# Personal Wealth, 2004 > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/agency%3Airs%3A5c24426cfb413bf2 ## Record - **Collection:** Agency decision - **Document type:** Agency decision ## Text Personal Wealth, 2004 by Brian G. Raub I n 2004, there were an estimated 2.7 million adults with gross assets of $1.5 million or more, the Federal estate tax filing threshold for decedents from that year. In total, these top wealth holders owned nearly $11.1 trillion in assets. After accounting for debts and mortgages of $850.1 billion, these individuals had a combined net worth of over $10.2 trillion. Although top wealth holders made up only about 1.2 percent of the total U.S. adult population, they held 20.3 percent of the total U.S. net worth in 2004.1,2 Background The distribution and composition of personal wealth in the United States are topics of great interest among researchers and policy planners. Unfortunately, these issues are difficult to research, since there are few sources of data on the wealth holdings of the general population, especially the very rich. Federal estate tax returns (Form 706) provide a unique source from which to study the nation’s wealthiest individuals. The estate tax return contains a complete listing of a decedent’s assets and debts, as well as a demographic profile of the decedent and information on the costs of administering the estate. A decedent’s estate has up to 9 months to file an estate tax return, but use of a 6-month extension is common. It is, therefore, necessary to combine returns filed over a number of calendar years in order to capture data representative of all estate tax decedents dying in a single year. The estate multiplier technique is used to estimate the wealth of living individuals from Federal estate tax return data. The fundamental assumption underlying this methodology is that estate tax returns filed for decedents who died in a particular year represent a random sample, designated by death, of the living population in that year. Estimates of the wealth holdings of the living population are derived Brian G. Raub is an economist with the Special Studies Special Projects Section. This article was prepared under the direction of Barry Johnson, Special Studies Branch Chief. 1 Valuation Measures The level of wealth to which these estimates apply is $1.5 million or more in gross assets, the Federal estate tax filing threshold in effect for 2004 U.S. decedents. Gross assets as defined here are a Federal estate tax concept of wealth that does not conform to usual definitions of wealth. Therefore, three measures of wealth are used in this article: gross assets, total assets, and net worth. Gross assets reflect the gross value of all assets, including the full face value of life insurance, reduced by the value of any policy loans, but excluding any reduction for other indebtedness or for special valuation of some real estate. This measure defines the individuals included in the top wealth holder group. Total assets are a lower wealth value, but still essentially a gross measure. They differ from gross assets in that the cash, or equity, value of life insurance (i.e., the value of insurance immediately before the policyholder’s death) replaces the “at death” value of life insurance included in gross assets.3 Total assets are the valuation concept on which all the analyses in this article are based. Net worth is total assets minus debts. Demographic Characteristics Of the 2.7 million individuals in 2004 who had gross assets of at least $1.5 million, almost 1.6 million, or 57 percent, were men. As shown in Figure A, these male top wealth holders could be divided roughly into thirds by age, with one-third under 50, one-third 50 but not yet 65, and the other third 65 and older. Female top wealth holders, who accounted for 43 percent of the total, had a significantly different age distribution. While the percentage of female top wealth holders ages 50 under 75 was nearly identical to that of their male counterparts, only about 26 percent were under 50. In contrast, individuals 75 and older made up a larger percentage of female top wealth holders than male top wealth holders. Estimate of the adult population of the United States in 2004 was obtained from U.S. Bureau of the Census at http://www.censusgov/popest/states/asrh/SC-est2004-01.html. Estimate of the total net worth of the United States was obtained from household estimates derived from the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System’s Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF), found in Kennickell, Arthur B. (2006), “Currents and Undercurrents: Changes in the Distribution of Wealth, 1989-2004,” http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2006/200613/200613pap.pdf. 3 Estimates of the equity value of life insurance included in total assets were approximated, based on the face value reported on Federal estate tax returns and on the decedent’s age. A ratio of the equity value to the face value was developed, using data from wealthy respondents to the 2004 Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System’s Surveys of Consumer Finances (SCF). A simple regression was used to predict the values used in the Statistics of Income estimates. 2 282 by applying a multiplier, based on appropriate mortality rates, to this sample. Personal Wealth, 2004 Statistics of Income Bulletin | Fall 2008 As shown in Figure B, the marital status of top wealth holders also varied considerably by sex. While a large majority of wealthy males, 70.5 percent, was married, only about half of their female counterparts had this marital status. Similarly, a higher percentage of wealthy males was single compared to female top wealth holders. In contrast, nearly one-quarter of women were widowed compared to only 6.8 percent of men. Figure A Top Wealth Holders: Age, by Sex, 2004 [1] [Numbers are in thousands] Age Males Percentage Females (1) (2) (3) (4) 1,555 100.0 1,173 100.0 Under 50 504 32.4 303 25.8 50 under 65 541 34.8 410 35.0 65 under 75 269 17.3 210 17.9 75 under 85 174 11.2 169 14.4 85 and older 66 4.2 81 6.9 Total Percentage [1] Top wealth holders are defined as individuals with gross assets of at least $1.5 million. NOTE: Detail may not add to totals because of rounding. Figure B Top Wealth Holders: Marital Status, by Sex, 2004 [1] [Numbers are in thousands] Age Males Percentage Females (1) (2) (3) Percentage (4) Total 1,555 100.0 1,173 100.0 Married 1,096 70.5 610 52.0 Widowed 105 6.8 281 24.0 Single 220 14.1 129 11.0 Other [2] 134 8.6 153 13.0 [1] Top wealth holders are defined as individuals with gross assets of at least $1.5 million. [2] Includes individuals who were separated or divorced or those for whom marital status could not be determined. NOTE: Detail may not add to totals because of rounding. Asset Portfolios As shown in Figure C, the portfolio composition for male top wealth holders varied considerably by size of net worth. Real estate, including personal resi- dences, was the most dominant portfolio component for those with net worth under $1.5 million, but made up a significantly smaller portion of the portfolio of their wealthier counterparts. While male top wealth holders with net worth of less than $1.5 million held 40.6 percent of their portfolio in real estate, including the personal residence, for men with net worth of $10 million or more, this portion was only 12.6 percent. The pattern was similar for retirement assets, including Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs), annuities, and self-employed or Keogh plans, which accounted for over 15.0 percent of the portfolio of male top wealth holders with net worth under $10 million but only 4.0 percent for men with net worth of $10 million or more. In contrast, equities, including closely held and publicly traded stock, made up a larger portion of the portfolios of wealthier men relative to their younger counterparts. While these assets accounted for 14.9 percent of the portfolio of top wealth holders with net worth under $1.5 million, they made up more than twice this percentage, 40.9 percent, in the portfolio of individuals with net worth of $10 million or more. This result is consistent with academic research demonstrating that wealthier investors allocate a greater share of their financial assets to equity investments.4 Figure D shows that the portfolio holdings for female top wealth holders were similar to those of males, although several differences are notable. In each wealth category, female top wealth holders held proportionately more of their assets in personal residences and publicly traded stock than their male counterparts, and less in closely held stock and business assets, including noncorporate businesses, farms, and limited partnerships. For individuals with net worth of $10 million or more, men and women held a nearly identical percentage of their portfolios in equities, about 40 percent, although the allocation between publicly traded stock and closely held stock was quite different for men than for women. While men in this top wealth category split their equity holdings nearly evenly, 52 percent in publicly traded stock and 48 percent in closely held stock, their female counterparts held 77 percent of their stock holdings in publicly traded companies compared to only 23 percent in closely held companies. 4 See, for example, Ackert, Lucy F. et al. (2002), “The Asset Allocation Decision and Investor Heterogeneity: A Puzzle?” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, Volume 47, pp. 423-433. 