduced household assets by 64.3 percent and debt by 85.1 percent after we adjusted for the underrepresentation of institutionalization in SIPP data. We also discuss these findings in the context of broader racial disparities in wealth and employment. Our findings demonstrate how contemporary patterns of mass incarceration contribute to the maintenance of social inequality in wealth and form barriers to economic security for other household members.},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

Despite the strong relationship between the rise in mass incarceration over the last forty years and racial inequality in employment and wages, few studies have examined the long-term consequences and spillover effects of criminal justice contact on the black-white wealth gap in the United States. In this paper, we investigate the mechanisms whereby the local and distal incarceration of a family member affects household wealth, focusing on wealth disparities by race and education. Using data from the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP), the Current Population Survey, and the Survey of Inmates in State and Federal Correctional Facilities and Local Jails, we apply fixed-effects and probit models to estimate how a family member's incarceration influences household assets and debt over panel waves. We find that having an incarcerated family member reduced household assets by 64.3 percent and debt by 85.1 percent after we adjusted for the underrepresentation of institutionalization in SIPP data. We also discuss these findings in the context of broader racial disparities in wealth and employment. Our findings demonstrate how contemporary patterns of mass incarceration contribute to the maintenance of social inequality in wealth and form barriers to economic security for other household members.

@article{ThompsonConley2016,
  title = {Health Shocks and Social Drift: Examining the Relationship between Acute Illness and Family Wealth},
  author = {Thompson, Jason and Conley, Dalton},
  year = {2016},
  journal = {RSF: Russell Sage Foundation Journal of Social Sciences},
  volume = {2},
  number = {6},
  pages = {153--171},
  doi = {10.7758/rsf.2016.2.6.08},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.7758/RSF.2016.2.6.08},
  abstract = {This paper analyzes the extent to which health shocks play a role in black- white wealth inequality. Deploying data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics, we implement a first- differences identification strategy in estimating the effects of acute health events on changes in wealth for couples across waves of data from 1999 to 2011. We find that although such shocks affect both white and black families, they make black families more vulnerable financially as family heads near retirement. In comparison with their white counterparts, black families that experience an acute health shock are more likely to rely on social safety nets, such as food stamps and Social Security Disability Insurance. Findings hold implications across multiple policy arenas, including health-care and labor law.},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality,Intergenerational Wealth}
}

This paper analyzes the extent to which health shocks play a role in black- white wealth inequality. Deploying data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics, we implement a first- differences identification strategy in estimating the effects of acute health events on changes in wealth for couples across waves of data from 1999 to 2011. We find that although such shocks affect both white and black families, they make black families more vulnerable financially as family heads near retirement. In comparison with their white counterparts, black families that experience an acute health shock are more likely to rely on social safety nets, such as food stamps and Social Security Disability Insurance. Findings hold implications across multiple policy arenas, including health-care and labor law.

@book{Williams2016,
  title = {The Privileges of Wealth: Rising Inequality and the Growing Racial Divide},
  author = {Williams, Robert B.},
  year = {2016},
  journal = {The Priveledge of Wealth:},
  publisher = {Routledge},
  url = {https://www.crcpress.com/The-Privileges-of-Wealth-Rising-inequality-and-the-growing-racial-divide/Williams/p/book/9781138227507},
  abstract = {The American Dream is under assault. This threat results not from a lack of means, but from an unwillingness to share. Total household wealth increased by half in the past generation, but barely one fifth of American households captured this new wealth. For the rest, the dream of owning a home, gaining a secure retirement, and ensuring a college education for their kids is disappearing. Worse still, the widening wealth divide largely tracks our racial fault lines. The Privileges of Wealth investigates the impact of the rising concentration of wealth. It describes how households accumulate wealth along three pathways: household saving, appreciation of assets, and family gifts and inheritances. In addition, federal wealth policies, in the form of assorted tax deductions and credits, act as a fourth pathway that favors wealthy households. For those with means, each pathway operates as a virtuous cycle enabling families to build wealth with increasing ease. For those without, these same pathways are experienced as vicious cycles. The issue of wealth privilege is even more pronounced when examining the racial wealth gap. Typically, White households own ten times the wealth of Black or Latino families. This chasm results from the durability and transferability of wealth across generations and serves as a persistent legacy of our history of racial enslavement, expropriation, and exclusion. Current policies favoring the wealthy are simply cementing these wealth disparities. This book explains how these sources of wealth privilege are systemic features of our economy and the basis of rising disparities. The arguments and evidence presented here offer a compelling case for how our current policies are undermining the American Dream for most Americans while fortifying a White plutocracy, with dire consequences for us all.},
  isbn = {978-1-138-22750-7},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

The American Dream is under assault. This threat results not from a lack of means, but from an unwillingness to share. Total household wealth increased by half in the past generation, but barely one fifth of American households captured this new wealth. For the rest, the dream of owning a home, gaining a secure retirement, and ensuring a college education for their kids is disappearing. Worse still, the widening wealth divide largely tracks our racial fault lines. The Privileges of Wealth investigates the impact of the rising concentration of wealth. It describes how households accumulate wealth along three pathways: household saving, appreciation of assets, and family gifts and inheritances. In addition, federal wealth policies, in the form of assorted tax deductions and credits, act as a fourth pathway that favors wealthy households. For those with means, each pathway operates as a virtuous cycle enabling families to build wealth with increasing ease. For those without, these same pathways are experienced as vicious cycles. The issue of wealth privilege is even more pronounced when examining the racial wealth gap. Typically, White households own ten times the wealth of Black or Latino families. This chasm results from the durability and transferability of wealth across generations and serves as a persistent legacy of our history of racial enslavement, expropriation, and exclusion. Current policies favoring the wealthy are simply cementing these wealth disparities. This book explains how these sources of wealth privilege are systemic features of our economy and the basis of rising disparities. The arguments and evidence presented here offer a compelling case for how our current policies are undermining the American Dream for most Americans while fortifying a White plutocracy, with dire consequences for us all.

