Do people still endorse inequality reduction when they risk paying for it?

Humans dislike inequality. But to what degree do people endorse others who aim to reduce inequality when this entails risk to their own position? We addressed this question in five pre-registered, incentivised behavioural experiments (total N=3,700, US and British samples). We measured judgemental and behavioural endorsement of others who reduced inequality at a (financial) risk to participants finding that 1) endorsements were lower when reducing inequality entailed risk, 2) participants were sensitive to degrees of risk, and 3) anchored endorsement in their personal outcomes rather than general principles. At the same time, however, participants 4) valued others who reduced inequality more than those keeping the (participant benefitting) unequal status quo. And 5) existing impressions of others improved after reducing inequality, even at medium risk. Hence, even though people are sensitive to risk to their own outcomes, they endorse others who reduce inequality. Politicians may underestimate social support for inequality-reducing policies.