usatoday24

Where would you live if money were no problem? There are those who will say that they would go to the countryside, where there is no Internet connection, to live life and take care of a garden and some chickens (spoiler: it is quite sacrificial), but the reality is rather different. The millionaires of the world have other preferences and a recent report by the firm Henley & Partners has shed a lot of light on the matter. It turns out that millionaires care little about the field, the garden and the chickens. Your favorite destinations are others. The report. He “Henley Private Wealth Migration Report 2026” is a report that measures the structural competitiveness of countries to attract and retain the fortunes of millionaires. Each country receives a score from zero to 100 based on several factors, such as tax treatment, quality of life, geopolitical stability, etc. The higher the score, the more “interesting” that country is to live, invest or deposit capital. That score, as a curious fact, is called “Wealth Mobility Competitiveness Score”, which sounds much more fancy that “competitiveness index in terms of asset mobility”. Panoramic of Singapore | Image: Song Kaiyue A little house in Singapore… According to the report, the most interesting country for millionaires is Singapore, whose score is 79.5. The reason, the firm argues, is that it is a country “with political stability, solid institutions, deep capital markets and sustained demand for assets with international mobility throughout Asia.” Their proximity to Hong Kong and China clearly makes them win points economically. …another in New Zealand… With a score of 75.8, New Zealand is attracting investors thanks to the “relaunch of its Active Investor Plus Visa Programme, stable legal and regulatory environment, geopolitical stability and its position as a safe destination away from geopolitical hotspots,” the report states. Panoramic view of Mount Cook in Canterbury, New Zealand | Image: Donovan Kelly …and of course, spend the summer in the Cayman Islands. Not because of its beaches, not because of how beautiful the Pedro St. James Castle is (now converted into a museum), not because of how good Seven Mile Beach is, but because, according to the report, “a leading jurisdiction in wealth structuring, supported by a neutral fiscal framework, legal certainty and a sophisticated financial services ecosystem.” This is what it means to be a tax haven.which allows you to achieve a score of 74.3. The other contenders. There are a total of 16 countries that equal or exceed 70 points. The three mentioned above top the list, but it is worth highlighting the large presence of European countries with Cyprus, the Netherlands, Italy, Latvia, Switzerland, Greece and Monaco. The report places special emphasis on Italy, a country considered an “example of success” thanks to its “single tax regime for new residents, a favorable tax framework for inheritance matters and access to the EU market.” Here is the list of the top countries: Those who do, but with doubts. The report also includes some countries that have implemented changes in their policies and regulations and that, therefore, are “creating pressure on their long-term competitiveness.” Among those countries are Germany (69.7), France (65.7), Norway (69) and the United Kingdom (68.3), countries that are debating or have already applied wealth taxes, or that are facing political uncertainties. The most striking case is that of the United Kingdom, which “faces competitiveness pressures that began after Brexit and have accelerated with recent tax reforms.” The paradoxical case of the United States. It is one of the main creators of wealth, but it is not attractive to maintain it. The reason, the report states, is “taxation based on citizenship, fiscal complexity and the long processing times for immigration files.” The norm, the firm explains, is that large American fortunes want to go to European countries and, to a lesser extent, Latin America and the Caribbean. And what does this tell us? Beyond curiosity, this report could be understood as a canary in the mine for millionaires. An increase in the migration of the wealthy population could be an indicator of the health of a country’s economic policy, while a greater outflow (in the case of the United States) would be an indicator of the opposite. However, it is not a perfect indicator nor can it be understood as such. The relationship “millionaires are leaving” = “the country is going badly” is not direct and may respond, for example, to a risk diversification strategy. It is what the report calls “sovereign portfolio” and, in essence, it is an idea that responds to something simpler: uprooting. The great fortunes are not attached to their country of origin, but diversify their residence, citizenship and business interests in different countries. It is, however, a short-term strategy that understands that states do not change, when this is not the case. What is an advantage today, in the long run, implies simultaneous dependence on several legislative and regulatory systems that, in short, increase the risk. Not to mention that a good country is not only one that has greater fiscal competitiveness, but also one that provides a solid social system. Cover image | Diego F. Parra In Xataka | Luxury homes in the US are selling like hotcakes and experts think they know why: AI