The King Charles Syndrome and the Timing of the Great Wealth Transfer
Longevity, late inheritance and the policy trade-off between retirement security and early-life mobility in Europe. A commentary by Arnstein Aasve
Europe is about to witness the largest intergenerational transfer of private wealth in modern history. Trillions of euros—largely in housing assets, savings, pension wealth, and business equity—will move from the baby boom generation to their children and grandchildren in the coming decades.
The scale is extraordinary. But the defining feature may not be scale. It may be timing.
Life expectancy has increased by roughly a decade over the past half century. As a result, inheritance increasingly arrives later in life. The first major beneficiaries are not young adults in their twenties and thirties, but individuals in their late fifties and sixties, already approaching retirement.
Wealth that arrives at 60 stabilises. Wealth that arrives at 30 transforms. That distinction matters.
Late inheritance can improve retirement adequacy for cohorts with weaker pension prospects. In an era of longer lives, including more years lived with chronic illness, inherited wealth often functions as private longevity insurance, financing healthcare and long-term care. It may even ease fiscal pressure on public systems.
Young adults struggling with housing affordability or precarious employment may see little benefit if inheritance arrives decades too late. Families with substantial housing wealth pass on significant assets; those without remain excluded. Capital arriving in late midlife does little to reduce early-life risk aversion. Entrepreneurship, mobility, and fertility decisions remain constrained.
Governments therefore face a strategic choice. Should the Great Wealth Transfer function primarily as old-age insurance, or as a lever for early-life opportunity? In most European systems, inheritance remains a private matter—lightly taxed and only weakly connected to housing or pension strategy. If late inheritance increasingly substitutes for pension insurance, policymakers must ensure that retirement security does not depend on family wealth alone.
If the goal is mobility, late inheritance is poorly suited to the task. Housing supply reform, access for first-time buyers, and risk-sharing instruments for entrepreneurs address early-life constraints more directly than redistributing late-arriving wealth.
Longevity is one of Europe’s great achievements. The silver economy is expanding. The Great Wealth Transfer is real. But if inheritance increasingly arrives late, its function shifts from transformative capital to retirement stabiliser.
The King Charles Syndrome forces a simple question: should delayed inheritance quietly substitute for public insurance? Or should policy reshape timing so that capital supports earlier mobility and resilience?
The answer will shape intergenerational equity for decades to come.
Arnstein Aasve is one of the authors of the report Live Long and Prosper - The Silver Economy, a IEP-Allianz project
IEP@BU does not express opinions of its own. The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors. Any errors or omissions are the responsibility of the authors.
