taz.de
German Millionaire Count Drops Amidst Global Wealth Surge
Germany experienced a 2.5% decrease in millionaires in 2024, to 41,000 fewer than the previous year, while global numbers increased by 2.6%, according to Capgemini's World Wealth Report 2025; this is mainly due to economic stagnation in major European countries, but total wealth of the rich still increased, highlighting wealth concentration among the ultra-rich.
- What are the key factors contributing to the decrease in the number of millionaires in Germany while global numbers increase, and what are the immediate implications?
- The number of millionaires in Germany decreased by 41,000 (2.5%) in 2024, contrasting with a 2.6% global increase. This decline is primarily attributed to economic stagnation in major European countries, according to the Capgemini Research Institute's World Wealth Report 2025. However, the total wealth of the wealthy still increased, indicating a concentration of wealth among the ultra-rich.
- How does the concentration of wealth among the ultra-wealthy in Germany compare to global trends, and what are the underlying economic and social factors driving this disparity?
- The German millionaire decline stems from a shrinking middle-wealth segment ('Millionaires Next Door,' those with less than \$5 million), while the ultra-wealthy ('Ultra-High-Net-Worth Individuals' with over \$30 million) saw a 3.5% increase in numbers and a 6%+ rise in total assets. This highlights a growing wealth gap, even within the wealthy population.
- What policy implications arise from the widening wealth gap between 'normal' millionaires and ultra-high-net-worth individuals, and what types of policy interventions could effectively address this disparity?
- The disparity underscores the need for wealth redistribution policies targeting the ultra-rich, not the 'normal' millionaires. The report suggests that the traditional benchmark of wealth (\$1 million) is insufficient to represent significant wealth in today's economic climate, necessitating a revised approach to measuring and addressing wealth inequality.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The headline and introduction frame the decrease in German millionaires as a problem of societal importance, emphasizing the potential for 'collapse into poverty' for the wealthy. This framing draws attention away from broader issues of wealth inequality and focuses on the plight of those with substantial wealth, potentially influencing public perception. The use of the term "Millionaires Next Door" further positions the reader to empathize with a specific group of wealthy individuals.
Language Bias
The article uses emotionally charged language, such as 'absturz in die Armut' (collapse into poverty) and 'kirre zu machen und in die Irre zu leiten' (to drive mad and mislead), to evoke strong emotional responses from the reader. While this language is effective in creating dramatic effect, it compromises neutrality. The repeated use of the term 'Superreiche' (super-rich) also carries a negative connotation. More neutral alternatives could include 'high-net-worth individuals' or simply using numerical designations for wealth levels.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses on the decrease in millionaires in Germany but omits discussion of potential contributing factors beyond economic stagnation, such as tax policies or wealth redistribution measures. It also doesn't explore the impact of inflation on the value of a million dollars, which could explain the perceived decrease in millionaires.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a false dichotomy by framing the issue as a choice between helping 'normal millionaires' or taxing the ultra-wealthy. It ignores other potential solutions or policy approaches to address wealth inequality.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights the growing gap between the super-rich and the "normal" millionaires in Germany. While the number of millionaires decreased, the number of ultra-high-net-worth individuals increased, indicating a concentration of wealth at the top and worsening inequality. This contradicts the SDG target of reducing inequality within and among countries.