Global Wealth Disparity: 0.001% Control Threefold of Poorest Half

A recent analysis reveals that fewer than 60,000 individuals, representing just 0.001% of the global population, possess three times more wealth than the entire bottom half of humanity. This finding, published in the World Inequality Report 2026, underscores the alarming levels of economic inequality that demand immediate action.

The report, compiled by 200 researchers and led by Ricardo Gómez-Carrera of the Paris School of Economics, highlights that the wealthiest 10% of income earners accumulate more than the remaining 90% combined. In stark contrast, the poorest half of the global population captures less than 10% of total earnings. Wealth concentration is even more severe than income distribution, with the richest 10% controlling an astonishing 75% of global wealth, while the bottom half owns merely 2%.

The report illustrates a troubling trend: wealth inequality is escalating at a rapid pace across the globe. “The result is a world in which a tiny minority commands unprecedented financial power, while billions remain excluded from even basic economic stability,” the authors stated. They noted that the share of global wealth held by the top 0.001% has increased from almost 4% in 1995 to over 6% in recent years. Meanwhile, the wealth of multimillionaires has risen by about 8% annually since the 1990s, nearly double the rate of growth for the bottom 50%.

Thomas Piketty, a prominent economist and co-author of the report, emphasized that while inequality has long been a characteristic of the global economy, by 2025 it will have reached levels that require urgent attention. Addressing inequality is not merely a question of fairness; it is essential for the resilience of economies, stability of democracies, and sustainability of the planet.

The World Inequality Report, produced every four years in collaboration with the United Nations Development Programme, is a comprehensive analysis based on the largest open-access database on global economic inequality. In a preface, Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz advocated for the establishment of an international panel similar to the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to monitor global inequality and provide evidence-based recommendations.

The report also sheds light on the inequality of opportunity that contributes to unequal outcomes. For instance, educational expenditure per child in Europe and North America is more than 40 times that of sub-Saharan Africa, a disparity that exacerbates the geography of opportunity. It suggests that implementing a 3% global tax on approximately 100,000 centimillionaires and billionaires could generate $750 billion annually, equivalent to the education budget of low- and middle-income countries.

Additionally, the report critiques the global financial system, which it claims favors wealthy nations. Advanced economies can borrow at lower rates and invest abroad for higher returns, allowing them to act as “financial rentiers.” Each year, about 1% of global GDP transfers from poorer to richer countries through net income transfers linked to high returns and low interest rates, amounting to nearly three times the total of global development aid.

Gender inequality also persists, with women earning only 61% of what men make per hour, excluding unpaid work. When unpaid labor is included, that figure drops to just 32%.

The report further connects wealth ownership to climate change. It states that wealthy individuals contribute more to the climate crisis through their investments than through their consumption. The poorest half of the global population accounts for only 3% of carbon emissions linked to private capital ownership, while the wealthiest 10% account for around 77%.

Addressing these inequalities is feasible, particularly through public investment in education and healthcare, alongside effective taxation and redistribution initiatives. The report indicates that while effective income tax rates rise for most of the population, they sharply decrease for billionaires and centimillionaires, leading to a situation where these elites pay a lower proportion of their income than many households with significantly lower earnings.

Ultimately, the report concludes that reducing inequality is a political choice complicated by fragmented electorates, the under-representation of workers, and the disproportionate influence of wealth. “The tools exist. The challenge is political will,” the authors assert.