@book{Atkinson2015,
  title = {Inequality: What Can Be Done?},
  author = {Atkinson, A. B.},
  year = {2015},
  url = {https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674504769},
  abstract = {Inequality is one of our most urgent social problems. Curbed in the decades after World War II, it has recently returned with a vengeance. We all know the scale of the problem---talk about the 99\% and the 1\% is entrenched in public debate---but there has been little discussion of what we can do but despair. According to the distinguished economist Anthony Atkinson, however, we can do much more than skeptics imagine. Atkinson has long been at the forefront of research on inequality, and brings his theoretical and practical experience to bear on its diverse problems. He presents a comprehensive set of policies that could bring about a genuine shift in the distribution of income in developed countries. The problem, Atkinson shows, is not simply that the rich are getting richer. We are also failing to tackle poverty, and the economy is rapidly changing to leave the majority of people behind. To reduce inequality, we have to go beyond placing new taxes on the wealthy to fund existing programs. We need fresh ideas. Atkinson thus recommends ambitious new policies in five areas: technology, employment, social security, the sharing of capital, and taxation. He defends these against the common arguments and excuses for inaction: that intervention will shrink the economy, that globalization makes action impossible, and that new policies cannot be afforded. More than just a program for change, Atkinson's book is a voice of hope and informed optimism about the possibilities for political action.},
  isbn = {978-0-674-50476-9},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Estate Inheritance and Gift Taxes,Impacts of Wealth Inequality,Wealth Taxation}
}

Inequality is one of our most urgent social problems. Curbed in the decades after World War II, it has recently returned with a vengeance. We all know the scale of the problem—talk about the 99% and the 1% is entrenched in public debate—but there has been little discussion of what we can do but despair. According to the distinguished economist Anthony Atkinson, however, we can do much more than skeptics imagine. Atkinson has long been at the forefront of research on inequality, and brings his theoretical and practical experience to bear on its diverse problems. He presents a comprehensive set of policies that could bring about a genuine shift in the distribution of income in developed countries. The problem, Atkinson shows, is not simply that the rich are getting richer. We are also failing to tackle poverty, and the economy is rapidly changing to leave the majority of people behind. To reduce inequality, we have to go beyond placing new taxes on the wealthy to fund existing programs. We need fresh ideas. Atkinson thus recommends ambitious new policies in five areas: technology, employment, social security, the sharing of capital, and taxation. He defends these against the common arguments and excuses for inaction: that intervention will shrink the economy, that globalization makes action impossible, and that new policies cannot be afforded. More than just a program for change, Atkinson's book is a voice of hope and informed optimism about the possibilities for political action.

@misc{Chamberlain2015,
  title = {Wealth in {{Great Britain}} Wave 3: Relationship between Wealth, Income and Personal Well-Being, {{July}} 2011 to {{June}} 2012},
  author = {Chamberlain, Elaine},
  year = {2015},
  month = sep,
  url = {https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/personalandhouseholdfinances/debt/articles/wealthingreatbritainwave3/2015-09-04},
  urldate = {2022-02-23},
  keywords = {Impacts of Wealth Inequality},
  note = {Office for National Statistics}
}

@article{CowellVanKerm2015,
  title = {Wealth Inequality: A Survey},
  author = {Cowell, Frank and Van Kerm, Philippe},
  year = {2015},
  journal = {Journal of Econoimc Surveys},
  volume = {29},
  number = {4},
  pages = {671--710},
  doi = {10.1111/joes.12114},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12114},
  abstract = {We survey the issues involved in comparing wealth distributions and measuring wealth inequality with illustrations from the Eurosystem Household Finance and Consumption Survey.},
  keywords = {Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

We survey the issues involved in comparing wealth distributions and measuring wealth inequality with illustrations from the Eurosystem Household Finance and Consumption Survey.

@article{MorelliAtkinson2015,
  title = {Inequality and Crises Revisited},
  author = {Morelli, Salvatore and Atkinson, A. B.},
  year = {2015},
  journal = {Economia Politica},
  volume = {32},
  number = {1},
  pages = {31--51},
  publisher = {Springer International Publishing},
  doi = {10.1007/s40888-015-0006-y},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s40888-015-0006-y},
  abstract = {Recent debate has suggested that growing levels or high levels of inequality may be systematically associated with the occurrence of banking crises. Using the updated version of the Chartbook of Economic Inequality, this paper provides new empirical evidence on the 'level' hypothesis and reassesses the empirical validity of the 'growth' hypothesis. In line with previous work, the empirical analysis on the entire set of countries and years under investigation does not provide any conclusive and compelling statistical support to either of the hypotheses. However, the apparent statistical insignificance of the findings does not rule out the economic relevance of the question at hand, given that the hypotheses cannot be rejected for important crises and countries such as the US and the UK. Hence, the overall evidence is far from being conclusive and there are several reasons to shed further light on this important research topic.},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

Recent debate has suggested that growing levels or high levels of inequality may be systematically associated with the occurrence of banking crises. Using the updated version of the Chartbook of Economic Inequality, this paper provides new empirical evidence on the 'level' hypothesis and reassesses the empirical validity of the 'growth' hypothesis. In line with previous work, the empirical analysis on the entire set of countries and years under investigation does not provide any conclusive and compelling statistical support to either of the hypotheses. However, the apparent statistical insignificance of the findings does not rule out the economic relevance of the question at hand, given that the hypotheses cannot be rejected for important crises and countries such as the US and the UK. Hence, the overall evidence is far from being conclusive and there are several reasons to shed further light on this important research topic.

