The Greek government has unveiled an ambitious €1.6 billion package of tax incentives to address what Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis calls “the greatest threat” to the country: the demographic crisis. Announced as the most significant tax reform in half a century, the measure aims to boost birth rates and ease pressure on families in a context of accelerated aging and mass youth emigration.
The figures are stark: with a fertility rate of just 1.32 children per woman—well below the replacement level of 2.1—Greece could lose more than two million inhabitants by 2050, according to Eurostat. By then, over a third of the population will be over 65, compared with 23.3% today. The challenge is not only social but economic: pensions, healthcare, and the labor market will be profoundly destabilized if the trend is not reversed. According to the World Bank, the country’s population has been in decline since 2010.
Mitsotakis’ plan includes a two-point reduction in income tax, full exemption for low-income families with four children, and the abolition of property tax in small villages. People under 25 will also pay no income tax, and certain households could see annual savings of up to €1,600. The measure will take effect in 2026, financed—according to the government—by an unusual fiscal surplus.
Yet the fine print raises doubts. Critics point out that many young Greeks work in precarious or part-time jobs, earning around the minimum wage of €830 per month. Under those conditions, tax cuts have little impact, while housing costs in Athens already consume two-thirds of that salary and food prices rise by 6% annually. On top of this comes a disproportionate burden of indirect taxes (VAT and consumption levies), amounting to more than 17% of GDP—one of the highest shares in the EU.
The Hungarian example
The Greek case inevitably recalls the path taken by Hungary more than a decade ago. Viktor Orbán’s government launched a wide range of economic, fiscal, and social benefits that—despite international criticism for its outright rejection of mass immigration—have produced tangible results: slowing demographic decline and strengthening family cohesion. Measures include tax exemption for life for women with three of more children, forgivable loans for young couples, and mortgage benefits for large families.
While most European governments present immigration as the “solution” to an aging population, Budapest has shown in practice that investing in native families is not only feasible but profitable. Numerous diplomats privately acknowledge Hungary’s success, even if in public they denounce it as “anti-European” or “exclusionary.”
Greece appears to have taken note. After years of migratory pressure on its borders—marked by violence, social tensions, and mounting costs for the state—Athens has chosen to prioritize its own population. The goal is clear: reverse demographic decline without resorting to more immigration.
A domino effect in Europe?
The Greek step could set a precedent. Experts suggest that other conservative governments, particularly in countries where mass immigration has not yet become a decisive share of the population, may adopt similar measures in the coming years. Poland has already advanced with maternity support policies, and Italy is cautiously debating tax incentives in response to its own demographic winter.
While Brussels continues to advocate the latter path, some states are opting for the former, aware that a society without generational renewal cannot sustain its economy or its culture. With its tax reform, Greece now joins that camp. Time will tell whether it succeeds in replicating the Hungarian model or whether its measures turn out to be little more than pre-election band-aids, as critics claim. What is certain is that the debate over birth rates, sovereignty, and the future can no longer be hidden behind the one-size-fits-all discourse of immigration.
