France & Sweden is close in the numbers but France is notably cheaper to eat out and Healthcare quality can't even be compared (to French favor). But if you're wealthy you'd probably prefer Sweden still because of the low taxes around wealth.
I recently compared (by actually going there) Switzerland vs Sweden when I passed a FAANG tech interview in Zurich, but even with 4-5x Salary of what I have now, I would probably end up living poorer if I had kids (if more than 2, it's for certain) in Zurich.
So like, who is this article for.
Oh and Sweden is slightly ahead of France on the latest EHCI. Sweden scores near the bottom on accessibility (as is tradition, same thing 10 and 15 years ago even) but ranks highly overall and especially on outcomes, so I take issue with the assertion that French healthcare is much better.
https://santesecu.public.lu/dam-assets/fr/publications/e/eur...
I live in a country from the bottom of this ranking and can confirm from personal experience. Nothing works, people die, and still it's very expensive.
Child tax credits are varied as well and generally too low (IMO), maternity/paternity leave and especially child support are much weaker than in Nordic countries.
From my perspective the strongest case for Switzerland is the decentralized and half-direct democratic process, political stability due to consensus. But you only get that as a citizen, which is not easy to achieve (takes a decade and you have to jump through a whole bunch of hoops). But the Swiss are very happy with their governmental structure in comparison and cherish direct democracy especially.
This is why for example working in a high COL city with a high salary is ultimately better; your 10% going to savings will be higher. It might not matter if you never leave the high COL city, but ceteris paribus I’d rather have a larger number in the bank account.
It's largely meaningless, because some of what people are saving for in one country can be included in tax and social security contributions in another country - e.g. pensions and university tuition.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_minimum_annual_leave_b...
In Sweden you can invest your money in a special investment account which charges a certain fixed percentage each year on the amount you have in this account (cash and stocks). The percentage is based on the central bank interest rates (a special formula based on that) so it changes each year. In the past 10 years it has been around between 0.5-1% of the total amount you have in this account. Then all the profits you make are tax free as well as no tax on dividends and interest. You can't deduct losses though.
In Sweden there is no wealth tax and no inheritance tax.
EDIT: And for completeness, if you invest outside of the above mentioned type of account you have to pay 30% on profits and 30% on dividends and interests.
But yea, considering I pay close to 50% tax it's remarkable at the same time I can speculate in the market, make 500% and pay 1% tax on it. Or that people with actual money pay so little.
The current ISK tax is about 3x that of a low tax canton.
You think they pay 56% tax on income like the idiotic peasants?
"You don't have to move out of Sweden if you're a billionaire today. And actually, some billionaires are moving here" - https://www.bbc.com/news/business-68927238
So I'm pretty sure Ukranian devs will end up with one of the top salary rates in all of Ukraine, but the externalities of that are large.
Also developers use official exchange rate while everything is imported using market rate. 10% cut here.
>> the cost of living in Ukraine was low before the war and only got lower
This is not true. Some low skilled services are cheap, but high skilled are not.
Or are you talking about cost of housing near the frontline?
Dev salaries in Ukraine also down since the start of the war as no new projects are outsourced to the country.
But as sibling comments noted, the whole article is a giant slop, confusing employee costs for employers (this is what the linked Eurostat chart is about) and net salaries.
And the second chart titled "Where do taxes weigh the most on employers and employees?" doesn't actually show what it purports to show.
It only shows a small slice of the social security contributions that employers pay. It shows: 100% * (Employer SSC / Total cost to employer), but:
Total tax = Tax + Employer SSC + Employee SSC.
Total cost to employer = Gross salary + Employer SSC + "benefits/costs" (vary by country)
Paid out to employee = Gross salary - Tax - Employee SSC + "benefits/costs"
See Table 3.1 on page 71 for a summarized overview of "total tax wedge vs total employer cost" in various living situations (single, with children, low/average/high wage).
Note that this still doesn't tell the full story because it ignores some benefits and entitlements that depend on your living situation ("Non-standard tax relief").
[1] https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/LC_LCI_LEV__c...
Last time I have been there food has costed literally double than in my home country which is also in the Alps, also has that standard of living, etc.
But hey, you moderately save on taxes if you finally manage to settle there, which csn be a bit of a challenge since switzerland isn't the most easy country to get permanent residence in.
As a European who has traveled to nearly all European countries and lived in 6 different ones, the idea to only look at the taxrate when chosing your future home country sounds so ridiculously simplistic and money-focused that it could only have come from an American author.
The point of having more money is to lead a happy live. In some countries you need more money to do that than in others. And depending on your character, hobbies and goals in life some countries will make it much more expensive than others.
For example if you like enjoying a beer in the sun and you start living in Island because of the tax rate, your first winter depression will make you question how smart that really was. Or you will just travel to southern Europe on a regular basis, but then why not live there in the first place.
core expenditure borne by employers for the purpose of employing staff. They include employee compensation, with wages and salaries in cash and in kind, employers' social security contributions and employment taxes regarded as labour costs minus any subsidies received, but not vocational training costs or other expenditure such as recruitment costs and spending on working clothes
In other words, this doesn't whatsoever represent "hourly wage after taxes" and this article is complete slop.
[0] https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/LC_LCI_LEV__c...
[1] https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/cache/metadata/de/lc_lci_lev_e...
Imagine there's country A where i get a net salary of X and Y units of value out of my tax money. And country B where my net Salary is (X-M) and I get (Y+N) out of my tax money. Depending on the values of M & N, country B could be a clear winner at the end of the day.
Then there's everything to do with children (from direct subsidies to public schools or kindergarten slots), education (not everyone goes to university, for instance), and other subsidies that are income-dependent (two common ones in France are rent subsidy and a salary top-up for low-but-not-too-low incomes).
Plus, ultimately, 100% of what comes in goes out (modulo administrative costs) at the global scale, so you can't just average this or everywhere looks the same.
My second biggest recurring expense is childcare. Having a child is something you are in control of, so the weight you might give to childcare benefits is something that wildly depends on your life plans.
Same with unemployment benefits. Would you rather a strong safety net and 8% unemployment (Like France), or a weaker net and 4% unemployment, like the Netherlands?
As an example, if I have kids who need daycare and one country provides free daycare and another does not, then we need to account for the cost of daycare in our equation. And that may or may not fall under one's definition of disposable income.
So sure, there's an even more nebulous "value to society" concept, but since TFA is trying to get to dollars and cents I was trying to focus it on overall personal value. But even then one needs to not treat tax dollars equally.
The truth is that the tax rste alone is utterly meaningless.
Because you know where you don't have to pay taxes? If you live as a hermit in a desert cave. But that also means you won't benefit from the society around you. If you ignoring culture and which countries style of living you prefer (a werod idea, but ok), wouldn't it be wise to consider both the tax rate and what kind of society and surrounding it offers you in return?
Or phrased differently: what are you going to buy with the extra money that is gonna offset you living in a country you dislike?
Choosing a country in Europe is not like choosing a state in the US. The systems, culture, people, food and so on differ much more wildely. Choosing that over a minor tax difference thst could change with the next government is downright unhinged.
According to Statistics Norway the monthly average salary in Norway was 62070kr in 2025, so 744840kr per year.
https://www.ssb.no/en/arbeid-og-lonn/lonn-og-arbeidskraftkos...