283 Personal Wealth, 2004 Statistics of Income Bulletin | Fall 2008 Figure C Male Top Wealth Holders: Selected Assets as a Percentage of Total Assets, by Size of Net Worth, 2004 [1] Percentage 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Personal residences Other real estate Closely held Publicly stock traded stock Cash assets [2] Other financial assets [3] Retirement assets [4] Business assets [5] All other assets Selected assets Size of net worth Under $1.5 million $1.5 million under $10.0 million $10.0 million or more [1] Top wealth holders are defined as individuals with gross assets of at least $1.5 million. [2] Includes cash and cash management accounts. [3] Includes all government bonds, bonds issued by corporations and foreign governments, mortgages and notes, cash value life insurance, and diversified mutual funds. [4] Includes Individual Retirement Accounts, annuities, and self-employed or Keogh plans. [5] Includes noncorporate businesses, farms, and limited partnerships. 284 Some of the differences between the asset portfolios of male and female top wealth holders can be attributed to the differing age distributions of the two groups. For example, as mentioned above, male top wealth holders in each net worth category held a higher percentage of their portfolios in closely held stock relative to females. Some of this disparity, however, is due to the fact that the age distribution of female top wealth holders is skewed more toward the older age categories than is true for males, as shown in Figure A. As shown in Figures E and F, top wealth holders 65 and older held a markedly lower percentage of their portfolios in closely held stock than their younger counterparts, although, in each age category, men held proportionately more than women. In general, the differences in portfolio composition between age groups are not as large as the differences between wealth groups shown above. Even so, several patterns based on age can be observed. For both male and female top wealth holders, personal residences and closely held stock accounted for a smaller percentage of the portfolio held by older individuals than that of their younger counterparts. In contrast, for both genders, the percentage of the portfolio held in publicly traded stock was lowest for individuals 50 under 65 but highest for those Personal Wealth, 2004 Statistics of Income Bulletin | Fall 2008 Figure D Female Top Wealth Holders: Selected Assets as a Percentage of Total Assets, by Size of Net Worth, 2004 [1] Percentage 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Personal residences Other real estate Closely held Publicly stock traded stock Cash assets [2] Other financial assets [3] Retirement assets [4] Business assets [5] All other assets Selected assets Size of net worth Under $1.5 million $1.5 million under $10.0 million $10.0 million or more [1] Top wealth holders are defined as individuals with gross assets of at least $1.5 million. [2] Includes cash and cash management accounts. [3] Includes all government bonds, bonds issued by corporations and foreign governments, mortgages and notes, cash value life insurance, and diversified mutual funds. [4] Includes Individual Retirement Accounts, annuities, and self-employed or Keogh plans. [5] Includes noncorporate businesses, farms, and limited partnerships. 65 and older, although, in each age category, women held more proportionately more than men. Taken as a whole, Figures C through F show that the portfolio allocation of top wealth holders in 2004 reflected preferences based on, age, gender, and wealth level. Debts and Mortgages Figure G shows the debts and mortgages of top wealth holders in 2004 as a percentage of total assets, by sex and age. Two main trends can be observed. First, the debt-to-assets ratio for both men and women was significant lower for older top 5 wealth holders than for their younger counterparts. This is consistent with the economic theory which predicts that individuals will take on greater debt early in their working lives in order to finance a desired lifestyle.5 Although data are not available separately on holdings of mortgage debt, much of the difference in overall debt-to-assets ratios between age groups is likely related to mortgage debt held on primary residences. Data collected as part of the Federal Reserve Board’s Survey of Consumer Finances demonstrate that families headed by younger individuals are much See, for example, Modigliani, Franco (1986), “Life Cycle, Individual Thrift, and the Wealth of Nations,” American Economic Review, Volume 68, pp. 547-560. 285 Personal Wealth, 2004 Statistics of Income Bulletin | Fall 2008 Figure E Male Top Wealth Holders: Selected Assets as a Percentage of Total Assets, by Age, 2004 [1] Percentage 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Personal residences Other real estate Closely held Publicly stock traded stock Cash assets [2] Other financial assets [3] Retirement assets [4] Business assets [5] All other assets Selected assets Age Under 50 50 under 65 65 and older [1] Top wealth holders are defined as individuals with gross assets of at least $1.5 million. [2] Includes cash and cash management accounts. [3] Includes all government bonds, bonds issued by corporations and foreign governments, mortgages and notes, cash value life insurance, and diversified mutual funds. [4] Includes Individual Retirement Accounts, annuities, and self-employed or Keogh plans. [5] Includes noncorporate businesses, farms, and limited partnerships. more likely to hold mortgage debt on residential property, and have considerably higher average mortgage balances when present, than families headed by older individuals.6 The second main trend that can be observed in Figure G is that female top wealth holders in each category had a significantly lower debt-to-assets ratio than their male counterparts. The relative difference in the ratios between genders was largest for top wealth holders under age 50, where the debt-to-assets ratio for men was 17.7 percent, compared to 10.1 percent for women. 6 286 Net Worth Net worth, defined as total assets minus mortgages and other debts, is a subject of interest among researchers and the general public because, relative to total assets, it represents a more complete picture of an individual’s financial position. The 2.7 million top wealth holders in 2004 held a combined $10.2 trillion in net worth, for an average of over $3.7 million. Figure H, however, reveals that the average net worth of these individuals varied considerably by age and sex. For both male and female top wealth holders, average net worth for older individuals was high- See Bucks, Brian K.; Arthur B. Kennickell; and Kevin B. Moore, “Recent Changes in U.S. Family Finances: Evidence from the 2001 and 2004 Survey of Consumer Finances,” Federal Reserve Board of Governors, http://www.federalreserve.gov/PUBS/oss/oss2/2004/bull0206.pdf. Personal Wealth, 2004 Statistics of Income Bulletin | Fall 2008 Figure F Female Top Wealth Holders: Selected Assets as a Percentage of Total Assets, by Age, 2004 [1] Percentage 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Personal residences Other real estate Closely held stock Publicly traded stock Cash assets [2] Other financial assets [3] Retirement assets [4] Business assets [5] All other assets Selected assets Age Under 50 50 under 65 65 and older [1] Top wealth holders are defined as individuals with gross assets of at least $1.5 million. [2] Includes cash and cash management accounts. [3] Includes all government bonds, bonds issued by corporations and foreign governments, mortgages and notes, cash value life insurance, and diversified mutual funds. [4] Includes Individual Retirement Accounts, annuities, and self-employed or Keogh plans. [5] Includes noncorporate businesses, farms, and limited partnerships. er than it was for younger individuals. Additionally, the youngest male top wealth holders, those under 50, had a lower average net worth than their female counterparts, but, in each of the other age groups, men had a higher average net worth than women. Male top wealth holders under 50 had the lowest average net worth, $2.5 million, trailing females in this age group, who had an average net worth of $3.1 million. Male top wealth holders 75 under 85 had an average net worth of $5.3 million, more than twice that of their under-50 counterparts and virtually identical to the $5.2 million average for men 85 and older. Women 75 under 85 had an average net worth of $4.3 million, just below the average for women 85 and older, $4.4 million. As shown in Figure H, a large part of the difference between the average net worth of male and female top wealth holders under 50 is attributable to the fact that men held more debt, as seen by the gap between total assets and net worth. For top wealth holders 65 and older, who held less debt than their younger counterparts, the gap between total assets and net worth is substantially smaller. For highly skewed distributions, the median is often a better summary measure than the average since the median is less affected by outliers in a 287 Personal Wealth, 2004 Statistics of Income Bulletin | Fall 2008 Figure G Top Wealth Holders: Debt and Mortgages as a Percentage of Total Assets, by Sex and Age, 2004 [1] Percentage 20 18 16 14 Males Females 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Under 50 50 under 65 65 under 75 75 under 85 85 and older [1] Top wealth holders are defined as individuals with gross assets of at least $1.5 million. population. As shown in Figure H, the median net worth of top wealth holders showed considerably less variation by age and sex than the average, and the differences in net worth between men and women were smaller. The median net worth for wealthy males ranged from $1.6 million for those under 50 to $2.4 million for those 75 under 85. For wealthy females, the median showed even less variation by age, with the smallest median, $2.0 million for those under 50, only 19 percent lower than the largest median, $2.3 million for those 85 and older. Taken