2011
DOI: 10.1002/j.1839-4655.2011.tb00219.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Inheritance in Australia: family and charitable distributions from personal estates

Abstract: This article provides unique empirical evidence of post mortem giving in Australia, through a random sample of probate records in Victoria in 2006. The records show that decedents overwhelmingly leave their estates to their immediate family; first spouses, and then children in equal measure. They also show that there is a significant discrepancy between common practice in the transmission of estates and intestacy laws; that about one in five decedents exercise some measure of testamentary freedom; that about o… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These studies have included analyses of the distribution of estates (Baker and Gilding, 2011;Tilse et al, 2015), the prevalence of will-making (Tilse et al, 2015) and the distribution of assets in different demographic groups and regions (Gilding, 2005;O'Dwyer, 1996). Other studies have considered the implications of inheritance for elder abuse in Australia (Kaspiew et al, 2016) and the implications of housing inheritance specifically on housing supply (O'Dwyer, 1999) and wealth distribution (O'Dwyer, 2001).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…These studies have included analyses of the distribution of estates (Baker and Gilding, 2011;Tilse et al, 2015), the prevalence of will-making (Tilse et al, 2015) and the distribution of assets in different demographic groups and regions (Gilding, 2005;O'Dwyer, 1996). Other studies have considered the implications of inheritance for elder abuse in Australia (Kaspiew et al, 2016) and the implications of housing inheritance specifically on housing supply (O'Dwyer, 1999) and wealth distribution (O'Dwyer, 2001).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Previous studies on inheritance in Australia have relied on state level convenience samples or data using specific asset types. For example,Baker and Gilding (2011) used probate data from Victoria and O'Dwyer (2001) made use of South Australian Property and Estate data. In this report, we build upon the extant NTA methodology to incorporate estimates of average assets and liabilities at average ages of death that are nationally representative.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The available academic literature on this topic is very small, and it is difficult to discern any particular pattern in the existing findings (Baker, ). One author finds that the contribution of lawyers in the promotion of bequests is crucial (Dauncey, ), and another author finds that such promotion is of no benefit to charities (Wise, ).…”
Section: Literature Review—bequest Promotion To Lawyers and Its Knownmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Bequests are an essential source of income for charities (Sargeant et al , ), but data about bequests are often piecemeal and incomplete (Baker, ). In the USA, the total charitable bequests in 2009 were estimated at $23.8bn (Giving USA Foundation and the Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, ), which represented 8% of the total charitable contributions.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In fact, in one Australian study, only a minority of people without a will (27%) even knew that succession laws would distribute their estate in case of their death, and 39% wrongly believed that their family members would be allowed to divide assets up as they saw fit (Tilse et al, 2016). Also, the preference of non-will holders often diverges from succession rules (Baker & Gilding, 2011). This suggests that, for people without a will, the heir status given a partner may be unintentional and undesired, with the married possibly involuntarily making their partner an heir, whereas the cohabiting risk unwittingly leaving theirs with nothing.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%