Item — HN Reader

Lots of people who work in Luxembourg don't live there so anything "per capita" is a bit misleading.

Additionally a lot of the EU's institutions are based there or have offices there, some of which might count as investments as well.

Lastly, everything there is really expensive. So you need to invest a larger amount to achieve the same thing as elsewhere.

2 comments

These are reasons why it might not be the largest provider of funds per capita, not why it would be by orders of magnitude the biggest recipient.

I have been to Luxembourg and to Hungary, Bulgaria & Greece - the otherwise obvious contenders for "poorest" in the EU and Luxembourg should not be in the picture.

If it gets funds for restoring one railway bridge or something of that sort the fact the population is tiny makes the per capita investment look huge, just usual tiny country effects.

A bunch of foreign companies also incorporate their EU subsidiaries there (presumably due to some tax benefit). I imagine that distorts their GDP quite badly as well.