together, the average and median net worth and total asset distributions by age and sex show that the averages are significantly impacted by relatively few extremely wealthy individuals, particularly for male top wealth holders. This relationship can also be seen in the percentile distribution of wealth for top wealth holders by sex, shown in Figure I. 288 For values below the 25th percentile, female net worth values dominate those for males, while, at the 90th percentile and above, male net worth values dominate. The net worth distribution for men and women between the 25th and 90th percentiles was very similar. While not included in Figure I, the left tail of the net worth distribution for males dips much lower (larger negative values) for points below the 1st percentile than for females. State Data Figure J shows the States with the largest number of individuals with net worth of $1.5 million or more.7 California, the nation’s most populous State in 2004, also had the largest number of residents with net worth of at least $1.5 million, 428,000.8 In fact, the State was home to 19.5 percent of all such residents, despite accounting for only 11.9 percent of the U.S. adult population. Florida, with 6.1 percent of the 7 While the size of the underlying sample of estate tax returns makes estimates of wealth derived using the estate multiplier technique fairly robust, estimates of wealth by State can be subject to significant year-to-year fluctuations. This is especially true for individuals at the extreme tail of the net worth distribution and for States with relatively small decedent populations. 8 U.S. Census Bureau, 2004. Personal Wealth, 2004 Statistics of Income Bulletin | Fall 2008 Figure H Average Total Average Net Median Total Median Net Top Wealth Holders: Average and Median Total Assets and Net Worth, by Sex and Age, 2004 [1] Age Assets Worth Assets Worth Value (in millions of dollars) Under 50 3,123,438 2,521,242 Males1,984,519 1,626,605 6 50 under 65 4,348,255 3,992,434 2,265,206 2,074,712 65 under 75 4,622,632 4,356,149 2,405,277 2,378,300 Average total assets 75 under 85 5,462,276 5,276,236 2,487,005 2,421,477 5 85 and older 5,318,121 5,187,288 2,391,508 2,359,545 Average net worth 4 3 Median total assets 2 Median net worth 1 0 Under 50 50 under 65 65 under 75 75 under 85 85 and older Age Value (in millions of dollars) 6 Females 5 Average total assets 4 Average net worth 3 Age Average Total Average Net MedianWorth total assets Assets 2 Under 50 50 under 65 65 under 75 1 under 85 75 85 and older 3,476,294 3,956,517 3,930,352 4,389,130 4,476,469 Median Total Assets 3,123,904 3,698,690 3,778,495 4,290,592 4,404,963 2,132,156 2,262,453 2,266,263 2,235,400 2,354,832 Median net worth Median Net Worth 1,960,092 2,119,397 2,179,207 2,150,779 2,328,399 0 Under 50 50 under 65 65 under 75 75 under 85 85 and older Age [1] Top wealth holders are defined as individuals with gross assets of at least $1.5 million. 289 Personal Wealth, 2004 Statistics of Income Bulletin | Fall 2008 Figure I Top Wealth Holders, by Sex, Net Worth Distribution, 1st-99th Percentiles, 2004 [1] Net worth (in millions of dollars) 35 30 Males 25 Females 20 15 10 5 0 1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 99 Percentile [1] Top wealth holders are defined as individuals with gross assets of at least $1.5 million. Figure J States with the Largest Number of Residents with Net Worth of $1.5 Million or More, 2004 [Numbers are in thousands] State Number of residents with net worth of $1.5 million or more (1) Total adult population [1] Percentage of adult population (2) (3) California 428 26,297 1.6 Florida 199 13,394 1.5 New York 168 14,655 1.1 Texas 108 16,223 0.7 Illinois 101 9,475 1.1 Pennsylvania 86 9,569 0.9 Massachusetts 83 4,952 1.7 New Jersey 79 6,543 1.2 Ohio 61 8,680 0.7 North Carolina 59 6,423 0.9 [1] Statistics on U.S. population in 2004, by State, were obtained from the U.S. Bureau of the Census, available online at http://www.census.gov/popest/states. NOTE: Detail may not add to totals because of rounding. 290 U.S. adult population, had the second-largest number of residents with net worth of at least $1.5 million, 199,000, which accounted for 9.1 percent of the total. New York had the third largest number of residents with net worth of at least $1.5 million, 168,000, or 7.7 percent of the total, but was home to only 6.6 percent of the total U.S. adult population. The fact that a disproportionate share of the very wealthy lived in California, Florida, and New York is reflected in Figure K, which shows that each of these three States ranked in the top ten in concentration of residents with net worth of at least $1.5 million. Ranking by concentration eliminates distortions caused by the widely varied populations of the States. Using this measure, Connecticut ranked first with the highest per capita number of residents with net worth of at least $1.5 million, 1.8 percent. Two of the smallest States in terms of population, Wyoming and Delaware, as well as the District of Columbia, were also in the top ten. In addition to California, Florida, and New York, two other States—Massachusetts and New Jersey—ranked in Personal Wealth, 2004 Statistics of Income Bulletin | Fall 2008 Figure K the top ten in both the number of residents with net worth of at least $1.5 million and the per capita number of these residents. The concentration of residents with at least $1.5 million in net worth, by State, is shown geographically in Figure L. This figure separates the States (including the District of Columbia) into three groups by per capita number of residents with net worth of at least $1.5 million. It is interesting to note that the States in the top third, those with the highest number of wealth holders per capita, were geographically distributed fairly evenly across the four major regions of the United States—Northeast, South, Midwest, and West—with four top-third States in each region.9 States with the Highest Concentration of Residents with Net Worth of $1.5 Million or More, 2004 [Numbers are in thousands] Number of residents with net worth of $1.5 million or more State (1) Connecticut 47 Total adult population [1] Percentage of adult population (2) (3) 2,665 1.8 Massachusetts 83 4,952 1.7 California 428 26,297 1.6 District of Columbia Florida 7 444 1.6 199 13,394 1.5 Wyoming 5 390 1.3 Delaware 8 637 1.3 New Jersey 79 6,543 1.2 Maryland 50 4,163 1.2 Top Wealth Holders, 1998-2004 Changes in the top wealth holder population over time are best understood against the backdrop of changes in the U.S. economy, since the financial well-being of top wealth holders is likely to be sig- [1] Statistics on U.S. population in 2004, by State, were obtained from the U.S. Bureau of the Census, available online at http://www.census.gov/popest/states. NOTE: Detail may not add to totals because of rounding. Figure L Concentration of Top Wealth Holders with Net Worth of $1.5 Million or More, by State, 2004 WA VT MT ME ND MN OR ID SD WI WY MI IA NE NV IL UT CA PA RI CT NJ VA DE MD NC DC OH IN WV CO KS MO KY TN AZ NH MA NY OK NM AR SC MS AL GA LA TX AK FL Top third HI Middle third Bottom third 9 Regions of the United States are assigned using the classification system of the U.S. Bureau of the Census. See http://www.census.gov/geo/www/us_regdiv.pdf. 291 Personal Wealth, 2004 Statistics of Income Bulletin | Fall 2008 nificantly affected by the health of the economy as a whole. Over the 2 years between 1998 and 2000, the country experienced a period of rapid economic growth, with real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) increasing a total of 8.3 percent.10 Equity prices during this time also increased rapidly. On January 2, 1998, the S&P 500 stock index closed at 975.04, but, by March 24, 2000, the index closed at a then-record 1527.46, a 56.7-percent increase in less than 27 months.11 Stocks in the technology-laden NASDAQ Composite Index, meanwhile, appreciated even more rapidly during this period, with the index increasing 219.2 percent between January 2, 1998, and its peak close on March 10, 2000.12 The period of rapid growth in the economy and stock prices between 1998 and early 2000 gave way to a pronounced retrenchment by the summer of 2001. Between 2000 and 2001, real GDP increased only 0.75 percent. From their March 2000 peaks, the S&P 500 dropped 28.5 percent by September 10, 2001, while the Nasdaq Composite Index shed nearly two-thirds of its value. Despite the historic nature of the September 11 terrorist attacks, however, both the S&P 500 and the Nasdaq Composite Index both closed higher on December 31, 2001, than they had on September 10. The National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) later declared that the economy was in a recession over the period March 2001 through November 2001.13 Between 2001 and 2004, the economy recovered gradually, with real GDP increasing a total of 7.9 percent over the 3 year period. Equity prices during this period posted small nominal gains, with the S&P 500 stock index increasing 5.6 percent from the start of 2002 to the end of 2004, and the Nasdaq Composite Index increasing 11.5 percent. In the preceding paragraphs, stock index levels are expressed in nominal terms without considering the effects of inflation, which erodes the value of money over time. A look at the real (inflation-adjusted) changes in the value of the stock market between 10 GDP statistics obtained from the Bureau of Economic Analysis. See http://www.bea.gov/national/index.htm#gdp. Data on the S&P 500 index obtained from http://www2.standardandpoors.com. 12 Data on the Nasdaq Composite Index obtained from http://www.nasdaq.com. 13 Business cycle data obtained from the National Bureau of Economic Research at http://www.nber.org/cycles.html. 14 Yearly average close is defi ned as the sum of the daily closing values of the index for each trading day during the calendar year divided by the number of trading days. 15 Money amounts were converted to constant 2004 dollars using the Gross Domestic Product Chain-Type Price Index produced by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. See http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/GDPCTPI. 