Private Wealth Is Redrawing the Map
Private wealth is becoming more mobile, but the story is no longer simply about millionaires leaving one country for another. Wealthy families are spreading residence rights, investments, businesses and family interests across several jurisdictions at once. Tax still matters, but legal certainty, access to markets, political stability, education and the ability to move capital are becoming part of the same decision.
The numbers show how far the trend has travelled. New World Wealth estimated that 142’000 millionaires changed country in 2025, compared with 120’000 in 2023 and 110’000 before the pandemic in 2019. Its current forecast puts the 2026 figure at 165’000. These figures are estimates rather than official migration statistics, but the direction is clear: internationally mobile wealth has moved well beyond the post-pandemic rebound.
There is also more wealth available to move. UBS estimates that global personal wealth increased by 10.8 percent in US-dollar terms in 2025, while almost one million people joined the ranks of dollar millionaires. The United States alone accounts for 35.7 percent of global personal wealth. Wealth creation remains heavily concentrated, but ownership and residence are becoming less tightly tied to one country.
Tax policy explains only part of the movement. Henley & Partners’ 2026 wealth-mobility research examines 12 dimensions and 38 indicators, including taxation, rule of law, geopolitical stability, capital mobility, quality of life, residence pathways and family access. Singapore, Italy, Switzerland, Greece, Hong Kong and New Zealand are among the jurisdictions attracting attention from internationally mobile wealth, while policy and tax changes are putting pressure on established European wealth centres including the UK, Germany and France.
Switzerland illustrates why the competition cannot be reduced to tax rates. Wealthy families also buy predictability. Political stability, a strong legal system, access to private banking and an established international business environment all influence where a family is prepared to place capital, establish residence or locate part of its wealth structure. A lower headline tax rate elsewhere does not automatically compensate for weaker institutions or uncertainty over how rules will be applied.
The same calculation works in reverse. Governments can change the economics of residence quickly through inheritance rules, capital taxes, residency regimes or restrictions on foreign investors. Families with businesses, property and investment portfolios spread across countries therefore face a more complicated question than whether to move. They have to decide which parts of their lives and balance sheets belong where.
Henley’s own client data points in that direction. During the first five months of 2026, the firm received applications from 86 nationalities across 47 investment-migration programmes, and more than 28 percent of applicants already lived outside their country of nationality. A growing group of wealthy families is not replacing one home country with another. They are building several points of access.
Capital follows only partly. Moving residence does not mean transferring an entire portfolio into the destination country. A Swiss resident may own a German company, hold US securities, have property in France and educate children in Britain. Citizenship, tax residence, asset custody and investment exposure increasingly sit in different places.
That makes wealth migration a portfolio issue as much as a lifestyle decision. Changing tax residence can alter the treatment of investment income, capital gains, inheritance, trusts, foundations and private companies. Currency exposure can change at the same time. Property acquired to support residency adds another asset to the balance sheet, while private businesses may continue to generate income elsewhere.
Countries also have more at stake than the assets arriving in private-bank accounts. Henley estimates that roughly 15 percent of migrating high-net-worth individuals are entrepreneurs or company founders; among centi-millionaires and billionaires, the share exceeds 60 percent. When these people relocate, business ownership, hiring, investment and future tax revenue can move with them.
The result is a competition for people as much as money. Residence programmes, tax regimes and investor incentives matter because they sit alongside schools, airports, political institutions, financial centres and access to other markets. The strongest proposition is rarely the country with the lowest tax bill on paper. It is the jurisdiction where a family can combine security, mobility and an acceptable economic cost over many years.
For wealth managers and family offices, the practical consequence is more demanding. A client considering a move cannot assess residency separately from the portfolio. Advisers need to know what happens to the operating company, investment accounts, property, succession structure and family governance before the address changes.
Global wealth migration is therefore becoming less about finding a single “safe haven” and more about deciding how much dependence a family wants on any one jurisdiction. The families moving capital most deliberately are not simply choosing where to live. They are deciding where to hold assets, where to establish rights and where they want the option to go next.