@article{Nishietal2015,
  title = {Inequality and Visibility of Wealth in Experimental Social Networks},
  author = {Nishi, Akihiro and Shirado, Hirokazu and Rand, David G. and Christakis, Nicholas A.},
  year = {2015},
  journal = {Nature},
  volume = {526},
  pages = {426--429},
  publisher = {Nature Publishing Group},
  doi = {10.1038/nature15392},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1038/nature15392},
  abstract = {Humans prefer relatively equal distributions of resources, yet societies have varying degrees of economic inequality6 . To invest- igate some of the possible determinants and consequences of inequality, here we perform experiments involving a networked public goods game inwhich subjects interact and gainor losewealth. Subjects (n=1,462) were randomly assigned to have higher or lower initial endowments, and were embedded within social networks with three levels of economic inequality (Gini coefficient50.0, 0.2, and 0.4). In addition, wemanipulated the visibility ofthe wealth of network neighbours. We show that wealth visibility facilitates the downstream consequences of initial inequality---in initially more unequal situations, wealth visibility leads to greater inequality than when wealth is invisible. This result reflects a heterogeneous response to visibility in richer versus poorer subjects. We also find that making wealth visible has adverse welfare consequences, yield- ing lower levels of overall cooperation, inter-connectedness, and wealth. High initial levels of economic inequality alone, however, have relatively few deleterious welfare effects.},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

Humans prefer relatively equal distributions of resources, yet societies have varying degrees of economic inequality6 . To invest- igate some of the possible determinants and consequences of inequality, here we perform experiments involving a networked public goods game inwhich subjects interact and gainor losewealth. Subjects (n=1,462) were randomly assigned to have higher or lower initial endowments, and were embedded within social networks with three levels of economic inequality (Gini coefficient50.0, 0.2, and 0.4). In addition, wemanipulated the visibility ofthe wealth of network neighbours. We show that wealth visibility facilitates the downstream consequences of initial inequality—in initially more unequal situations, wealth visibility leads to greater inequality than when wealth is invisible. This result reflects a heterogeneous response to visibility in richer versus poorer subjects. We also find that making wealth visible has adverse welfare consequences, yield- ing lower levels of overall cooperation, inter-connectedness, and wealth. High initial levels of economic inequality alone, however, have relatively few deleterious welfare effects.

@article{RehmSchnetzer2015,
  title = {Property and Power: Lessons from Piketty and New Insights from the {{HFCS}}},
  author = {Rehm, Miriam and Schnetzer, Matthias},
  year = {2015},
  journal = {European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies: Intervention},
  volume = {12},
  number = {2},
  pages = {204--219},
  publisher = {Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.4337/ejeep.2015.02.06},
  abstract = {This paper argues that the cumulative causation processes between wealth and power risk leading to an escalation of wealth inequality. Piketty's historical description of this development from administrative data for individual countries is corroborated with new survey data for the eurozone, the Household Finance and Consumption Survey (HFCS). Wealth is extremely unequally distributed in the eurozone -- much more so than income. Furthermore, we provide a multi-faceted picture of wealth distribution in Europe using the socio-economic characteristics available in the HFCS, and we show that inheritances are the single most important factor for wealth inequality. The structural power to shape economic and political institutions is thus ever more concentrated. Finally, we discuss three channels through which the unequal distribution of private assets may affect power relations and economic activity.},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality,Methods of Estimation of Wealth Inequality}
}

This paper argues that the cumulative causation processes between wealth and power risk leading to an escalation of wealth inequality. Piketty's historical description of this development from administrative data for individual countries is corroborated with new survey data for the eurozone, the Household Finance and Consumption Survey (HFCS). Wealth is extremely unequally distributed in the eurozone – much more so than income. Furthermore, we provide a multi-faceted picture of wealth distribution in Europe using the socio-economic characteristics available in the HFCS, and we show that inheritances are the single most important factor for wealth inequality. The structural power to shape economic and political institutions is thus ever more concentrated. Finally, we discuss three channels through which the unequal distribution of private assets may affect power relations and economic activity.

@book{Piketty2014,
  title = {Capital in the Twenty-First Century},
  author = {Piketty, Thomas},
  translator = {Goldhammer, Arthur},
  year = {2014},
  publisher = {The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press},
  address = {Cambridge, MA},
  url = {http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/en/capital21c2},
  urldate = {2022-02-25},
  isbn = {978-0-674-24507-5},
  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}
}

@techreport{Salverdaetal2013,
  type = {{{GINI Country Reports}}},
  title = {Growing Inequalities and Their Impacts in the Netherlands},
  author = {Salverda, Wiemer and Haas, Christina and {de Graaf-Zijl}, Marloes and Lancee, Bram and Notten, Natascha and Ooms, Tahnee},
  year = {2013},
  month = sep,
  number = {Netherlands},
  institution = {Growing Inequalities' Impacts},
  url = {https://hdl.handle.net/11245/1.468739},
  abstract = {GI-NI Project country report for the Netherlands},
  keywords = {Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

GI-NI Project country report for the Netherlands

@book{SmileyWest2012,
  title = {The Rich and the Rest of Us},
  author = {Smiley, Tavis and West, Cornel},
  year = {2012},
  publisher = {SmileyBooks},
  address = {New York},
  url = {https://www.hayhouse.com/the-rich-and-the-rest-of-us-1},
  abstract = {Record unemployment and rampant corporate avarice, empty houses but homeless families, dwindling opportunities in an increasingly paralyzed nation---these are the realities of 21st-century America, land of the free and home of the new middle class poor. Award-winning broadcaster Tavis Smiley and Dr. Cornel West, one of the nation's leading democratic intellectuals, co-hosts of Public Radio's Smiley \& West, now take on the "P" word---poverty. The Rich and the Rest of Us is the next step in the journey that began with "The Poverty Tour: A Call to Conscience." Smiley and West's 18-city bus tour gave voice to the plight of impoverished Americans of all races, colors, and creeds. With 150 million Americans persistently poor or near poor, the highest numbers in over five decades, Smiley and West argue that now is the time to confront the underlying conditions of systemic poverty in America before it's too late.By placing the eradication of poverty in the context of the nation's greatest moments of social transformation--- such as the abolition of slavery, woman's suffrage, and the labor and civil rights movements---ending poverty is sure to emerge as America's 21st -century civil rights struggle.As the middle class disappears and the safety net is shredded, Smiley and West, building on the legacy of Martin Luther King, Jr., ask us to confront our fear and complacency with 12 poverty changing ideas. They challenge us to re-examine our assumptions about poverty in America---what it really is and how to eliminate it now.},
  isbn = {978-1-4019-4064-5},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

Record unemployment and rampant corporate avarice, empty houses but homeless families, dwindling opportunities in an increasingly paralyzed nation—these are the realities of 21st-century America, land of the free and home of the new middle class poor. Award-winning broadcaster Tavis Smiley and Dr. Cornel West, one of the nation's leading democratic intellectuals, co-hosts of Public Radio's Smiley & West, now take on the "P" word—poverty. The Rich and the Rest of Us is the next step in the journey that began with "The Poverty Tour: A Call to Conscience." Smiley and West's 18-city bus tour gave voice to the plight of impoverished Americans of all races, colors, and creeds. With 150 million Americans persistently poor or near poor, the highest numbers in over five decades, Smiley and West argue that now is the time to confront the underlying conditions of systemic poverty in America before it's too late.By placing the eradication of poverty in the context of the nation's greatest moments of social transformation— such as the abolition of slavery, woman's suffrage, and the labor and civil rights movements—ending poverty is sure to emerge as America's 21st -century civil rights struggle.As the middle class disappears and the safety net is shredded, Smiley and West, building on the legacy of Martin Luther King, Jr., ask us to confront our fear and complacency with 12 poverty changing ideas. They challenge us to re-examine our assumptions about poverty in America—what it really is and how to eliminate it now.