16 See the OFHEO HPI Web site at http://www.ofheo.gov/hpi.aspx. 17 See http://www2.standardandpoors.com for data from the S&P/Case-Shiller Home Price Index. While this index has more limited geographic coverage than the OFHEO Home Price Index, it may better account for the change in value of homes fi nanced with so-called “subprime” loans. For a detailed comparison of differences between the two indices, see http://www.ofheo.gov/media/research/OFHEOSPCS12008.pdf. 11 292 1998 and 2004 paints a somewhat different picture. The yearly average close for the S&P 500 index, in constant 2004 dollars, was 2.7 percent higher for 2001 than for 1998, but 10.5 percent lower for 2004 than for 2001.14 For the Nasdaq Composite Index, the yearly average close, in constant 2004 dollars, increased 4.2 percent between 1998 and 2001 before falling 7.0 percent between 2001 and 2004.15 Although the growth rates of GDP and equity prices experienced considerable turbulence between 1998 and 2004, the value of residential real estate increased steadily throughout this period. Data from the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) Home Price Index show a consistent monthly increase from January 1998 through December 2004, with an overall increase of 62.0 percent over this period.16 Data from the S&P/Case-Shiller 10-City Composite Index, which tracks changes in the value of the residential real estate market in 10 major metropolitan regions across the United States, show a similar, steady monthly increase during this period, with an overall increase of 131.5 percent.17 As shown in Figure M, the number of individuals with net worth of $1.5 million or more, in constant 2004 dollars, increased from just over 1.8 million in 1998 to nearly 2.2 million in 2004. Nearly all of this 21.5-percent increase occurred between 1998 and 2001, as the number stayed nearly constant between 2001 and 2004. This is likely due, in part, to the relatively stronger performance of the equity markets in the earlier 3-year period. As will be shown below, stock was a dominant portfolio component of top wealth holders throughout this period. Therefore, the relatively stronger performance of the stock market between 1998 and 2001 than in the later three-year period is likely to have impacted the number of individuals with net worth of $1.5 million or more. Figure M also shows that the growth in the number of individuals with net worth of $1.5 million or more between 1998 and 2004 varied by net worth category. The growth in the number of these top Personal Wealth, 2004 Statistics of Income Bulletin | Fall 2008 Figure M Number of Top Wealth Holders with Net Worth of $1.5 Million or More, by Size of Net Worth, 1998-2004 [Numbers are in thousands] Size of net worth, in constant 2004 dollars [1] 1998 2001 (1) (2) (3) (4) 1,807 2,193 2,196 21.5 $1.5 million under $2.0 million 651 754 745 14.4 $2.0 million under $3.5 million 685 789 845 23.4 $3.5 million under $5.0 million 188 259 248 31.9 $5.0 million under $10.0 million 189 260 232 22.8 $10.0 million or more 94 140 125 33.0 Total 2004 Percentage growth, 1998-2004 [1] Net worth was converted to constant 2004 dollars using the Gross Domestic Product Chain-type Price Index produced by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. See http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/GDPCTPI. wealth holders between 1998 and 2001 was most pronounced for those with net worth of $3.5 million or more, with more modest gains in the number of individuals with net worth between $1.5 million and $3.5 million. In contrast, between 2001 and 2004, the number of individuals with net worth of $3.5 million or more declined, while the number of those with net worth between $1.5 million and $3.5 mil- lion increased. This pattern may reflect, in part, the movement of some top wealth holders from the higher net worth categories into lower net worth categories as their portfolio values declined in real terms. Changes in the asset portfolio of top wealth holders between 1998 and 2004 are shown in Figure N. For individuals with net worth of $1.5 million or more, in constant 2004 dollars, the amount held in stock was nearly $3.4 trillion in 1998, $4.1 trillion in 2001, but only $3.3 trillion in 2004. In contrast, the value of real estate assets held by individuals with this level of wealth increased from almost $1.4 trillion in 1998 to $1.9 trillion in 2001 and $2.3 trillion in 2004. It is important to note that asset portfolio changes can be arise both from the appreciation or depreciation of asset types, as well as the reallocation of assets within the portfolio. Research suggests that individuals “chase returns” by reallocating their portfolios to shift more resources into assets that have performed well in the recent past, or, conversely, shifting assets away from assets that have performed poorly.18 Shifts in the portfolio composition of top wealth holders between 1998 and 2004 suggest that some “return chasing” may have taken place, although these changes may not be statistically significant. Figure N Top Wealth Holders with Net Worth of $1.5 Million or More, Selected Assets as a Percentage of Total Assets, 1998-2004 [Numbers are in thousands] 1998 Selected asset Amount 2001 Percentage of total assets Amount (1) All stock [2] 3,382,551 2004 Percentage of total assets Amount Percentage of total assets (2) (3) (4) 42.9 4,109,947 36.9 3,267,301 31.6 All real estate 1,368,076 17.3 1,866,500 16.8 2,276,462 22.0 Other financial assets [3] 1,247,031 15.8 1,583,538 14.2 1,477,658 14.3 Cash assets [4] 633,152 8.0 927,083 8.3 938,019 9.1 Retirement assets [5] 549,942 7.0 1,026,137 9.2 937,625 9.1 [1] Money amounts converted to constant 2004 dollars using the Gross Domestic Product Chain-type Price Index produced by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. See http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/GDPCTPI. [2] Includes publicly traded and closely held stock. [3] Includes all government bonds, bonds issued by corporations and foreign governments, mortgages and notes, cash value life insurance, and diversified mutual funds. [4] Includes cash and cash management accounts. [5] Includes individual retirement accounts, annuities, and self-employed or Keogh plans. 18 See, for example, Friesen, G. and T. Sapp, “Mutual Fund Flows and Investor Returns: An Empirical Examination of Fund Investor Timing Ability,” Journal of Banking and Finance, September 2007, pp. 2796-2816. 293 Personal Wealth, 2004 Statistics of Income Bulletin | Fall 2008 Figure O 1998 2001 2004 Under 50 507,699 Percentage of 420,479 Top Wealth625,277 Holders with $1.5 Million or More in Net Worth, by Age, 1998-2004 [1] 50 under 65 592,699 724,409 761,268 Percentage 65 under 75 412,935 416,357 449,759 40 75 under 85 269,119 298,601 332,028 85 and older 111,504 128,688 144,434 35 30 Under 50 50 under 65 25 65 under 75 75 under 85 20 and older 85 1998 23.3 32.8 22.9 14.9 6.2 2001 28.5 33.0 19.0 13.6 5.9 1998 2004 23.1 34.7 20.5 15.1 6.6 2001 2004 15 10 5 0 Under 50 50 under 65 65 under 75 75 under 85 85 and older Age [1] In constant 2004 dollars using the Gross Domestic Product Chain-type Price Index produced by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. See http://research.stlouisfed.org/ fred2/series/GDPCTPI. In 1998, over 91 percent of top wealth holders held stock in their portfolios. In 2001, after the significant decline in the stock market beginning in March 2000, a slightly smaller portion of the top wealth holder population, 89 percent, held stock. In 2004, after 3 more years of relatively weak performance in the stock market, less than 87 percent of top wealth holders held stock in their portfolios. Another way to look at changes in the top wealth holder population between 1998 and 2004 is to look at changes in the age distribution. Figure O shows the percentage of individuals with net worth of $1.5 million or more in each of three age groups—under 50, 50 under 65, and 65 or older. Overall, the figure shows that the age distribution of these wealthy individuals was relatively stable over time, with the exception being an increase in those under 50 for 2001.19 294 Concentration Estimates The share of total U.S. wealth held by the Nation’s top wealth holders has long been a topic of interest for researchers and the general public. One way of looking at year-to-year changes in the distribution of wealth is to examine the share of total U.S. wealth held by a constant percentage of the population. Figure P shows the percentages of total U.S. wealth held by the top 1.0 percent and the top 0.5 percent of the population between 1989 and 2004.20 In 2004, 1.0 percent of the U.S. adult population was approximately 2.2 million individuals. These individuals owned approximately 19.4 percent of total U.S. individual wealth, a 2.9-percent decrease since 2001, although this difference may not be statistically significant. A similar pattern was evident in the share of wealth held by the over 1.1 million individu- 19 At least a portion of this increase can be attributed to sampling variance; in particular, on the unusually large number of relatively young, wealthy individuals who died as a result of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The estate multipliers, or sample weights, used to produce these wealth estimates are computed using mortality rates that are smoothed to minimize normal year-to-year variations in the U.S. decedent population. These rates cannot easily be adjusted to accurately reflect the mortality rate actually experienced by this subpopulation due to these tragic events, meaning that the resulting estimates of wealth for young, wealthy individuals in the living population based on data reported for these decedents may be biased slightly upward. 