IMF Completes 2025 Article IV Review of Luxembourg

• Luxembourg's fundamentals remain strong and economic recovery is projected to slowly gain pace amidst external headwinds. Downside risks prevail in the short term.
• Surprising on the upside, the fiscal balance improved to a surplus of 1 percent of GDP in 2024, boosted by one-off revenues. Given structurally high revenue volatility, prudent fiscal policy should be based on a more efficient use of fiscal space.
• The financial sector is resilient, with well-capitalized and liquid banks. While the risks are manageable, the housing market, and other pockets of vulnerabilities should continue to be closely monitored.

Washington, DC: On May 30, 2025, the Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) concluded the 2025 Article IV Consultation ^[1] with Luxembourg, and considered and endorsed the staff appraisal without a meeting on a lapse-of-time basis. ^[2]

Luxembourg's fundamentals remain strong, but its economic performance has been lackluster. Public debt is low and the 2024 FSAP found the financial sector sound and well-diversified. After contracting by 0.7 percent in 2023, GDP growth turned positive at 1 percent in 2024, mainly driven by public consumption. Private domestic demand though remained lackluster amidst tight financial conditions and a lack of confidence in the real estate sector. The labor market is cooling, following a sizeable increase in labor costs in past years. While the headline fiscal deficit showed a large improvement from one-off revenues, the underlying structural deficit has widened, reflecting a shift from temporary to permanent support. Financial conditions remain tight, and the financial cycle has not yet decisively turned. Despite some deterioration in asset quality, the financial sector remains resilient overall.

An economic recovery is projected to slowly gain pace amidst external headwinds. Growth is projected to increase to 1.6 percent in 2025 and accelerate in 2026–27 supported by improved confidence and a gradual recovery in external demand. The unwinding of labor hoarding and lingering uncertainty would weigh on job creation and unemployment is likely to rise in the near term, before slowly declining to its historical average. Inflation is projected to decline to about 2 percent in 2025 and stay at that level over the medium term. Downside risks prevail in the short term, with headwinds from weaker external demand and tighter and/or more volatile financial conditions triggered by trade policy uncertainty, geopolitical tensions, and possibly higher interest rates for longer. Risks to growth are more balanced over the medium term, but fiscal risks are assessed to be high.

Executive Board Assessment [3]

Luxembourg's recent economic performance has been lackluster and a projected recovery faces headwinds. Anchored in strong economic fundamentals, the economy is expected to gradually recover from a protracted slowdown. Yet, the global situation is fluid, and there are risks of setbacks stemming from weaker external demand and higher financial market volatility, alongside domestic challenges in the real estate sector and the labor market. Moreover, productivity has been declining, and Luxembourg faces fiscal pressures and risks. While Luxembourg's current external position is assessed to be substantially stronger than the level implied by medium-term fundamentals, the assessment is subject to several limitations. The country's specific economic features—a small open economy with a global financial center and a large share of cross-border workers —make the external position subject to significant volatility. This, together with the long-term challenges due to aging costs, call for more prudent policies while incentivizing private sector investment.

Prudent fiscal policy calls for a more efficient use of fiscal space. For 2025, a less expansionary fiscal stance would have been welcome, given low fiscal multipliers and the need to make room for more private sector-led growth. There is scope for reviewing the effectiveness and targeting of current measures, while preserving possible savings from revenue overperformance or budget execution. The authorities' medium-term expenditure path is broadly appropriate to accommodate future spending pressures, but should be underpinned by measures, which will require containing the growth of the wage bill, enhancing spending efficiency, and avoiding any further erosion of the tax base.

There is scope for increasing revenue resilience. Luxembourg's revenue performance depends to a large extent on a concentrated and volatile revenue base. Tax reforms should thus aim at diversifying revenue sources. This will help reduce volatility and uncertainty of fiscal receipts.

Fiscal policies should be better anchored in a medium-term perspective. The public consultations on pension reform are welcome, as there is a need for early reforms, including reducing the generosity of benefits—the highest in Europe, increasing both the effective and statutory retirement ages, and a well-calibrated increase in contributions to minimize the negative impact on the labor market. Strengthening the medium-term fiscal framework would enhance policy predictability. The planned implementation of a national fiscal rule is welcome and should combine a debt anchor with a net spending ceiling that consider revenue uncertainty and allow appropriate flexibility. Additional reforms of the budgeting framework and strengthening of the fiscal council are necessary to make the new framework more effective.

Risks in the financial sector, while manageable, should continue to be closely monitored. The financial sector appears broadly resilient. However, persistent solvency and liquidity risks in the corporate sector—especially in real estate—and the potential impact of rising financial market volatility warrant close monitoring. The authorities should continue ensuring adequate provisioning, collateral valuation, and loss absorption capacity. At the same time, continued oversight of the large nonbank financial sector—notably pockets of liquidity mismatches and leverage—and a better understanding of the intermediation role of the OFI sector should be prioritized.

Macroprudential policy should remain agile. The current CCyB level is appropriate. Should the recovery firm up, the authorities should strengthen releasable capital buffers and address still elevated household indebtedness by introducing income-based measures in line with FSAP recommendations. In the event of continued credit pressure, some loosening of the CCyB could be envisaged. Capitalizing on the commendable progress in implementing the 2024 FSAP recommendations in the supervision of banks and investment funds, the authorities should strengthen the macroprudential policy framework.

Structural reforms are needed to boost private sector-led growth and sustain living standards. Wage indexation has become a key constraint on competitiveness, and more labor market flexibility is called for. The authorities should also aim at boosting productivity and containing the cost of living by streamlining the regulatory and administrative burden, removing barriers to entry in some sectors, and addressing housing and infrastructure supply bottlenecks. Efforts should continue to capitalize on the country's comparative advantages in AI adoption and financial sector development while minimizing potential costs of the transition. Recent measures to enhance technology diffusion and ongoing upskilling programs are welcome.

[1] Under Article IV of the IMF's Articles of Agreement, the IMF holds bilateral discussions with members, usually every year. A staff team visits the country, collects economic and financial information, and discusses with officials the country's economic developments and policies. On return to headquarters, the staff prepare a report, which forms the basis for discussion by the Executive Board.

[2] Under the IMF's Articles of Agreement, publication of documents that pertain to member countries is voluntary and requires the member consent. The staff report will be shortly published on the www.imf.org/luxembourg page.

[3] At the conclusion of the discussion, the Managing Director, as Chairman of the Board, summarizes the views of Executive Directors, and this summary is transmitted to the country's authorities. An explanation of any qualifiers used in summings up can be found here: http://www.IMF.org/external/np/sec/misc/qualifiers.htm .