@incollection{Davies2011,
  title = {Wealth and Economic Inequality},
  booktitle = {The Oxford Handbook of Economic Inequality},
  author = {Davies, James B.},
  year = {2011},
  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.},
  chapter = {6},
  isbn = {978-0-19-174362-7},
  keywords = {Cross-National Comparisons,Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

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.

@incollection{GurievRachinsky2008,
  title = {The Evolution of Personal Wealth in the Former {{Soviet Union}} and {{Central}} and {{Eastern Europe}}},
  booktitle = {Personal Wealth from a Global Perspective},
  author = {Guriev, Sergei and Rachinsky, Andrei},
  editor = {Davies, James B.},
  year = {2008},
  month = oct,
  series = {{{UNU-WIDER}} Studies in Development Economics},
  pages = {134--149},
  publisher = {Oxford University Press},
  address = {Oxford},
  doi = {10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199548880.003.0007},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199548880.003.0007},
  isbn = {978-0-19-172076-5},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality},
  chapter = {7}
}

@article{Zimmer2008,
  title = {Poverty, Wealth Inequality and Health among Older Adults in Rural Cambodia},
  author = {Zimmer, Zachary},
  year = {2008},
  journal = {Social Science \& Medicine},
  volume = {66},
  number = {1},
  pages = {57--71},
  doi = {10.1016/J.SOCSCIMED.2007.08.032},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.08.032},
  abstract = {Little research exists on health determinants among adults living in economically deprived regions despite the fact that these areas comprise a good part of the world. This paper examines the distribution of wealth then tests associations between wealth inequality and a variety of health outcomes, among older adults, in one of the world's poorest regions---rural Cambodia. Data from the 2004 Survey of the Elderly in Cambodia are employed. Using a disablement framework to conceptualize health, associations between four health components and a wealth inequality measure are tested. The wealth inequality measure is based on an index that operationalizes wealth as ownership of household assets and household structural components. Results confirm difficult economic conditions in rural Cambodia. The lowest wealth quintile lives in households that own nothing, while the next quintiles are only slightly better off. Nevertheless, logistic regressions that adjust for other covariates indicate heterogeneity in health across quintiles that appear qualitatively similar, with the bottom quintiles reporting the most health problems. An exception is disability, which presents a U-shaped association. It is difficult to determine mechanisms behind the relationship using cross-sectional data, but the paper speculates on possible causal directions, both from wealth to health and vice-versa. The analysis suggests the ability to generalize the relationship between wealth inequality and health to extremely poor populations as a very small difference in wealth makes a relatively large difference with respect to health associations among those in meager surroundings.},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

Little research exists on health determinants among adults living in economically deprived regions despite the fact that these areas comprise a good part of the world. This paper examines the distribution of wealth then tests associations between wealth inequality and a variety of health outcomes, among older adults, in one of the world's poorest regions—rural Cambodia. Data from the 2004 Survey of the Elderly in Cambodia are employed. Using a disablement framework to conceptualize health, associations between four health components and a wealth inequality measure are tested. The wealth inequality measure is based on an index that operationalizes wealth as ownership of household assets and household structural components. Results confirm difficult economic conditions in rural Cambodia. The lowest wealth quintile lives in households that own nothing, while the next quintiles are only slightly better off. Nevertheless, logistic regressions that adjust for other covariates indicate heterogeneity in health across quintiles that appear qualitatively similar, with the bottom quintiles reporting the most health problems. An exception is disability, which presents a U-shaped association. It is difficult to determine mechanisms behind the relationship using cross-sectional data, but the paper speculates on possible causal directions, both from wealth to health and vice-versa. The analysis suggests the ability to generalize the relationship between wealth inequality and health to extremely poor populations as a very small difference in wealth makes a relatively large difference with respect to health associations among those in meager surroundings.

@article{Hongetal2006,
  title = {Relationship between Household Wealth Inequality and Chronic Childhood Under-Nutrition in Bangladesh},
  author = {Hong, Rathavuth and Banta, James E. and Betancourt, Jose A.},
  year = {2006},
  journal = {International Journal for Equity in Health},
  volume = {5},
  number = {1},
  pages = {15},
  publisher = {BioMed Central},
  doi = {10.1186/1475-9276-5-15},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-9276-5-15},
  abstract = {Background: Household food insecurity and under-nutrition remain critically important in developing countries struggling to emerge from the scourge of poverty, where historically, improvements in economic conditions have benefited only certain privileged groups, causing growing inequality in health and healthcare among the population. Methods: Utilizing information from 5,977 children aged 0-59 months included in the 2004 Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey , this study examined the relationship between household wealth inequality and chronic childhood under-nutrition. A child is defined as being chronically undernourished or whose growth rate is adversely stunted, if his or her z-score of height-for-age is more than two standard deviations below the median of international reference. Household wealth status is measured by an established index based on household ownership of durable assets. This study utilized multivariate logistic regressions to estimate the effect of household wealth status on adverse childhood growth rate. Results: The results indicate that children in the poorest 20\% of households are more than three time as likely to suffer from adverse growth rate stunting as children from the wealthiest 20\% of households (OR=3.6; 95\% CI: 3.0, 4.3). The effect of household wealth status remain significantly large when the analysis was adjusted for a child's multiple birth status, age, gender, antenatal care, delivery assistance, birth order, and duration that the child was breastfed; mother's age at childbirth, nutritional status, education; household access to safe drinking water, arsenic in drinking water, access to a hygienic toilet facility, cooking fuel cleanliness, residence, and geographic location (OR=2.4; 95\% CI: 1.8, 3.2). Conclusion: This study concludes that household wealth inequality is strongly associated with childhood adverse growth rate stunting. Reducing poverty and making services more available and accessible to the poor are essential to improving overall childhood health and nutritional status in Bangladesh.},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

