TOP 10 Countries by Public Health Spending per Capita (2025)
Public Health Spending per Capita: Who Leads in 2025 and Why It Matters
In the mid-2020s, debates about universal health coverage and fiscal space increasingly revolve around one simple metric: how much governments actually spend on health per person. Public spending is not the whole story — private insurance and out-of-pocket payments also matter — but domestic general government health expenditure per capita (GGHE-D per capita, PPP) is the clearest signal of how strongly a country’s budget backs its health system.
According to recent compilations of WHO and World Bank data, the Top 10 countries by public health spending per capita (measured in purchasing-power-parity, international dollars) are dominated by high-income economies. The group is led by the United States and a cluster of European countries such as Norway, Luxembourg, Denmark, Switzerland, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, Austria and Canada, all of which combine high fiscal capacity with relatively mature health systems.
For this article, “public health spending per capita” refers specifically to domestic general government health expenditure per person, converted to purchasing power parity. This indicator captures what governments finance from their own budgets and compulsory schemes, after adjusting for price differences between countries. It is closely related to, but distinct from, total health spending per capita — which also includes private insurance and out-of-pocket payments.
Table 1. Leaders by public health spending per capita (PPP, indicative bands)
The table below groups countries into bands drawn from recent WHO and World Bank data (around 2022–2023). Values are rounded and shown as ranges to avoid false precision; all of the countries mentioned fall within the global Top 10 by public health spending per capita.
| Group / countries | Public health spending per capita (PPP, intl $, approx.) | Short interpretation |
|---|---|---|
| United States | ≈ 9 500–10 000 | Highest government health spending per person globally, combined with very high total health expenditure and a large private component. |
| High-spending Europe (Norway, Luxembourg, Denmark, Switzerland, Germany, Netherlands) | ≈ 5 500–8 000 | Cluster of tax-funded or social-insurance systems with broad coverage and a strong public role in financing core services. |
| Other high-income universal systems (Canada, Sweden, Austria, Iceland) | ≈ 4 500–6 000 | Spending slightly below the very top cluster, but still far above the OECD average; strong protection against catastrophic health costs. |
“Countries that keep public health budgets growing faster than inflation are the ones that come closest to universal coverage.”
The fact that almost all of the top spenders are high-income economies is not surprising. What matters for policy, however, is not only the absolute level of spending, but also how consistently governments protect and prioritize health within their overall budgets. The next sections look at this budget priority and at how public health spending per capita has evolved between 2000 and 2025.
How much of the budget goes to health?
A high public health spend per person is easiest to sustain when health also has a strong share of the overall government budget. The World Bank indicator “domestic general government health expenditure (% of general government expenditure)” captures this priority by asking: out of each dollar the state spends, how many cents go to health?
Among the Top-10 countries by public health spending per capita, we can distinguish three broad groups. Some effectively make health their single largest social-sector line item; others balance health with pensions, education and debt service; and a third group is still in the process of raising health’s share of the budget to match its ambitions for universal coverage.
Table 2. Health’s share in the government budget (illustrative groupings)
| Group / examples | Health share of total gov. spending (approx.) | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|
| “Health champions” (Canada, Denmark, Norway) | ≈ 17–20 % of total expenditure | Health consistently absorbs close to one-fifth of public spending, signalling a very strong fiscal commitment to universal coverage. |
| High-income mainstream (Germany, France, Netherlands, Sweden) | ≈ 14–17 % | Health competes with pensions and education, but still commands a sizeable, stable share of the budget over time. |
| Upper-middle-income “climbers” (Chile, South Korea, selected EU candidates) | ≈ 10–14 % | Health is gaining importance in the budget as incomes rise, but still competes with infrastructure and debt service. |
Countries in the “champion” and “high-income mainstream” groups often pair high per-capita spending with a strong budget share for health. That combination allows them to finance generous benefit packages without relying excessively on out-of-pocket payments. In contrast, some upper-middle-income economies spend growing amounts per person but still allocate a relatively modest fraction of their budget to health, leaving them more vulnerable when growth slows or debt service increases.
