Residents of a handful of countries still face an annual tax on the net value of their assets, while most OECD members have eliminated or narrowed such levies. The remaining regimes differ sharply in scope, thresholds, rates, and treatment of foreign holdings, creating both opportunities and pitfalls for high‑net‑worth individuals considering relocation.
Current wealth‑tax regimes
| Country | Tax base | Threshold | Top marginal rate | Scope (worldwide vs domestic) | Notable features |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Norway | Net worth (all assets) | 1.9 million kr (~US$197 k) | 1.1 % on assets > 21.5 million kr (~US$2.2 m) | Worldwide, including foreign property (partial discounts) | Main home counted at 25 % of market value up to 10 m kr; generated ~NOK 32 bn (US$3.3 bn) in 2023 from ~655 k taxpayers |
| Switzerland | Cantonal/communal wealth tax (no federal levy) | CHF 80 k–83 k (≈US$104 k) depending on canton | Up to ~1 % in Geneva; ~0.3 % in Zurich for wealth > CHF 3.3 m | Worldwide, excluding foreign real estate | Rates vary by canton/municipality; “lump‑sum” forfait tax for non‑working foreigners (wealth assessed on 20× negotiated income) |
| Spain | Regional net‑wealth tax + national solidarity tax | €700 k (regional) / €3 m (national) | 3.5 % (regional) / up to 3.5 % (national) | Worldwide for residents; Spanish assets for non‑residents | Regional rates can be 0 % (e.g., Madrid); national solidarity tax (1.7‑3.5 %) made permanent in 2023; Beckham law exempts foreign assets for up to 6 years |
| Colombia | Net assets (UVT‑based) | 40 000 UVT ≈ US$530 k (after decree) | 5 % on assets > 2 million UVT ≈ US$28 m | Worldwide for residents; only Colombian assets for non‑residents | Decree 1474 (Jan 2026) was suspended and struck down in April 2026, leaving the tax in limbo |
| Argentina | Personal assets tax | No explicit threshold; rates applied to total | 0.25 % (planned 2027) after step‑down from 1.5 % in 2023 | Worldwide | Top bracket eliminated in 2024 reform; pre‑payment option at 0.75 % of 2023 assets |
| Uruguay | Domestic assets only | ~US$120 k (individual) / US$240 k (family) | Flat 0.1 % | Only assets located in Uruguay | Residents with overseas wealth pay nothing; 11‑year tax holiday on foreign income for new arrivals |
| Netherlands | “Box 3” deemed‑return tax (treated as wealth tax) | €57 684 (2025) – €59 357 (2026) tax‑free | 36 % on deemed return (assumed 1.37 % on deposits, 5.88 % on stocks/crypto, etc.) | Worldwide, but based on assumed returns rather than actual gains | Tax owed regardless of portfolio performance; Supreme Court rulings (2021, 2024) deem the system incompatible with human‑rights standards; shift to taxing actual returns slated for 2028 (still pending) |
| France | Real‑estate wealth tax (IFI) | €1.3 m net property | 1.5 % top rate | Worldwide property only | Raised €2.3 bn in 2025 from ~193 k households; newcomers taxed only on French property for first five years; possible replacement with a broader financial‑wealth levy under political debate |
| Italy | Tax on foreign assets | No universal threshold; 1.06 % on foreign real estate, 0.2 % on foreign financial assets | 1.06 % (real estate) / 0.2 % (financial) | Only assets held abroad | Domestic assets exempt; flat‑tax regimes (e.g., €300 k/year for new residents from 2026) also waive these levies |
| Belgium | Securities‑account tax | €1 m per account | 0.15 % on whole account value once threshold crossed | Worldwide securities holdings | Cap applied to accounts just above €1 m; in force since 2021 |
How the regimes differ
- Scope of assets – Norway, Spain, Switzerland, Colombia, Argentina, and the Netherlands tax worldwide wealth. Uruguay, Italy, and Belgium limit the tax to domestic or specific asset classes.
- Thresholds – Most countries set a low entry point (e.g., CHF 80 k in Zurich, €700 k in Spain). Uruguay’s threshold is relatively high (US$120 k) but applies only to domestic assets.
- Rate structure – Low, broad‑based rates (Switzerland’s 0.05‑1 %) tend to survive, while high rates on narrow bases (Sweden’s pre‑2007 tax, France’s pre‑2018 tax) have been repealed.
- Special regimes – Spain’s Beckham law, Switzerland’s lump‑sum forfait, Uruguay’s 11‑year foreign‑income holiday, and Italy’s flat‑tax schemes can dramatically reduce or eliminate wealth‑tax exposure for newcomers.
Recent trends and policy volatility
- Repeals and reductions – Since the mid‑1990s, Austria, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Iceland, Italy, the Netherlands, and Sweden have eliminated broad wealth taxes, citing administrative complexity, capital flight, and lower‑than‑expected revenue.
- Temporary spikes – Colombia’s emergency decree (Jan 2026) introduced a 5 % top rate, only to be struck down weeks later, illustrating the risk of abrupt policy shifts.
- Political uncertainty – France may replace the IFI with a broader financial‑wealth levy if Marine Le Pen wins the 2027 election; the Netherlands’ shift from deemed‑return to actual‑return taxation is still pending a Senate vote.
Practical considerations for potential movers
- Determine the tax base – Verify whether the jurisdiction taxes worldwide assets or only domestic holdings. If you hold most of your wealth abroad, Uruguay or Italy may offer the lowest exposure.
- Check thresholds and exemptions – Some regions within a country (e.g., Swiss cantons, Spanish autonomous communities) provide significant relief. Selecting a favorable canton or region can cut the effective rate substantially.
- Assess special regimes – The Beckham law can shield foreign assets for up to six years in Spain; Switzerland’s lump‑sum tax bases wealth on a multiple of declared income rather than actual assets.
- Plan for exit costs – Leaving a wealth‑tax country may trigger exit taxes (not covered here) that can add a one‑time liability.
- Monitor legislative risk – Countries that have introduced wealth taxes via emergency decrees (Colombia) or are debating major reforms (France, Netherlands) present higher policy‑uncertainty risk.
Summary
Only a minority of OECD members continue to levy a direct wealth tax, and the surviving regimes cluster around low rates on broad bases (Switzerland) or narrow, asset‑specific taxes (France’s IFI, Italy’s foreign‑asset levy). High rates on limited asset pools have largely been abandoned, reflecting the difficulty of administration and the tendency of wealthy taxpayers to relocate. For high‑net‑worth individuals, the decisive factors are the geographic scope of taxation, the presence of thresholds or exemptions, and the stability of the legal framework. Careful comparison of these elements can prevent unexpected liabilities when moving across borders.