Background: Household food insecurity and under-nutrition remain critically important in developing countries struggling to emerge from the scourge of poverty, where historically, improvements in economic conditions have benefited only certain privileged groups, causing growing inequality in health and healthcare among the population. Methods: Utilizing information from 5,977 children aged 0-59 months included in the 2004 Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey , this study examined the relationship between household wealth inequality and chronic childhood under-nutrition. A child is defined as being chronically undernourished or whose growth rate is adversely stunted, if his or her z-score of height-for-age is more than two standard deviations below the median of international reference. Household wealth status is measured by an established index based on household ownership of durable assets. This study utilized multivariate logistic regressions to estimate the effect of household wealth status on adverse childhood growth rate. Results: The results indicate that children in the poorest 20% of households are more than three time as likely to suffer from adverse growth rate stunting as children from the wealthiest 20% of households (OR=3.6; 95% CI: 3.0, 4.3). The effect of household wealth status remain significantly large when the analysis was adjusted for a child's multiple birth status, age, gender, antenatal care, delivery assistance, birth order, and duration that the child was breastfed; mother's age at childbirth, nutritional status, education; household access to safe drinking water, arsenic in drinking water, access to a hygienic toilet facility, cooking fuel cleanliness, residence, and geographic location (OR=2.4; 95% CI: 1.8, 3.2). Conclusion: This study concludes that household wealth inequality is strongly associated with childhood adverse growth rate stunting. Reducing poverty and making services more available and accessible to the poor are essential to improving overall childhood health and nutritional status in Bangladesh.

@article{HongMishra2006,
  title = {Effect of Wealth Inequality on Chronic Under-Nutrition in Cambodian Children},
  author = {Hong, Rathavuth and Mishra, Vinod},
  year = {2006},
  journal = {Journal of Health, Population and Nutrition},
  volume = {24},
  number = {1},
  eprint = {23499271},
  eprinttype = {jstor},
  pages = {89--99},
  url = {https://www.jstor.org/stable/23499271},
  abstract = {The problems of food insecurity and under-nutrition remain particularly severe in countries recovering from recent wars or civil unrest, where improvements in economic conditions have tended to benefit the advantaged groups and resulted in widespread inequalities in health. Using information on 3,235 children aged 0-59 month(s) included in the 2000 Cambodia Demographic and Health Survey, this study examined how economic inequality was associated with inequalities in chronic childhood under-nutrition. An under-nourished (stunted) child was defined as having his/her height-for-age more than two standard deviations below the reference median. Household wealth status was measured by an index based on household ownership of durable assets. Binary and multinomial logistic regressions were used for estimating the effects of household wealth status on moderate and severe stunting. The results indicated that children in the poorest 20\% households were more than twice as likely to suffer from stunting as children in the richest 20\% households (odds ratio [OR]=2.54; 95\% confidence interval [CI] 1.91-3.39). Adjusting for child's age, sex, birth order, and duration of breastfeeding; age of mother at childbirth, body mass index, and education; and household access to safe drinking-water, hygienic toilet facility, residence, and geographic region made little difference to this effect (OR=2.05; 95\% CI 1.28-3.28). The adjusted effect of wealth status was somewhat stronger on severe stunting (relative risk ratio [RRR]=2.26; 95\% CI 1.22-4.18) than on moderate stunting (RRR=1.89; 95\% CI 1.12-3.20). The study concludes that wealth inequality is strongly associated with chronic childhod under-nutrition and emphasizes that reducing poverty and making services more accessible to the poor will be key to improving the health and nutritional status of children in Cambodia.},
  keywords = {Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

The problems of food insecurity and under-nutrition remain particularly severe in countries recovering from recent wars or civil unrest, where improvements in economic conditions have tended to benefit the advantaged groups and resulted in widespread inequalities in health. Using information on 3,235 children aged 0-59 month(s) included in the 2000 Cambodia Demographic and Health Survey, this study examined how economic inequality was associated with inequalities in chronic childhood under-nutrition. An under-nourished (stunted) child was defined as having his/her height-for-age more than two standard deviations below the reference median. Household wealth status was measured by an index based on household ownership of durable assets. Binary and multinomial logistic regressions were used for estimating the effects of household wealth status on moderate and severe stunting. The results indicated that children in the poorest 20% households were more than twice as likely to suffer from stunting as children in the richest 20% households (odds ratio [OR]=2.54; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.91-3.39). Adjusting for child's age, sex, birth order, and duration of breastfeeding; age of mother at childbirth, body mass index, and education; and household access to safe drinking-water, hygienic toilet facility, residence, and geographic region made little difference to this effect (OR=2.05; 95% CI 1.28-3.28). The adjusted effect of wealth status was somewhat stronger on severe stunting (relative risk ratio [RRR]=2.26; 95% CI 1.22-4.18) than on moderate stunting (RRR=1.89; 95% CI 1.12-3.20). The study concludes that wealth inequality is strongly associated with chronic childhod under-nutrition and emphasizes that reducing poverty and making services more accessible to the poor will be key to improving the health and nutritional status of children in Cambodia.

@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}
}

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.

@book{DunfordGreco2005,
  title = {After the Three Italies: Wealth, Inequality and Industrial Change},
  author = {Dunford, Michael and Greco, Lidia},
  year = {2005},
  publisher = {Blackwell Publishing},
  doi = {10.1002/9780470761113},
  url = {http://doi.org/10.1002/9780470761113},
  abstract = {After the Three Italies develops a new political economy approach to the analysis of comparative regional development and the territorial division of labour and exemplifies it through an up-to-date account of Italian industrial change and regional economic performance.},
  isbn = {1-4051-7853-1},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality}
}

After the Three Italies develops a new political economy approach to the analysis of comparative regional development and the territorial division of labour and exemplifies it through an up-to-date account of Italian industrial change and regional economic performance.

