Girls get 6-11% less money from parents than boys, UK study finds

A study of more than one million children in the United Kingdom has found that girls aged 6 to 10 receive 6 to 11 per cent less money each month from their parents than boys of the same age. The research, by a team that includes Chuck Howard, an associate professor at the University of Virginia's Darden School of Business, was reported by the school on 29 October 2026. The working paper, titled "A childhood gender gap in parent-to-child financial transfers", was revised in October 2026 and is posted on the research site SSRN.

Most discussion of the gender money gap begins at the first job: unequal pay, career breaks after children, and smaller pensions for women. This study looks much earlier, at the money parents put into their children's hands. Its point is not that parents set out to treat daughters and sons differently. The regular, planned allowance showed no gap. The difference appears in the small, informal top-ups, the extra cash given on a whim or as a treat, which the authors say boys receive more often than girls.

The researchers' concern is what that money does. Pocket money is often a child's first experience of deciding how to spend, save or wait for something bigger. According to coverage of the study, Howard said it means boys have money they get to decide about more often than girls. He links that early practice to adult financial habits and confidence, though that link is the researchers' view and is not something the data on children directly measures. The paper itself tracks children only up to age 15.

The study uses records of actual transfers and purchases rather than what children or parents remember, which avoids under-reporting. The limit is that it covers only families whose children's money passed through the records the authors used, in one country, so it may not describe every household. It is a working paper, which means it has not yet been published in a peer-reviewed journal.

For Indian readers, the research does not cover India and its figures cannot be applied here. What it offers is a pattern to notice: an equal main allowance can sit alongside uneven extras.

Peepals calculation: The paper's dataset has 126 million transfers spread over about 1.15 million children, an average of roughly 110 transfers per child (126 ÷ 1.15 ≈ 109.6), and 101 million purchases, roughly 88 per child (101 ÷ 1.15 ≈ 87.8). So for every 10 transfers a child received, the children made about 8 purchases (101 ÷ 126 ≈ 0.80). Our calculation from the reported figures.

Short-term: The findings give parents, schools and financial-education groups a measured figure for a gap that was often discussed in general terms. The researchers suggest that steady, regular allowances, rather than frequent unplanned cash, would reduce the difference, since the planned allowance showed no gap.

Long-term: If later research confirms that early control over money shapes adult habits, the study adds to the case for starting financial education, and equal treatment of daughters and sons, well before working age.

Who is affected: Parents and grandparents who give children money, girls and boys aged 6 to 15, teachers of money skills, and organisations working on women's financial independence.

Questions and Answers