#6. How Inheritances Relate to Wealth Distribution? Theoretical Reasoning and Empirical Evidence on the Basis of LWS Data, by Pirmin Fessler, Peter Mooslechner, Martin Schürz, June 2008
The aim of this paper is to study the analytical scope for cross-country comparisons of inheritances based on Luxembourg Wealth Study (LWS) data. In the first part of the paper, we review in a selective way the existing literature on inheritances and bequests. In the second part, we focus on cross country data issues and survey designs. In the third part, we show stylized results on inheritances in different countries, based on LWS data. These data reveal a rather similar picture: beneficiaries tend to have better education, higher income and own more wealth. In the last part of the paper, conclusions for data improvements in the future will be drawn.

#5. Homeownership Inequality and the Access to Credit Markets. Can Credit Availability Explain Cross-country Differences in the Inequality of Homeownership across Income of Young Households?, by Alena Bičáková and Eva Sierminska, December 2007
This paper focuses on the cross-country differences in homeownership rates and the extent this variation can be explained by differences in the degree of financial development of the mortgage market. Expecting that home ownership among the young is mostly driven by their ability to borrow (against their future income) to buy their homes we focus on households 18 to 40 years of age. We use the newly developed Luxembourg Wealth Study and focus on five countries: Finland, Germany, Italy, the UK and the US.
We find that aside from Italy, homeownership rates and inequality in the four countries more or less correspond to their mortgage take up rates and its distribution across income, reflecting the different degree of size and development of their respective mortgage markets. In Italy, however, alternative ways of financing a home such as family transfers substitute the limited mortgage availability and take up rates. The mortgage market in the UK is the most open (in terms of mortgage take up) and the most equal (in terms of the distribution of mortgage take-up across household income deciles), which leads to the highest and most equally distributed homeownership in this country as well.
The mortgage market in Germany is on the other side of the spectrum with very low mortgage take-up rates and strong dependence of homeownership and mortgage take up on household income (high homeownership/mortgage income inequality). Finland and the US are in-between.
Counterfactual predictions suggest that although household characteristics play some role in explaining the observed (and predicted) variation in home ownership rates across the five countries, it is mostly the country specific effects of these characteristics determined by the institutional environment as well as the functioning of the housing and mortgage markets that drive the main result. We conclude that in the absence of alternative sources, mortgage availability is the main determinant of home ownership across countries and also across income deciles within countries.

#4. Wealth Effects Out of Financial and Housing Wealth: Cross Country and Age Group Comparisons, by Eva Sierminska and Yelena Takhtamanova., November 2006.
"This study is a contribution to the literature on the link between consumption and wealth (wealth effect). We use a new source of harmonized micro data (Luxembourg Wealth Study) to investigate whether there are differences in wealth effects out of different types of wealth and also across age groups. Three countries are considered: Canada, Italy and Finland. We find that the overall wealth effect out of housing is stronger than the effect out of financial wealth for all the countries in the sample. Additionally, in accordance with life cycle theory of consumption, we find housing wealth effect to be significantly lower for younger households. We also find between-country differences in the wealth effects."

#3. Older Women’s Income and Wealth Packages: The Five-Legged Stool in Cross-National Perspective, by Janet C. Gornick, Teresa Munzi, Eva Sierminska and Timothy M. Smeeding, November 2006.
"In this chapter, we analyze the economic well-being of older women in cross-national perspective, comparing the United States with four other high-income countries: the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy and Sweden. These countries constitute an illuminating group; although all operate at similar levels of economic development, their employment, income, and wealth outcomes vary widely.
We report some of the first findings based on micro-data from a new source, the Luxembourg Wealth Study (LWS). LWS, a project within the larger Luxembourg Income Study (LIS), is a database containing harmonized wealth datasets from a number of industrialized countries. Using the LWS data, we analyze the income and wealth packages held by women, age 60 and older, across these five countries. The income and wealth results from the LWS data are supplemented by findings on older adults’ employment patterns, using the longstanding LIS income micro-datasets.
Throughout this chapter, we invoke the metaphor of the four-legged stool, which is often used to refer to the multiple income streams on which older persons rely. In this chapter, we conceptualize the income stool as having these four legs: earnings, capital income, private transfers, and public transfers. We extend this metaphor to conceptualize a fifth leg – that is, wealth. We capture wealth mostly as a stock (in what we call wealth packages), although wealth clearly constitutes potential and actual income flows. We also capture some wealth directly as flows, via the capital income component of the income package.
We begin by assessing employment, income, and wealth outcomes, first among all older women’s households and, second, in one particularly vulnerable group: older women who live alone. We then turn our attention to poor older women and, finally, to those who are extremely poor. We close with brief comments about policy implications and further research."

#2. Cross National Comparison of Income and Wealth Status in Retirement: First Results from the Luxembourg Wealth Study (LWS), by Eva Sierminska, Andrea Brandolini, and Timothy Smeeding, August 2006.
"This paper provides a first glance at the role of income and wealth in comparing economic security of older persons in the United States in cross-national perspective. We compare our elders to those in six other rich OECD countries (Canada, Finland Germany, Italy, Sweden, and the United Kingdom). These countries have diverse social policy systems, with respect to both social insurance and public assistance; and they have very different patterns of private wealth holding. The paper is based on a new source of wealth micro data, known as the Luxembourg Wealth Study (LWS).
In this paper, we first develop a comparable definition of wealth and net worth across nations and then focus our efforts on the inter-country variation in the composition of income and asset packages for those 65 and over, with respect to the main sources in each package. We examine the structure of income and wealth holdings and their joint distribution; income and asset poverty of the elderly; the importance of home ownership in providing security for the elderly; differences in wealth by education; and we provide an initial glimpse at wealth and income inequality in a comparative perspective. We conclude by comparing the risks associated with private assets to those associated with under-funded public pension systems."

#1. Comparing Wealth Distribution across Rich Countries: First Results from the Luxembourg Wealth Study, by Eva Sierminska, Andrea Brandolini, and Timothy Smeeding, August 2006.
"The new Luxembourg Wealth Study (LWS - see http:/lws.htm//www.lisproject.org/lws.htm) will for the first time create a harmonized cross national wealth and asset database. The aim of this paper is to summarize the initial results based on countries participating in the initial phase of the Luxembourg Wealth Study: Canada, Cyprus, Finland, Germany, Italy, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom and the United States.  The paper also outlines conceptual and practical issues that need to be addressed in preparing harmonized and comparable wealth data across countries."