20 U.S. Census Bureau, 2004. Personal Wealth, 2004 Statistics of Income Bulletin | Fall 2008 Figure P Percentage of Total U.S. Net Worth Held by Top 1 Percent and 0.5 Percent of the U.S. Population, 1989-2004 Percentage 25 Top 1% 20 Top 0.5 % 15 10 5 0 1989 1992 1995 als who made up the top 0.5 percent of the U.S. adult population in 2004. They held about 15.3 percent of the Nation’s net worth in 2004, down from 17.9 percent in 2001, although, as noted above, this difference may be within the sampling error of these estimates. Overall, these results suggest that the share of wealth held by the very wealthiest Americans has stayed within a relatively narrow range over the 15year period.21 Summary An estimated 2.7 million U.S. adults in 2004 had gross assets of $1.5 million or more. These top wealth holders combined to hold over $10.2 trillion in net worth. A little less than 1.6 million, or 57.0 percent, of top wealth holders were men, while just under 1.2 million were women. Most wealthy individuals of both genders were married, although a significantly higher proportion of wealthy females were widowed compared to widowed wealthy males. Although the median net worth of male and female top wealth holders was similar, men had a significantly higher average net worth, reflecting the 21 1998 2001 2004 impact of a relatively small number of extremely wealthy men. The asset portfolio of top wealth holders varied considerably by gender, age, and relative wealth. Women’s portfolios contained a greater proportion held in personal residences and publicly traded stock than those of men. Conversely, men’s portfolios were made up of proportionately more closely held stock and business assets. For top wealth holders of both genders, the wealthiest individuals held proportionately more of their assets in stock and less in real estate than their less wealthy counterparts. Additionally, the value of the personal residence made up a smaller percentage of the portfolios held by older top wealth holders than in the portfolios held by younger individuals. Men in each age and wealth class had a higher ratio of debts to assets than their female counterparts. In 2004, California had the largest number of individuals with net worth of $1.5 million or more, while Connecticut had the highest per capita population of these very wealthy residents. States with a relatively high concentration of residents with net worth These results are similar to with those derived from the Federal Reserve Board’s Survey of Consumer Finances (Kennickell, 2006). 295 Personal Wealth, 2004 Statistics of Income Bulletin | Fall 2008 of $1.5 million or more were distributed relatively evenly across the major regions of the United States. Between 1998 and 2004, there was a significant increase in the number of individuals with net worth of $1.5 million or more. Most of this increase occurred between 1998 and 2001, as the number of individuals with net worth of $1.5 million was nearly identical in 2001 and 2004. The value of stock held by very wealthy individuals increased substantially between 1998 and 2001, before falling in the 2001 through 2004 period. In contrast, the value of real estate held by individuals with net worth of $1.5 million or more increased steadily between 1998 and 2004. Data Sources and Limitations Statistics of Income collects data from an annual sample of Federal estate tax returns that are used primarily for policy and budget purposes. The sample follows a 3-year cycle that is designed mainly to accommodate year-of-death estimates, with each study concentrating on decedents who died in the first year (the focus year) of the 3-year cycle. The annual samples are also adequate for producing filing-year estimates. Year-of-death estimates are desirable, because filing extensions and other filing delays mean that returns filed in any given calendar year may represent decedents who died in many different years. Thus, estate tax return data for a single filing year may reflect different economic and tax law conditions. By concentrating on a single year of death, these limitations can be overcome, making it possible to study the data in the context of a single time period. Returns are selected using a stratified random sample with three stratifying variables. The stratifying variables are: year of death (focus year versus nonfocus years), total gross estate plus certain adjusted taxable gifts made during a decedent’s lifetime, and age at death. The gross estate plus gifts variable is divided into four categories: $1.5 million under $2.5 million, $2.5 million under $5 million, $5 million under $10 million, and $10 million or more. Age at death is also divided into five categories: under 40, 40 under 50, 50 under 65, 65 under 75, and 22 296 75 and older. Sample rates vary from 3 percent to 100 percent, with over half the strata selected with certainty, i.e., at the 100-percent rate. SOI has combined Federal estate tax returns filed in 2004, 2005, and 2006 to produce the estimates of wealth for 2004 presented here. One of the strengths of estimates derived from SOI samples of estate tax returns is the large sample on which the estimates are based. The 2004 sample includes more than 25,800 returns.22 While the sample size and richness of available data make the estimation techniques used in this study attractive, there are limitations to be noted. First, and most important, estate tax returns provide a presumably random sample, stratified by age, not of the total population, but of living persons with gross estates at or above the estate tax filing threshold. Sample rates are approximated by appropriate mortality rates. However, determining appropriate mortality rates for use in calculating sample weights is by no means a straightforward exercise. The Appendix to this article discusses the estate multiplier technique and recent innovations in calculating sample weights for SOI’s personal wealth estimates. Second, while estate tax returns are generally prepared by professionals and are, therefore, likely to be more accurate in detail than survey responses, the values reported are used to compute tax liability, so that there is a natural tendency for the values to be somewhat conservative. This is especially true for hard-to-value assets, such as businesses and certain types of real estate. It should also be noted that the estate tax data used for these estimates are preaudit figures. A Statistics of Income (SOI) study, based on the results of IRS audits of estate tax returns, estimated that detected undervaluation of assets was about 1.2 percent of total asset holdings.23 In addition, it is common to claim substantial discounts when valuing ownership interests of less than 50 percent in small companies, partnerships, and other nonliquid assets. Increasingly, estate planning techniques are used to fracture ownership interests in a variety of business and financial assets to take advantage of these discounts. Although the overall sample of estate tax returns is large, the number of decedents who were young (less than 40) or extremely wealthy (gross assets of $5 million or more) in any given year varies considerably and is small in comparison to their numbers in the living population. Because of this, the resulting estimates of wealth for these two categories of living individuals would be subject to significant fluctuations from period to period. To reduce this variance, the sample is “smoothed” by including all returns for young or wealthy decedents filed during the 3-year sample period without regard to their years of death. These segments of the sample are then poststratified and reweighted to represent the true decedent population for the year of interest. This technique reduces the effect of outliers on estimates of personal wealth. 23 Eller, Martha Britton (2001), “Audit Revaluation of Federal Estate Tax Returns,” Internal Revenue Service Statistics of Income Bulletin, Winter 2000-2001, Washington, DC. Personal Wealth, 2004 Statistics of Income Bulletin | Fall 2008 Third, while estate tax returns report assets that are owned outright, total wealth might ideally include wealth to which a person has an income interest but not necessarily actual title. Examples of the latter include defined-benefit pension plans and Social Security benefits. Finally, the wealth of some individuals near death may differ somewhat from that of the general population in the same age cohort. For some, portfolios may have been altered or simplified to ensure the uninterrupted continuation of an ongoing business or to simplify the task of executing the estate. For others, wealth will have been reduced through expenses related to a final illness. In many cases, effective estate planning may also have reduced the value of the estate reportable for tax purposes. Appendix: The Estate Multiplier Technique The estate multiplier technique assumes that estate tax returns, taken as a whole, represent a random sample of the living wealthy population and thus provide a means of producing reasonable estimates of personal wealth.24 Estimates of the wealth holdings of the living population are derived by applying a multiplier, based on appropriate mortality rates, to this sample. The multiplier is equivalent to a sampling weight where the probabilities of selection include the probability of being a decedent and also that of being included in the Statistics of Income sample of estate tax returns. Mathematically, this is represented