@article{Meh2005,
  title = {Entrepreneurship, Wealth Inequality, and Taxation},
  author = {Meh, C{\'e}saire A.},
  year = {2005},
  journal = {Review of Economic Dynamics},
  volume = {8},
  number = {3},
  pages = {688--719},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  doi = {10.1016/J.RED.2005.03.001},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.red.2005.03.001},
  abstract = {This paper investigates the importance of entrepreneurship when quantifying the aggregate and distributional effects of switching from a progressive to a proportional income tax system. I find that the distributional consequences of the tax reform in a model economy with entrepreneurs contrast markedly from those in a model economy with no entrepreneurs. The elimination of progressive taxation has a negligible effect on wealth inequality when entrepreneurship is considered but has a large effect when entrepreneurship is omitted. The framework used is an occupational choice model, in which the decision to become an entrepreneur is determined by the ability to manage a firm and by asset holdings. The calibrated economy can account for the high savings rate of entrepreneurs relative to non-entrepreneurs, and the high concentration of wealth observed in the data.},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality,Wealth Taxation}
}

This paper investigates the importance of entrepreneurship when quantifying the aggregate and distributional effects of switching from a progressive to a proportional income tax system. I find that the distributional consequences of the tax reform in a model economy with entrepreneurs contrast markedly from those in a model economy with no entrepreneurs. The elimination of progressive taxation has a negligible effect on wealth inequality when entrepreneurship is considered but has a large effect when entrepreneurship is omitted. The framework used is an occupational choice model, in which the decision to become an entrepreneur is determined by the ability to manage a firm and by asset holdings. The calibrated economy can account for the high savings rate of entrepreneurs relative to non-entrepreneurs, and the high concentration of wealth observed in the data.

@article{Alvarez-PelaezDiaz2005,
  title = {Minimum Consumption and Transitional Dynamics in Wealth Distribution},
  author = {{\'A}lvarez-Pel{\'a}ez, Mar{\'i}a J. and D{\'i}az, Antonia},
  year = {2005},
  journal = {Journal of Monetary Economics},
  volume = {52},
  number = {3},
  pages = {633--667},
  doi = {10.1016/j.jmoneco.2004.06.004},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmoneco.2004.06.004},
  abstract = {This paper investigates quantitatively how initial wealth holding differences across households are propagated through time in a one sector growth model economy. A key feature of the model is that household consumption cannot fall below a positive level each period. The existence of a minimum consumption requirement implies that the Intertemporal Elasticity of Substitution not only differs across households but also changes differently over time. This model is calibrated to match some key aggregate statistics of the U.S. economy. We find that, as in the data, the wealth distribution in our benchmark model economy exhibits a (brief) period of increasing inequality, a short period in which inequality diminishes and a steady level of inequality along the balanced growth path. However, our model illustrates that the evolution of inequality is very sensitive to the length of the transition path. Additionally, our model predicts an upsurge in wealth inequality following the productivity slowdown in the 1970s.},
  keywords = {Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

This paper investigates quantitatively how initial wealth holding differences across households are propagated through time in a one sector growth model economy. A key feature of the model is that household consumption cannot fall below a positive level each period. The existence of a minimum consumption requirement implies that the Intertemporal Elasticity of Substitution not only differs across households but also changes differently over time. This model is calibrated to match some key aggregate statistics of the U.S. economy. We find that, as in the data, the wealth distribution in our benchmark model economy exhibits a (brief) period of increasing inequality, a short period in which inequality diminishes and a steady level of inequality along the balanced growth path. However, our model illustrates that the evolution of inequality is very sensitive to the length of the transition path. Additionally, our model predicts an upsurge in wealth inequality following the productivity slowdown in the 1970s.

@book{Shapiro2004,
  title = {The Hidden Cost of Being {{African American}}: How Wealth Perpetuates Inequality},
  author = {Shapiro, Thomas M.},
  year = {2004},
  publisher = {Oxford University Press},
  address = {New York},
  url = {https://global.oup.com/ushe/product/the-hidden-cost-of-being-african-american-9780195181388},
  abstract = {Over the past three decades, racial prejudice in America has declined significantly and many African American families have seen a steady rise in employment and annual income. But alongside these encouraging signs, Thomas Shapiro argues in The Hidden Cost of Being African American, fundamental levels of racial inequality persist, particularly in the area of asset accumulation--inheritance, savings accounts, stocks, bonds, home equity, and other investments. Shapiro reveals how the lack of these family assets along with continuing racial discrimination in crucial areas like homeownership dramatically impact the everyday lives of many black families, reversing gains earned in schools and on jobs, and perpetuating the cycle of poverty in which far too many find themselves trapped. Shapiro uses a combination of in-depth interviews with almost 200 families from Los Angeles, Boston, and St. Louis, and national survey data with 10,000 families to show how racial inequality is transmitted across generations. We see how those families with private wealth are able to move up from generation to generation, relocating to safer communities with better schools and passing along the accompanying advantages to their children. At the same time those without significant wealth remain trapped in communities that don't allow them to move up, no matter how hard they work. Shapiro challenges white middle class families to consider how the privileges that wealth brings not only improve their own chances but also hold back people who don't have them. This "wealthfare" is a legacy of inequality that, if unchanged, will project social injustice far into the future. Showing that over half of black families fall below the asset poverty line at the beginning of the new century, The Hidden Cost of Being African American will challenge all Americans to reconsider what must be done to end racial inequality.},
  isbn = {978-0-19-518138-8},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality,Intergenerational Wealth}
}

Over the past three decades, racial prejudice in America has declined significantly and many African American families have seen a steady rise in employment and annual income. But alongside these encouraging signs, Thomas Shapiro argues in The Hidden Cost of Being African American, fundamental levels of racial inequality persist, particularly in the area of asset accumulation–inheritance, savings accounts, stocks, bonds, home equity, and other investments. Shapiro reveals how the lack of these family assets along with continuing racial discrimination in crucial areas like homeownership dramatically impact the everyday lives of many black families, reversing gains earned in schools and on jobs, and perpetuating the cycle of poverty in which far too many find themselves trapped. Shapiro uses a combination of in-depth interviews with almost 200 families from Los Angeles, Boston, and St. Louis, and national survey data with 10,000 families to show how racial inequality is transmitted across generations. We see how those families with private wealth are able to move up from generation to generation, relocating to safer communities with better schools and passing along the accompanying advantages to their children. At the same time those without significant wealth remain trapped in communities that don't allow them to move up, no matter how hard they work. Shapiro challenges white middle class families to consider how the privileges that wealth brings not only improve their own chances but also hold back people who don't have them. This "wealthfare" is a legacy of inequality that, if unchanged, will project social injustice far into the future. Showing that over half of black families fall below the asset poverty line at the beginning of the new century, The Hidden Cost of Being African American will challenge all Americans to reconsider what must be done to end racial inequality.