A recurring lesson from recent WHO and OECD analyses is that stable, predictable public financing matters as much as the nominal level of spending. When health budgets swing up and down with the economic cycle, systems struggle to maintain staffing, invest in primary care and keep up with new technologies.
Visualising the Top-10 in a single chart underlines how steep the gradient is: the United States sits far above even the richest European systems, while high-income European and other OECD countries form a tight cluster. For analysts and advocates, this raises a nuanced question: is the goal to match the very highest spenders, or to reach the “good practice” band where health outcomes are strong and financial protection is robust?
Two decades of change: 2000–2025
Between 2000 and the early 2020s, global health spending per capita more than doubled in real terms, with especially strong increases in high- and upper-middle-income countries. However, WHO’s latest global health expenditure reports show that low-income countries have often been left behind, with much more modest growth and, in some cases, stagnation or decline in public health budgets after adjusting for inflation.
The illustrative chart below tracks three series:
- Top-10 high-income average – countries that currently lead in public health spending per capita.
- Upper-middle-income average – countries with fast-growing systems and rising coverage.
- Global average – the world as a whole, including all income groups.
Values are simplified and rounded, but they reflect the broad story told by WHO and World Bank data: sustained growth in public spending at the top, gradual convergence from the upper-middle band, and a slower, more fragile trajectory for the global average.
For the Top-10 high-income group, public health spending per capita roughly tripled between 2000 and the mid-2020s. Upper-middle-income countries also increased spending substantially, often from a very low base, driven by growth in tax revenues and political commitments to universal health coverage. By contrast, the global average is pulled down by countries where fiscal constraints, debt burdens and competing priorities still limit room for health.
From a policy perspective, several patterns stand out:
- Counter-cyclical budgets help protect health. Countries that kept or raised health’s share of government spending during crises were better able to maintain services through COVID-19 and other shocks.
- Primary care and prevention multiply the impact of each dollar. High-spending systems that allocate a growing share to primary care, immunisation and public health agencies tend to see better coverage and fewer financial catastrophes.
- Equity matters as much as averages. Even in very high-spending countries, gaps in access persist for rural areas, migrants and low-income households. Monitoring how public funds are distributed across regions and population groups is crucial.
Looking ahead to the late 2020s, the key question is not only whether countries can sustain high levels of public health spending per person, but whether they can spend more intelligently: aligning budgets with demographic change, chronic disease burdens and the transition to greener, more resilient health systems. For many governments, the practical benchmark will be to reach and maintain at least the level of pooled public spending associated with strong service coverage, then to fine-tune how those resources are allocated.
Primary data sources and further reading
- World Health Organization – Global Health Expenditure Database (GHED), including indicators for domestic general government health expenditure per capita (PPP, current international dollars) and as a share of government expenditure. Available at apps.who.int/nha/database.
- World Bank – World Development Indicators, health expenditure series (e.g. SH.XPD.GHED.PP.CD, SH.XPD.GHED.GE.ZS, SH.XPD.CHEX.PP.CD) with annual data for 2000–2023. See data.worldbank.org.
- World Health Organization – Global Spending on Health 2023 and subsequent updates, providing narrative analysis of post-COVID trends in government health budgets, external aid and out-of-pocket spending. Overview and report links at who.int/publications.
- OECD – Health at a Glance 2025, chapters on health expenditure per capita and financing structure for OECD members, available via oecd.org/health.
- Our World in Data – Total health spending per person and related charts based on WHO GHED and World Bank data, including downloadable series and documentation on methods. Access via ourworldindata.org.
Archive with CSV tables and PNG charts for “TOP 10 Countries by Public Health Spending per Capita (2025)”. Use it for your own analysis, presentations or further visualisation.
Download ZIP archive
