 We're interested in what is the impact of the coronavirus crisis on human inequality? We know people are different along many dimensions their economic situation, their health, their mental well-being, and we want to know whether the coronavirus crisis exacerbates existing inequality, that is, makes the worse off, even worse off, and the best off, even better off, or whether it acts as a great equalizer. Now, there's various facets to all dimensions involved. First of all, what do we mean by the coronavirus crisis? It's that the pandemic directly is the measures taken by the government to control the pandemic, social distancing restrictions, lockdowns, and the like, and what role play economic support programs to firms to keep up employment relationships, and the like. In terms of outcomes, there's economic inequalities along the income and wealth dimensions, there is health inequalities in terms of physical health, and also in terms of mental health, and finally, there's different mediators. For example, young people tend to be less affected by the virus, but tend to have larger or more precarious employment relationships. The effects on genders might be different, especially if children are present in households, and the type of work might play a large role. For example, whether you are able to work from home, or whether you are classified as an essential worker during lockdowns. All of this potentially has important impacts on inequalities, and we want to know to what extent do they reduce or get larger through the coronavirus crisis. We started collecting data in the Netherlands in an online panel about one week after the lockdown started in mid-March. An online panel, what I mean by that, this is a set of about 7,000 people who are interviewed every month about a broad set of questions, and we have been able to add so far five different questionnaires of between 10 and 15 minutes length, specifically tailored to potential impacts of the coronavirus crisis to this online panel. That means we can track the same people over time, and we have a very good idea of which situation these people were in at the moment that the coronavirus hit. Once we've gathered the data and sliced through that in a sensible way, the empirical methods are fairly straightforward. That is, we use standard regression analysis to tease out the relationship between the coronavirus crisis, the mediators that we think of, and economic outcomes that we might think are affected. So our key findings to this point focus on ours worked relative to before the pandemic. We focus on ours worked because they give us a very good high frequency indicator on changes in labor demand, even in the presence of firing restrictions and firm subsidies that are specifically directed at keeping up employment relationships. So our first key finding is that during the first couple of months of the pandemic, while countries were in a mild form of lockdown, there is a very large explanatory power of being able to work from home and of being classified as an essential worker. If you could do almost all of your work from home or if you were classified as an essential worker, the hours reductions were zero or very limited, whereas they were very large for people for whom neither was the case. By June, when countries were operating under what we might call a new normal these days, this relationship had all but disappeared. That is, we saw large reductions in hours across the board lower than in March, but we do not see any or much of an impact anymore of the ability to work from home or of being classified as an essential worker. Now this has direct implications for the impact on inequality because those workers who can neither work a lot from home nor are classified as essential, they tend to be at the very bottom of the income distribution and we see very large effects in other countries there. However, by June, we do not see in the Netherlands any impact anymore of where you're located in the income distribution that is in particular of household income, household level income on changes in hours relative to before the pandemic. Surprisingly, we do not find any effect, any additional hours reductions in two-parent families. During the time where daycare centers and schools were closed, parents saw the same hours reductions as other people and did not have to reduce more in order to take care of the children during the time they would be usually at school or in daycare. Parents managed to make it work by shifting hours into the evening, working at the same time. They were homeschooling their kids, etc. and they managed to get by without reducing their hours beyond what everybody else did or had to do as well. First of all, in the context of the developed world, there really was no impact initially between controlling the pandemic and the economy. Controlling the pandemic through an early lockdown was really the best strategy to help the economy and to help mitigate the inequality impacts. Many jobs can be done from home, so we have seen that large parts of the economy continue to function well. The mitigation measures by the government, by the Dutch government, similarly by the German one for example, ensured that incomes were high or were close to previous levels for most people even during the period of the lockdown. And after the lockdown, we did not see any reductions in hours being related to the locations of households in the income distribution anymore. As the pandemic progresses, it is crucial to try to keep schools and daycare centers open. The coping strategies that we've seen that have protected the labor supply of parents during the time that schools and daycare centers were closed would work only in the short run. This was a very stressful pay period for families and it would not be possible for many of them to shift hours to this extent into the evening hours etc. in order to keep up their labor supply. If they have to reduce their labor supply, it would reinforce the recession that we already see. So this pandemic will continue to occupy us for the coming years and we will try to do our best to continue to supply research that is relevant for understanding its effects, particularly on inequality. So we will follow the same individuals over time in several ways. This will allow us to address, for example, questions like how do social norms change as, for example, a home office becomes more common. One thing you might expect, for example, is that this has an impact on the division of childcare duties in households. We know that men were much more willing to take on long commutes, which meant that they were essentially unable to pick up kids from school, from daycare in the afternoons. If they work from home now two or three days a week, they might as well be able to, leading to a more equal division of gender roles when it comes to childcare. Another important dimension is structural change. We just finish collecting data on whether individuals think about switching their type of career and we will be able to understand so given the type of job they currently have, are they worried about their employment prospects in this job going forward and what kind of employment are they looking for? Answers to these questions will be very important in guiding policy in the years to come as this pandemic progresses.