@article{Gollier2001,
  title = {Wealth Inequality and Asset Pricing},
  author = {Gollier, Christian},
  year = {2001},
  journal = {The Review of Economic Studies},
  volume = {68},
  number = {1},
  pages = {181--203},
  doi = {10.1111/1467-937X.00165},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-937X.00165},
  abstract = {In an Arrow-Debreu exchange economy with identical agents except for their initial endowment, we examine how wealth inequality affects the equilibrium level of the equity premium and the risk-free rate. We first show that wealth inequality raises the equity premium if and only if the inverse of absolute risk aversion is concave in wealth. We then show that the equilibrium risk-free rate is reduced by wealth inequality if the inverse of the coefficient of absolute prudence is concave. We also prove that the combination of a small uninsurable background risk with wealth inequality biases asset pricing towards a larger equity premium and a smaller risk-free rate.},
  keywords = {Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

In an Arrow-Debreu exchange economy with identical agents except for their initial endowment, we examine how wealth inequality affects the equilibrium level of the equity premium and the risk-free rate. We first show that wealth inequality raises the equity premium if and only if the inverse of absolute risk aversion is concave in wealth. We then show that the equilibrium risk-free rate is reduced by wealth inequality if the inverse of the coefficient of absolute prudence is concave. We also prove that the combination of a small uninsurable background risk with wealth inequality biases asset pricing towards a larger equity premium and a smaller risk-free rate.

@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}
}

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.

@incollection{Bardhanetal2000,
  title = {Wealth Inequality, Wealth Constraints and Economic Performance},
  booktitle = {Handbook of Income Distribution},
  author = {Bardhan, Pranab and Bowles, Samuel and Gintis, Herbert},
  editor = {Atkinson, Anthony B. and Bourguignon, Fran{\c c}ois},
  year = {2000},
  volume = {1},
  pages = {541--603},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  doi = {10.1016/S1574-0056(00)80013-5},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/S1574-0056(00)80013-5},
  abstract = {Where such behaviors as risk-taking and hard work are not subject to complete contracts, some distributions of assets (for instance the widespread use of tenancy) may preclude efficient contractual arrangements. In particular, the distribution of wealth may affect: (a) residual claimancy over income streams; (b) exit options in bargaining situations; (c) the relative capacities of actors to exploit common resources; (d) the capacity to punish those who deviate from cooperative solutions; and (e) the pattern of both risk aversion and the subjective cost of capital in the population.},
  chapter = {Ch. 10},
  isbn = {978-0-444-81631-3},
  keywords = {Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

Where such behaviors as risk-taking and hard work are not subject to complete contracts, some distributions of assets (for instance the widespread use of tenancy) may preclude efficient contractual arrangements. In particular, the distribution of wealth may affect: (a) residual claimancy over income streams; (b) exit options in bargaining situations; (c) the relative capacities of actors to exploit common resources; (d) the capacity to punish those who deviate from cooperative solutions; and (e) the pattern of both risk aversion and the subjective cost of capital in the population.

@article{Keister2000,
  title = {Race and Wealth Inequality: The Impact of Racial Differences in Asset Ownership on the Distribution of Household Wealth},
  author = {Keister, Lisa A.},
  year = {2000},
  journal = {Social Science Research},
  volume = {29},
  number = {4},
  pages = {477--502},
  doi = {10.1006/SSRE.2000.0677},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1006/ssre.2000.0677},
  abstract = {What accounts for persistent racial differences in wealth ownership? Previous research has debated the role that differences in asset ownership play in creating and maintaining wealth inequality. I use survey data to model the ownership of seven assets and find that whites are indeed more likely than blacks to buy high-risk, high-return assets. I then use a simulation model to explore the effect that these differences have on the distribution of wealth. I separate the effects of asset ownership from the effects of racial differences in family wealth history, earnings, education, marital behavior, fertility, and other influences on wealth inequality. I find that removing racial differences in asset ownership reduced wealth inequality drastically, but not completely, and that racial differences in educational attainment account for much of the remaining difference. I estimate how changes in historical patterns of portfolio behavior and educational attainment would have reduced inequality, and I explore the implications of these findings for reducing wealth inequality in the future.},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality,Methods of Estimation of Wealth Inequality,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality}
}

What accounts for persistent racial differences in wealth ownership? Previous research has debated the role that differences in asset ownership play in creating and maintaining wealth inequality. I use survey data to model the ownership of seven assets and find that whites are indeed more likely than blacks to buy high-risk, high-return assets. I then use a simulation model to explore the effect that these differences have on the distribution of wealth. I separate the effects of asset ownership from the effects of racial differences in family wealth history, earnings, education, marital behavior, fertility, and other influences on wealth inequality. I find that removing racial differences in asset ownership reduced wealth inequality drastically, but not completely, and that racial differences in educational attainment account for much of the remaining difference. I estimate how changes in historical patterns of portfolio behavior and educational attainment would have reduced inequality, and I explore the implications of these findings for reducing wealth inequality in the future.

