The Inclusion of Non-cash Housing Advantages in the Income Concept. Estimates and Distribution Effects for Belgium.1

As pointed out by the Canberra Group (2001), the way in which is dealt with the income value of home ownership is crucial for distributional analyses. The focus of the Belgian housing policy has always been on home acquisition rather than the provision of social housing. As a result, a large majority of Belgian households are living in their own home (around 70%), while only a small percentage are living in a social rented home (less than 10%). Home-ownership has a large impact on a household’s expenditure structure. Firstly, mortgage free owner-occupiers are much better off than renters with comparable incomes. Secondly, the impact of mortgage payments can lower a household’s disposable income considerably. Because of the large proportion of home-owners in Belgium, a serious attempt to estimate the economic well-being of households should take the non-cash advantage derived of home-ownership, the so-called ‘imputed rent ’ into account. Also tenants wh