as MULT= 1 / (p · r ) where: p = probability of selection to the estate tax sample, r = mortality rate appropriate to wealthy individuals. Some smoothing of the multipliers was employed to constrain both tails of the net worth distribution. The more difficult computation is determining the probability of being a decedent. Mortality rates for the general population, by age and sex, are available from the National Center for Health Statistics. However, there is much evidence that the wealthy have mortality rates significantly lower than those of the entire population. Research has demonstrated that individuals who are economically or socially better off also live longer, on average, and are healthier.25 Factors such as access to better health services, better diet and nutrition, and fewer work-related risks seem to contribute to this phenomenon. If mortality and wealth are inversely related, then mortality rates for the general population, unadjusted for wealth level, will result in multipliers that are too low and, thus, undervalue wealth. Therefore, it is important to determine a mortality rate appropriate to the wealthy decedents in the estate tax return filing population. There have been a considerable number of attempts to quantify differences between the mortality of the general population and that of the very wealthy, looking at such factors as education, income, and occupation. In years prior to 2001, SOI calculated mortality rates for its Personal Wealth estimates by adjusting mortality rates for the entire population using mortality differentials derived from the National Longitudinal Mortality Study (NLMS) sponsored by the National Institutes of Health. Starting with the 2001 estimates, however, estate multipliers have been calculated using mortality rates for holders of large dollar value annuity policies obtained from the Society of Actuaries (SOA). This data source has several advantages relative to using the NLMS mortality differentials. First, the annuitant mortality rates are available for every year, in contrast to the NLMS differentials, which are updated on a biennial cycle. Second, use of this source is consistent with other academic research within and outside the IRS.26 For consistency, estimates for 1998 used in this article were recalculated using the annuitant mortality rates. 24 See Atkinson, A.B. and A.J. Harrison (1978), Distribution of Personal Wealth in Britain, Cambridge University Press, London, for a thorough discussion of the estate multiplier technique. 25 See, for example, Attanasio, O. and C. Emmerson (2003), “Mortality, Health Status, and Wealth,” Journal of the European Economic Association, June 2003, Volume 1, Number 4, pp. 821-850. 26 See, for example, Friedberg, Leora and Anthony Webb, “Life is Cheap: Using Mortality Bonds to Hedge Aggregate Mortality Risk,” January 2006, NBER Working Paper Number W11984. 297 Personal Wealth, 2004 Statistics of Income Bulletin | Fall 2008 Table 1. Personal Wealth 2004: Top Wealth Holders with Gross Assets of $1.5 Million or More, Type of Property by Size of Net Worth [All figures are estimates based on samples—numbers are in thousands, money amounts are in millions of dollars] Debts and mortgages Total assets Net worth Personal residence Size of net worth Number (1) Total Under $1.5 million [1] $1.5 million under $2.0 million $2.0 million under $3.5 million $3.5 million under $5.0 million $5.0 million under $10.0 million $10.0 million under $20.0 million $20.0 million or more 2,728 531 746 846 247 231 79 47 Amount Number Amount Number (2) (3) (4) (5) 11,076,759 736,039 1,386,077 2,316,701 1,082,889 1,668,002 1,155,326 2,731,726 Other real estate 2,099 468 544 614 192 176 64 40 850,622 231,035 98,187 147,370 58,950 104,811 69,849 140,421 Closely held stock 2,728 531 746 846 247 231 79 47 Amount Number (6) (7) 10,201,246 480,113 1,287,890 2,169,331 1,023,939 1,563,191 1,085,477 2,591,305 Publicly traded stock Size of net worth Total Under $1.5 million [1] $1.5 million under $2.0 million $2.0 million under $3.5 million $3.5 million under $5.0 million $5.0 million under $10.0 million $10.0 million under $20.0 million $20.0 million or more Amount (8) 2,062 410 549 639 194 173 61 36 1,185,941 176,105 229,369 342,206 127,444 148,543 76,472 85,802 State and local government bonds Number Amount Number Amount Number Amount Number Amount (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) 1,531 255 406 475 153 149 58 35 1,402,029 134,674 206,626 329,893 152,634 230,146 137,770 210,286 682 119 140 187 86 82 35 32 1,127,194 42,431 69,066 141,272 95,958 165,781 136,144 476,542 2,100 339 567 670 209 202 69 43 2,247,269 63,062 219,818 415,249 209,459 373,575 246,824 719,282 Corporate and foreign bonds 994 73 264 336 123 122 47 29 700,114 8,255 61,720 110,990 71,715 121,735 104,650 221,051 Bond funds Federal savings bonds Other Federal bonds Number Amount Number Amount Number Amount Number Amount (19) (20) (17) (18) (21) (22) (23) (24) Size of net worth Total Under $1.5 million [1] $1.5 million under $2.0 million $2.0 million under $3.5 million $3.5 million under $5.0 million $5.0 million under $10.0 million $10.0 million under $20.0 million $20.0 million or more Footnotes at end of table. 298 246 39 74 87 23 15 5 2 13,244 488 3,334 6,220 1,811 941 316 134 489 45 126 181 51 52 20 14 180,708 2829 20,084 32,518 12,762 24,323 18,589 69,605 630 52 174 222 76 66 26 14 109,159 2,039 16,096 25,279 10,876 16,170 11,411 27,288 222 26 63 81 20 20 8 4 22,678 885 3,854 6,339 2,289 2,794 4,555 1,961 Personal Wealth, 2004 Statistics of Income Bulletin | Fall 2008 Table 1. Personal Wealth 2004: Top Wealth Holders with Gross Assets of $1.5 Million or More, Type of Property by Size of Net Worth—Continued [All figures are estimates based on samples—numbers are in thousands, money amounts are in millions of dollars] Diversified mutual funds [2] Cash Cash management accounts Mortgages and notes Size of net worth Number (25) Total Under $1.5 million [1] $1.5 million under $2.0 million $2.0 million under $3.5 million $3.5 million under $5.0 million $5.0 million under $10.0 million $10.0 million under $20.0 million $20.0 million or more 793 108 216 259 83 80 28 18 Amount (26) 96,627 4,333 15,223 24,618 12,969 10,358 9,677 19,449 Number (27) 2,563 495 705 785 235 221 77 46 Amount (28) 574,681 35,184 92,092 128,397 66,514 70,890 48,881 132,723 Cash value life insurance Noncorporate business assets Number (33) Number (35) Size of net worth Total Under $1.5 million [1] $1.5 million under $2.0 million $2.0 million under $3.5 million $3.5 million under $5.0 million $5.0 million under $10.0 million $10.0 million under $20.0 million $20.0 million or more 998 231 272 302 76 79 25 15 Amount (34) 144,481 38,255 36,671 41,380 10,662 11,243 3,731 2,540 643 115 119 183 68 90 37 29 Amount (36) 566,615 30,088 32,822 84,464 48,385 99,091 75,794 195,972 Number (29) Amount (30) 1,880 284 500 610 193 184 67 42 414,165 15,451 41,807 89,745 43,687 70,232 62,226 91,016 Farm assets Number (37) Retirement assets Amount (32) 650 89 151 184 80 81 38 27 283,451 15,339 35,321 43,906 28,700 47,846 40,314 72,025 Limited partnerships Amount (38) 277 39 72 95 22 29 11 8 Number (31) 300,787 23,792 48,882 78,157 29,036 38,332 28,359 54,228 Number (39) Amount (40) 394 35 79 111 52 57 32 27 362,713 7,580 10,399 30,335 19,649 50,368 53,605 190,777 Other assets Art Size of net worth Number (41) Total Under $1.5 million [1] $1.5 million under $2.0 million $2.0 million under $3.5 million $3.5 million under $5.0 million $5.0 million under $10.0 million $10.0 million under $20.0 million $20.0 million or more 2,063 423 556 639 185 170 58 33 Amount (42) 1,048,730 111,516 212,106 337,328 115,965 148,559 64,313 58,942 Number (43) 177 10 33 46 23 29 17 18 Amount (44) 49,891 531 712 1,602 1,552 4,066 7,052 34,375 Number (45) 2,460 481 669 750 226 212 76 46 Amount (46) 246,286 23,202 30,076 46,804 20,821 33,010 24,643 67,730 [1] Includes individuals with zero or negative net worth. [2] Mutual funds with a single investment objective are grouped with similar direct investments in this table. [3] Includes individual retirement accounts, annuities, and self-employed retirement or Keogh plans. NOTE: Detail may not add to total due to rounding. 299 Personal Wealth, 2004 Statistics of Income Bulletin | Fall 2008 Table 2. Personal Wealth 2004: Male Top Wealth Holders with Gross Assets of $1.5 Million or More, Type of Property by Size of Net Worth [All figures are estimates based on samples—numbers are in thousands, money amounts are in millions of dollars] Total assets Debts and mortgages Net worth Personal residence Size of net worth Number (1) Total Under $1.5 million [1] $1.5 million under $2.0 million $2.0 million under $3.5 million $3.5 million under $5.0 million $5.0 million under $10.0 million $10.0 million under $20.0 million $20.0 million or more Size of net worth Amount (2) 1,555 389 359 465 131 135 47 30 Other real estate Number (9) Amount (4) 1,208 339 258 346 102 100 38 25 583,805 184,673 54,149 96,654 37,496 74,003 41,466 95,364 Closely held stock Amount (10) Number (11) Number (5) Amount (6) 1,555 389 359 465 131 135 47 30 5,862,844 318,454 621,172 1,192,868 540,808 915,074 638,146 1,636,322 Publicly traded stock Amount (12) Number (13) Amount (14) Number (7) Amount (8) 1,144 298 257 339 100 95 33 22 597,971 117,554 97,605 163,984 60,123 68,653 38,710 51,342 State and local government bonds Number (15) Amount (16) Total 882 828,055 469 833,929 1,156 1,140,665 480 Under $1.5 million [1] 182 96,796 100 36,177 249 42,494 45 4,639 $1.5 million under $2.0 million 203 105,224 85 44,376 261 94,788 104 21,604 348,496 48,090 $2.0 million under $3.5 million 265 179,481 130 102,116 357 199,844 162 $3.5 million under $5.0 million 83 80,919 53 63,006 108 95,417 58 28,664 $5.0 million under $10.0 million 92 151,731 56 110,961 113 200,003 65 63,297 $10.0 million under $20.0 million 35 75,459 23 97,601 41 135,157 27 55,734 $20.0 million or more 23 138,446 21 379,692 27 372,962 18 126,469 Size of net worth Federal savings bonds Other Federal bonds Number (19) Number (17) Amount (20) Amount (18) Corporate and foreign bonds Number (21) Amount (22) Bond funds Number (23) Amount (24) Total 147 6,469 225 82,702 305 62,350 109 Under $1.5 million [1] 30 302 25 1,364 32 1,418 18 521 $1.5 million under $2.0 million 40 1,360 50 6,402 71 6,638 23 1,347 10,768 2,948 $2.0 million under $3.5 million 50 3,378 83 17,057 107 13,323 41 $3.5 million under $5.0 million 12 717 23 5,938 35 5,306 9 1,240 $5.0 million under $10.0 million 9 445 25 10,925 36 8,152 11 1,619 $10.0 million under $20.0 million 3 162 11 10,983 14 7,138 4 1,628 $20.0 million or more 1 105 8 30,034 10 20,374 3 1,464 Footnotes at end of table. 