@article{BalandPlatteau1998,
  title = {Wealth Inequality and Efficiency in the Commons, Part {{II}}: The Regulated Case},
  author = {Baland, Jean-Marie and Platteau, Jean-Philippe},
  year = {1998},
  journal = {Oxford Economic Papers},
  volume = {50},
  number = {1},
  pages = {1--22},
  doi = {10.1093/oxfordjournals.oep.a028631},
  url = {http://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.oep.a028631},
  abstract = {Does more inequality lead to more efficiency in the management of common property resources? To answer this question, an attempt is made to develop relevant theoretical models and to articulate them with empirical evidence drawn mainly from social science studies. The paper is divided into two parts. In this, the second part, it is shown that inequality tends to amplify the distributive effects of regulation when the latter is carried out through the use of second best instruments. As a result, efficiency gains from regulation must decrease as inequality increases, for all users to gain from such regulation.},
  keywords = {Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

Does more inequality lead to more efficiency in the management of common property resources? To answer this question, an attempt is made to develop relevant theoretical models and to articulate them with empirical evidence drawn mainly from social science studies. The paper is divided into two parts. In this, the second part, it is shown that inequality tends to amplify the distributive effects of regulation when the latter is carried out through the use of second best instruments. As a result, efficiency gains from regulation must decrease as inequality increases, for all users to gain from such regulation.

@article{KrusellSmithJr.1998,
  title = {Income and Wealth Heterogeneity in the Macroeconomy},
  author = {Krusell, Per and Smith, Jr., Anthony A.},
  year = {1998},
  journal = {Journal of Political Economy},
  volume = {106},
  number = {5},
  pages = {867--896},
  publisher = {The University of Chicago Press},
  doi = {10.1086/250034},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1086/250034},
  abstract = {How do movements in the distribution of income and wealth affect the macroeconomy? We analyze this question using a calibrated version of the stochastic growth model with partially uninsurable idiosyncratic risk and movements in aggregate productivity. Our main finding is that, in the stationary stochastic equilibrium, the behavior of the macroeconomic aggregates can be almost perfectly described using only the mean of the wealth distribution. This result is robust to substantial changes in both parameter values and model specification. Our benchmark model, whose only difference from the representative-agent framework is the existence of uninsurable idiosyncratic risk, displays far less cross-sectional dispersion and skewness in wealth than U.S. data. However, an extension that relies on a small amount of heterogeneity in thrift does succeed in replicating the key features of the wealth data. Furthermore, this extension features aggregate time series that depart significantly from permanent income behavior.},
  keywords = {Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

How do movements in the distribution of income and wealth affect the macroeconomy? We analyze this question using a calibrated version of the stochastic growth model with partially uninsurable idiosyncratic risk and movements in aggregate productivity. Our main finding is that, in the stationary stochastic equilibrium, the behavior of the macroeconomic aggregates can be almost perfectly described using only the mean of the wealth distribution. This result is robust to substantial changes in both parameter values and model specification. Our benchmark model, whose only difference from the representative-agent framework is the existence of uninsurable idiosyncratic risk, displays far less cross-sectional dispersion and skewness in wealth than U.S. data. However, an extension that relies on a small amount of heterogeneity in thrift does succeed in replicating the key features of the wealth data. Furthermore, this extension features aggregate time series that depart significantly from permanent income behavior.

@article{LindhOhlsson1998,
  title = {Self-Employment and Wealth Inequality},
  author = {Lindh, Thomas and Ohlsson, Henry},
  year = {1998},
  journal = {Review of Income and Wealth},
  volume = {44},
  number = {1},
  pages = {25--42},
  doi = {10.1111/j.1475-4991.1998.tb00250.x},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4991.1998.tb00250.x},
  abstract = {Is the decision to become and stay self-employed constrained by access to credit? If this is the case, a more unequal wealth distribution will---for empirically observed distributions---imply more self-employed, since the number of people able to provide collateral will be higher. Swedish data between 1920 and 1992 suggest that wealth inequality and the share of self-employed among those working are positively related. The data, therefore, are consistent with the hypothesis that liquidity constraints are binding on the decision to become and stay self-employed.},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Impacts of Wealth Inequality,Trends in Aggregate Wealth and Wealth Inequality}
}

Is the decision to become and stay self-employed constrained by access to credit? If this is the case, a more unequal wealth distribution will—for empirically observed distributions—imply more self-employed, since the number of people able to provide collateral will be higher. Swedish data between 1920 and 1992 suggest that wealth inequality and the share of self-employed among those working are positively related. The data, therefore, are consistent with the hypothesis that liquidity constraints are binding on the decision to become and stay self-employed.

@article{BalandPlatteau1997,
  title = {Wealth Inequality and Efficiency in the Commons, Part {{I}}: The Unregulated Case},
  author = {Baland, Jean-Marie and Platteau, Jean-Philippe},
  year = {1997},
  journal = {Oxford Economic Papers1},
  volume = {49},
  number = {4},
  pages = {451--482},
  doi = {10.1093/oxfordjournals.oep.a028620},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.oep.a028620},
  abstract = {Does more inequality lead to more efficiency in the management of common property resources? To answer this question, an attempt is made to develop relevant theoretical models and to articulate them with empirical evidence drawn mainly from social science studies. The paper is divided into two parts. In this, the first part, assuming away the possibility of regulatory instruments, we construct a series of arguments pointing to the ambiguous impact of wealth inequality on the efficiency of the equilibrium outcome.},
  keywords = {Impacts of Wealth Inequality}
}

Does more inequality lead to more efficiency in the management of common property resources? To answer this question, an attempt is made to develop relevant theoretical models and to articulate them with empirical evidence drawn mainly from social science studies. The paper is divided into two parts. In this, the first part, assuming away the possibility of regulatory instruments, we construct a series of arguments pointing to the ambiguous impact of wealth inequality on the efficiency of the equilibrium outcome.

@book{Wedgwood1939,
  title = {The Economics of Inheritance},
  author = {Wedgwood, Josiah},
  year = {1939},
  edition = {2nd Editio},
  publisher = {Penguin Books},
  abstract = {With a new introduction by the author},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Estate Inheritance and Gift Taxes,Impacts of Wealth Inequality,Intergenerational Wealth}
}

With a new introduction by the author

@book{Wedgwood1929,
  title = {The Economics of Inheritance},
  author = {Wedgwood, Josiah},
  year = {1929},
  publisher = {Routledge \& Sons},
  url = {https://archive.org/details/economicsofinher035213mbp/page/n1/mode/2up},
  keywords = {Determinants of Wealth and Wealth Inequality,Estate Inheritance and Gift Taxes,Impacts of Wealth Inequality,Intergenerational Wealth}
}