300 6,471,540 528,017 675,321 1,289,522 578,304 989,077 679,613 1,731,686 Number (3) Personal Wealth, 2004 Statistics of Income Bulletin | Fall 2008 Table 2. Personal Wealth 2004: Male Top Wealth Holders with Gross Assets of $1.5 Million or More, Type of Property by Size of Net Worth—Continued [All figures are estimates based on samples—numbers are in thousands, money amounts are in millions of dollars] Diversified mutual funds [2] Cash Cash management accounts Mortgages and notes Size of net worth Number (25) Total Under $1.5 million [1] $1.5 million under $2.0 million $2.0 million under $3.5 million $3.5 million under $5.0 million $5.0 million under $10.0 million $10.0 million under $20.0 million $20.0 million or more Size of net worth Amount (26) 417 78 95 128 43 44 16 12 53,014 2,748 6,150 11,824 7,482 4,895 5,505 14,409 Number (27) Amount (28) 1,461 361 339 436 122 129 45 29 351,407 24,123 40,470 73,508 35,249 44,827 27,624 105,608 Cash value life insurance Noncorporate business assets Number (33) Number (35) Amount (34) Amount (36) Number (29) Amount (30) 1,027 204 229 328 97 102 40 26 213,375 10,387 16,109 44,123 18,907 37,345 31,843 54,661 Farm assets Number (37) Number (31) Amount (32) 402 71 81 111 48 51 24 17 189,942 11,354 19,221 28,290 17,418 31,878 26,848 54,933 Limited partnerships Amount (38) Number (39) Amount (40) Total 685 102,716 430 382,753 174 178,803 215 Under $1.5 million [1] 182 30,925 98 26,699 32 18,686 21 211,350 5,011 $1.5 million under $2.0 million 161 22,345 72 21,362 39 25,421 34 5,252 $2.0 million under $3.5 million 203 28,669 119 57,613 57 44,810 62 16,948 $3.5 million under $5.0 million 54 7,815 40 29,601 14 15,702 30 13,552 $5.0 million under $10.0 million 54 7,927 56 57,200 19 25,178 34 31,793 $10.0 million under $20.0 million 18 2,896 24 54,326 7 15,838 18 28,725 $20.0 million or more 12 2,138 19 135,951 5 33,167 17 110,069 Size of net worth Retirement assets Number (41) Total Amount (42) Art Number (43) Other assets Amount (44) Number (45) Amount (46) 1,223 717,051 80 24,970 1,401 Under $1.5 million [1] 311 79,471 8 480 352 134,757 16,868 $1.5 million under $2.0 million 277 122,427 11 364 321 16,855 $2.0 million under $3.5 million 368 226,969 22 1,012 414 25,535 $3.5 million under $5.0 million 102 79,458 9 603 119 11,187 $5.0 million under $10.0 million 104 111,775 13 2,805 122 17,669 $10.0 million under $20.0 million 38 48,923 8 2,330 44 12,184 $20.0 million or more 22 48,026 10 17,376 29 34,459 [1] Includes individuals with zero or negative net worth. [2] Mutual funds with a single investment objective are grouped with similar direct investments in this table. [3] Includes individual retirement accounts, annuities, and self-employed retirement or Keogh plans. NOTE: Detail may not add to total due to rounding. 301 Personal Wealth, 2004 Statistics of Income Bulletin | Fall 2008 Table 3. Personal Wealth 2004: Female Top Wealth Holders with Gross Assets of $1.5 Million or More, Type of Property by Size of Net Worth [All figures are estimates based on samples—numbers are in thousands, money amounts are in millions of dollars] Total assets Debts and mortgages Personal residence Net worth Size of net worth Number (1) Total Under $1.5 million [1] $1.5 million under $2.0 million $2.0 million under $3.5 million $3.5 million under $5.0 million $5.0 million under $10.0 million $10.0 million under $20.0 million $20.0 million or more Size of net worth Amount (2) 1,173 143 387 380 116 96 33 18 4,605,219 208,021 710,757 1,027,179 504,585 678,924 475,713 1,000,040 Amount (4) 891 129 286 268 89 77 27 15 266,817 46,362 44,038 50,716 21,454 30,808 28,382 45,057 Closely held stock Other real estate Number (9) Amount (10) Number (11) Number (5) Amount (6) 1,173 143 387 380 116 96 33 18 4,338,402 161,659 666,719 976,463 483,131 648,116 447,331 954,983 Number (13) Amount (8) 918 113 291 300 94 79 28 14 587,970 58,550 131,764 178,222 67,321 79,890 37,762 34,461 State and local government bonds Publicly traded stock Amount (12) Number (7) Amount (14) Number (15) Amount (16) Total 649 573,974 213 293,264 944 1,106,604 514 Under $1.5 million [1] 72 37,879 19 6,255 90 20,568 27 3,616 $1.5 million under $2.0 million 203 101,402 55 24,690 307 125,030 160 40,116 351,618 $2.0 million under $3.5 million 209 150,412 57 39,155 314 215,405 174 62,900 $3.5 million under $5.0 million 70 71,714 33 32,953 101 114,042 64 43,051 $5.0 million under $10.0 million 58 78,416 27 54,820 88 173,572 58 58,437 $10.0 million under $20.0 million 24 62,312 12 38,543 28 111,667 20 48,916 $20.0 million or more 12 71,840 11 96,849 16 346,320 12 94,581 Size of net worth Federal savings bonds Other Federal bonds Number (19) Number (17) Amount (20) Amount (18) Corporate and foreign bonds Number (21) Amount (22) Bond funds Number (23) Amount (24) Total 99 6,775 264 98,007 324 46,809 113 Under $1.5 million [1] 9 185 21 1,465 19 621 9 365 $1.5 million under $2.0 million 34 1,974 76 13,682 103 9,457 40 2,507 11,910 $2.0 million under $3.5 million 37 2,843 97 15,461 115 11,956 39 3,391 $3.5 million under $5.0 million 11 1,095 28 6,824 41 5,570 12 1,049 $5.0 million under $10.0 million 6 496 27 13,398 30 8,018 9 1,175 $10.0 million under $20.0 million 2 154 9 7,606 11 4,272 4 2,926 $20.0 million or more 1 29 6 39,571 5 6,913 1 497 Footnotes at end of table. 302 Number (3) Personal Wealth, 2004 Statistics of Income Bulletin | Fall 2008 Table 3. Personal Wealth 2004: Female Top Wealth Holders with Gross Assets of $1.5 Million or More, Type of Property by Size of Net Worth—Continued [All figures are estimates based on samples—numbers are in thousands, money amounts are in millions of dollars] Diversified mutual funds [2] Cash Cash management accounts Mortgages and notes Size of net worth Number (25) Total Under $1.5 million [1] $1.5 million under $2.0 million $2.0 million under $3.5 million $3.5 million under $5.0 million $5.0 million under $10.0 million $10.0 million under $20.0 million $20.0 million or more Size of net worth Amount (26) 376 30 121 131 40 36 12 6 43,613 1,584 9,073 12,793 5,487 5,463 4,172 5,040 Number (27) Amount (28) 1,102 133 366 348 113 92 32 17 223,274 11,061 51,623 54,890 31,266 26,063 21,257 27,115 Cash value life insurance Noncorporate business assets Number (33) Number (35) Amount (34) Number (29) Amount (36) Amount (30) 853 80 271 282 96 82 27 15 Number (31) 200,790 5,064 25,698 45,623 24,781 32,887 30,383 36,355 Farm assets Number (37) Amount (32) 247 18 71 73 32 30 14 10 93,509 3,986 16,099 15,615 11,283 15,968 13,466 17,092 Limited partnerships Amount (38) Number (39) Amount (40) Total 314 41,766 213 183,863 103 121,984 179 Under $1.5 million [1] 49 7,329 17 3,389 7 5,106 14 2,568 $1.5 million under $2.0 million 111 14,326 47 11,460 33 23,461 46 5,146 $2.0 million under $3.5 million 98 12,712 64 26,851 38 33,347 50 13,387 $3.5 million under $5.0 million 22 2,846 28 18,783 8 13,333 23 6,097 $5.0 million under $10.0 million 25 3,316 34 41,891 10 13,154 23 18,575 $10.0 million under $20.0 million 6 835 13 21,468 4 12,521 14 24,881 $20.0 million or more 3 402 10 60,021 3 21,061 10 80,708 Size of net worth Retirement assets Number (41) Amount (42) Art Number (43) 151,363 Other assets Amount (44) Number (45) Amount (46) Total 840 331,679 96 24,920 1,059 Under $1.5 million [1] 112 32,045 3 51 130 111,530 6,334 $1.5 million under $2.0 million 279 89,679 22 348 348 13,221 $2.0 million under $3.5 million 270 110,359 24 590 336 21,269 $3.5 million under $5.0 million 82 36,507 15 949 107 9,635 $5.0 million under $10.0 million 66 36,784 15 1,261 90 15,341 $10.0 million under $20.0 million 20 15,390 9 4,723 32 12,459 $20.0 million or more 10 10,916 8 16,999 17 33,271 [1] Includes individuals with zero or negative net worth. [2] Mutual funds with a single investment objective are grouped with similar direct investments in this table. [3] Includes individual retirement accounts, annuities, and self-employed retirement or Keogh plans. NOTE: Detail may not add to total due to rounding. 303 Personal Wealth, 2004 Statistics of Income Bulletin | Fall 2008 Table 4. Personal Wealth 2004: Male Top Wealth Holders with Gross Assets [All figures are estimates based on samples—numbers are in thousands, money amounts are in millions of dollars] Number (1) Total Under 50 50 under 65 65 under 75 75 under 85 85 and older Age Amount (2) 1,555 504 541 269 174 66 6,471,540 1,574,213 2,352,406 1,243,488 950,436 350,996 Other real estate Number (3) Amount (4) 1,208 436 420 189 118 45 583,805 278,616 192,499 71,684 32,371 8,635 Closely held stock Net worth Number (5) Personal residence Amount (6) 1,555 504 541 269 174 66 5,862,844 1,270,706 2,159,907 1,171,804 918,065 342,361 Publicly traded stock Number (7) Amount (8) 1,144 369 412 200 124 40 597,971 195,305 214,106 97,363 68,479 22,718 State and local government bonds Number Amount Number Amount Number Amount Number Amount (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) Total 882 828,055 469 833,929 1,156 1,140,665 480 Under 50 248 208,018 173 247,875 341 248,653 83 53,864 50 under 65 342 318,486 185 341,601 403 313,589 162 100,564 348,496 65 under 75 167 175,539 71 140,477 208 199,448 94 66,442 75 under 85 97 97,472 33 86,064 147 248,770 97 82,849 85 and older 28 28,540 8 17,912 57 130,206 44 44,776 Age Total Federal savings bonds Other Federal bonds Corporate and foreign bonds Bond funds Number Amount Number Amount Number Amount Number Amount (17) (18) (19) (20) (21) (22) (23) (24) 147 6,469 225 82,702 305 62,350 109 Under 50 31 1,153 49 15,417 66 12,487 30 3,506 50 under 65 50 1,350 69 24,165 98 17,106 36 3,462 10,768 65 under 75 36 1,360 41 13,637 64 11,269 23 1,726 75 under 85 23 1,946 45 21,333 53 15,422 14 1,516 85 and older 7 660 21 8,149 25 6,066 7 558 Footnotes at end of table. 304 Debts and mortgages Total assets Age Personal Wealth, 2004 Statistics of Income Bulletin | Fall 2008 Table 4. Personal Wealth 2004: Male Top Wealth Holders with Gross Assets—Continued [All figures are estimates based on samples—numbers are in thousands, money amounts are in millions of dollars] Diversified mutual funds [1] Age Number (25) Total Under 50 50 under 65 65 under 75 75 under 85 85 and older Amount (26) 417 105 150 82 58 21 53,014 10,914 17,444 12,660 8,798 3,197 Cash value life insurance Age Total Cash Number (27) Cash management accounts Amount (28) 1,461 462 512 256 167 64 351,407 75,796 151,599 57,050 46,686 20,277 Noncorporate business assets Number (29) Amount (30) 1,027 301 353 192 132 50 Mortgages and notes Number (31) 213,375 48,221 75,925 41,967 34,248 13,014 Farm assets Amount (32) 402 121 140 79 48 14 189,942 53,587 66,884 36,536 26,301 6,634 Limited partnerships Number Amount Number Amount Number Amount Number Amount (33) (34) (35) (36) (37) (38) (39) (40) 685 102,716 430 382,753 174 178,803 215 211,350 Under 50 205 33,404 158 121,152 40 27,897 46 41,037 50 under 65 254 39,224 164 150,551 70 81,170 83 69,063 65 under 75 116 15,862 61 64,146 31 36,405 43 55,057 75 under 85 80 10,468 37 39,511 26 24,224 34 35,262 85 and older 30 3,758 10 7,393 8 9,107 10 10,931 Age Total Retirement assets [2] Art Other assets Number Amount Number Amount Number Amount (41) (42) (43) (44) (45) (46) 1,223 717,051 80 24,970 1,401 134,757 Under 50 383 139,964 21 1,900 445 34,062 50 under 65 457 299,280 29 9,114 493 57,724 65 under 75 221 187,465 16 6,349 250 22,732 75 under 85 131 81,427 11 4,529 157 15,131 85 and older 31 8,915 4 3,078 56 5,108 [1] Mutual funds with a single investment objective are grouped with similar direct investments in this table. [2] Includes individual retirement accounts, annuities, and self-employed retirement or Keogh plans. NOTE: Detail may not add to total due to rounding. 305 Personal Wealth, 2004 Statistics of Income Bulletin | Fall 2008 Table 5. Personal Wealth 2004: Female Top Wealth Holders with Gross Assets of $1.5 Million or More, Type of Property by Age [All figures are estimates based on samples—numbers are in thousands, money amounts are in millions of dollars] Age Total assets Number (1) Total Under 50 50 under 65 65 under 75 75 under 85 85 and older Age Amount (2) 1,173 303 410 210 169 81 Age Total Under 50 50 under 65 65 under 75 75 under 85 85 and older Footnotes at end of table. 306 4,605,219 1,053,317 1,622,172 825,374 741,763 362,594 Other real estate Number (9) Total Under 50 50 under 65 65 under 75 75 under 85 85 and older Debts and mortgages 891 245 319 145 117 65 Amount (4) 266,817 106,773 105,709 31,890 16,653 5,792 Closely held stock Amount (10) 649 132 253 141 91 31 Number (3) 573,974 94,367 251,171 126,587 71,720 30,130 Number (11) 213 59 86 41 21 6 Amount (12) 293,264 90,678 105,724 46,905 38,909 11,048 Federal savings bonds Other Federal bonds Number (17) Number (19) Amount (18) 99 17 32 19 20 11 6,775 196 1,089 2,250 1,993 1,246 264 57 73 62 44 28 Amount (20) 98,007 14,150 32,704 11,070 28,835 11,248 Net worth Number (5) 1,173 303 410 210 169 81 Personal residence Amount (6) 4,338,402 946,543 1,516,463 793,484 725,110 356,802 Publicly traded stock Number (13) 944 235 321 174 143 70 Amount (14) 1,106,604 263,205 298,652 200,890 205,107 138,750 Corporate and foreign bonds Number (21) 324 68 97 75 55 30 Amount (22) 46,809 7,846 15,388 9,247 8,480 5,849 Number (7) Amount (8) 918 240 341 171 118 48 587,970 160,882 229,420 99,494 70,226 27,948 State and local government bonds Number (15) Amount (16) 514 95 154 108 104 53 351,618 48,019 99,834 71,347 88,059 44,358 Bond funds Number (23) 113 25 43 20 17 8 Amount (24) 11,910 2,420 5,773 1,343 1,294 1,080 Personal Wealth, 2004 Statistics of Income Bulletin | Fall 2008 Table 5. Personal Wealth 2004: Female Top Wealth Holders with Gross Assets of $1.5 Million or More, Type of Property by Age—Continued [All figures are estimates based on samples—numbers are in thousands, money amounts are in millions of dollars] Age Diversified mutual funds [1] Number (25) Total Under 50 50 under 65 65 under 75 75 under 85 85 and older Age 376 87 133 74 55 27 Age 43,613 8,440 16,158 6,914 8,977 3,124 Cash value life insurance Number (33) Total Under 50 50 under 65 65 under 75 75 under 85 85 and older Amount (26) 314 75 127 53 43 15 Amount (34) 41,766 10,654 16,926 6,907 5,348 1,931 Cash Number (27) 1,102 269 387 202 165 79 Amount (28) 223,274 45,727 63,868 35,707 53,459 24,513 Noncorporate business assets Number (35) 213 62 78 45 21 7 Amount (36) 183,863 59,753 62,657 24,239 30,188 7,026 Number (29) 840 220 330 156 106 28 Amount (42) 331,679 79,313 144,566 62,698 37,538 7,564 Amount (30) 853 211 297 149 134 61 200,790 59,997 61,975 36,062 28,644 14,113 Number (37) Amount (38) 103 11 38 30 16 7 121,984 14,440 53,246 30,252 17,526 6,519 Art Number (43) Number (31) Amount (32) 247 62 85 46 40 14 93,509 21,884 34,143 17,318 14,374 5,790 Number (39) Amount (40) 179 43 61 42 23 10 151,363 30,229 81,151 18,829 13,722 7,431 Other assets Amount (44) 96 17 36 25 12 6 Mortgages and notes Limited partnerships Farm assets Retirement assets [2] Number (41) Total Under 50 50 under 65 65 under 75 75 under 85 85 and older Cash management accounts 24,920 1,847 8,515 2,662 5,081 6,815 Number (45) 1,059 271 376 190 155 68 Amount (46) 111,530 39,267 39,213 14,655 12,283 6,111 [1] Mutual funds with a single investment objective are grouped with similar direct investments in this table. [2] Includes individual retirement accounts, annuities, and self-employed retirement or Keogh plans. NOTE: Detail may not add to total due to rounding. 307 Personal Wealth, 2004 Statistics of Income Bulletin | Fall 2008 Table 6. Top Wealth Holders with Net Worth of $1.5 Million or More, Net Worth and Selected Assets, by State of Residence, 2004 [1] [All figures are estimates based on samples—numbers are in thousands, money amounts are in millions of dollars] State of residence Net worth Number (1) Total Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming Other areas [3] 308 2,196 18 1 36 11 428 32 47 8 7 199 56 7 5 101 32 18 21 18 22 8 50 83 47 33 8 33 7 13 15 7 79 9 168 59 1 61 17 15 86 8 14 6 25 108 8 4 59 50 12 26 5 5 Financial assets [2] Amount (2) 9,721,133 79,123 4,776 139,861 94,704 1,793,642 163,324 197,801 30,923 27,850 904,014 270,677 22,552 23,982 476,354 112,272 55,332 65,084 65,404 92,315 35,173 191,279 335,482 261,085 135,682 61,786 115,716 23,966 83,265 80,768 27,342 324,712 28,107 942,812 223,408 3,988 228,532 58,554 61,328 399,312 30,782 67,856 18,850 100,778 492,663 52,674 20,584 223,984 180,008 28,415 127,515 106,698 28,042 Number (3) 2,194 18 1 36 11 427 32 47 8 7 198 56 6 5 101 32 18 21 18 22 8 50 83 47 33 8 33 7 13 15 7 79 9 168 59 1 61 17 15 85 8 14 6 25 108 8 4 59 50 12 26 5 5 Amount (4) 6,622,433 53,629 3,384 96,570 79,760 996,853 98,430 129,299 19,418 16,495 612,124 211,199 11,903 17,509 349,822 87,147 34,395 45,121 48,258 72,653 28,677 134,922 237,389 192,736 92,618 33,608 91,254 16,515 68,620 54,894 18,563 219,677 18,230 636,244 171,845 2,944 182,596 45,444 42,631 293,609 20,882 43,678 14,181 75,826 330,457 43,204 12,864 150,855 120,362 21,937 103,720 97,214 20,270 All real estate Number (5) 1,974 17 1 33 10 404 29 41 6 7 177 51 7 5 83 26 14 18 17 22 7 47 75 39 31 8 26 6 11 14 6 72 8 147 53 1 50 14 14 73 8 13 5 24 102 7 4 55 46 10 23 4 5 Amount (6) 2,277,191 17,512 897 34,175 8,075 691,416 51,571 63,737 8,121 8,416 221,033 60,494 10,647 4,055 77,028 13,344 5,635 8,376 8,018 15,543 5,950 37,892 82,248 34,803 25,875 5,238 17,673 4,420 6,396 22,132 7,245 79,200 4,957 218,876 41,138 777 30,049 6,217 13,685 70,258 8,124 17,713 1,433 17,670 59,259 5,128 3,944 51,348 50,261 5,839 22,016 3,109 8,227 All other assets Number (7) 2,042 18 1 34 11 405 31 45 7 7 188 54 5 5 90 29 18 21 18 22 7 45 75 40 32 8 32 6 13 15 5 67 9 141 54 1 55 17 14 74 7 14 5 24 107 8 4 55 49 12 24 5 5 Amount (8) 1,441,099 12,646 682 16,737 14,051 247,481 27,349 20,351 5,007 4,231 138,936 41,528 1,825 4,187 68,659 14,939 18,996 13,388 11,347 10,383 1,928 27,589 34,079 50,592 23,032 23,790 13,429 3,490 11,969 12,959 2,677 40,264 6,422 143,601 25,721 413 23,694 9,117 8,515 47,388 3,533 10,988 3,949 12,433 134,159 8,218 4,173 33,420 21,468 3,853 10,230 9,987 1,294 [1] While the size of the underlying sample of estate tax returns makes estimates of wealth derived using the estate multiplier technique fairly robust, estimates of wealth by State can be subject to significant year-to-year fluctuations. This is especially true for individuals at the extreme tail of the net worth distribution and for States with relatively small decedent populations. [2] Includes all stocks, bonds, mutual funds, cash, and cash management accounts. [3] Includes U.S. territories and possessions. NOTE: Detail may not add to total due to rounding. --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/agency%3Airs%3A5c24426cfb413bf2. Public record. Not legal advice.