The economic crisis of the previous decade, the collapse of the real estate market, and the recent inflationary crisis have shaped a new reality for Greek society.
Behind the recovery of macroeconomic indicators, GDP growth, and the improvement of the fiscal picture, a deep imbalance in the distribution of wealth has taken shape.
Housing, which for decades constituted the primary asset of the Greek middle class, has been transformed from a factor of financial security into a source of insecurity for a large segment of society.
At the same time, inflation curtailed the purchasing power of households, burdening most heavily those with weaker financial resilience and eroding the value of their savings.
Two major studies by the European Central Bank highlight the dimensions of this development. The first, "How the sovereign debt crisis shaped wealth inequality in the euro area," published on November 11, 2026, examines the long-term impacts of the sovereign debt crisis on wealth distribution. The second, "The 2021-23 high inflation episode and inequality: insights from the Consumer Expectations Survey," published in the ECB's Economic Bulletin in 2025, analyzes how inflation and rising interest rates affected social groups differently.
The conclusions of the two studies acquire even greater significance when combined with data from Eurostat, the Bank of Greece, the European Commission, and the International Monetary Fund regarding the Greek housing market and poverty.
The collapse of the real estate market and the weakening of the middle class
The sovereign debt crisis that began in Greece in 2010 did not carry solely fiscal and labor consequences.
It also decisively affected the distribution of private wealth.
Recession, unemployment, falling incomes, and declining property prices inflicted substantial losses on the assets of Greek households.
The ECB identifies falling house prices as the single most important driver of rising net wealth inequality during the sovereign debt crisis period.
Families that had purchased a home through bank borrowing proved particularly vulnerable.
The value of their property declined, while the nominal value of the loan remained essentially unchanged.
Thus, their net asset position deteriorated.
The trajectory of property prices in Greece illustrates the magnitude of the upheaval.
According to data from the Bank of Greece, the residential property price index, based on 2007 = 100, dropped to roughly 60 during the 2016–2018 period.
This collapse meant that a large portion of Greek families' wealth lost its value.
The recovery that followed was strong. In 2025, apartment prices rose by an average of 7.8%, while in the second quarter of 2026 they recorded a new annual increase of 5.5%, according to the Bank of Greece.
The nominal house price index has now recovered to levels higher than those of 2007.
However, this recovery did not benefit everyone.
Owners who held onto their properties benefited from the increase in their value.
Conversely, those who lost their homes, were forced to sell, or never had the opportunity to acquire real estate found themselves facing an increasingly difficult market.
The ECB itself notes that in the countries hardest hit by the sovereign debt crisis, including Greece, the decline in homeownership was one of the factors that kept wealth inequalities at elevated levels.
When real estate prices began recovering, fewer households were able to participate in this wealth appreciation.
Greece tops Europe in housing cost burden
The true dimension of the Greek housing crisis is captured in Eurostat data for 2024.
Greece recorded the highest housing cost burden rate in the European Union.
36% of Greek households' disposable income went on average toward housing, when the corresponding European average was just 19%.
The gap is striking: a Greek household spent nearly double the share of its income on shelter compared to the European Union average.
Even more revealing is the figure regarding payment arrears.
In 2024, 43% of the population in Greece lived in households with arrears on rent, mortgage payments, or utility bills. The corresponding figure in the EU was just 9%.
Greece was the country with the highest rate in Europe.
Moreover, this rate had risen from 31% in 2010 to 43% in 2024, at a time when across the European Union as a whole it had declined.
The picture becomes even more alarming for the financially vulnerable.
According to Eurostat, 37% of the disposable income of Europeans at risk of poverty goes toward housing.
In Greece, the overall housing burden is already extraordinarily high, leaving far smaller margins for spending on food, healthcare, education, and other basic needs.
The problem is also confirmed by the European Commission.
According to its report on Greece, 28.9% of the population spent more than 40% of their disposable income on housing costs in 2024, compared to 8.2% in the EU. For tenants, the housing cost overburden rate reached 37.4%.
This means that for a very large segment of society, housing is no longer merely an expense, but a factor that determines whether they can cover their remaining basic needs.
The housing crisis is not solely a rent problem
There is an important detail frequently overlooked in public debate.
According to Eurostat, over the 2010–2024 period, rents in Greece fell overall by 16%, while headline inflation rose by 20%.
This does not mean that today's housing crisis is smaller.
On the contrary, it reflects the deep gap between price trajectories and the ability of households to meet their needs.
The housing market is shaped by the distance between incomes, purchase prices, rents, and available housing stock. Rising real estate prices, ownership concentration, and limited supply of affordable housing create an environment in which access to shelter becomes progressively harder.
The International Monetary Fund, in its 2026 report "Greece: Selected Issues," estimates that median housing expenditure, including mortgage payments, exceeded one-third of disposable income in 2025.
It also estimates that roughly two in five households face housing cost overburden, meaning they spend over 40% of their disposable income on housing.
This is an extraordinarily serious finding: when a household allocates one-third or more of its income just to secure shelter, its ability to save, build wealth, or cope with a financial emergency is drastically curtailed.
The top 10% by income and the concentration of wealth
ECB data for the Eurozone as a whole are revealing.
The share of total net wealth held by the richest 10% of households rose from 50.8% in 2010 to 52.6% in 2014. The poorest 50% saw their corresponding share decline from 6% to 5.4%.
In 2023, despite a partial recovery of losses among poorer households, the richest 10% still held 51.8% of total net wealth, roughly one percentage point more than in 2010.
These figures apply to the Eurozone overall and not exclusively to Greece.
However, the same study confirms that the rise in inequality was sharper and more persistent in the six countries hardest hit by the sovereign debt crisis, among which is Greece.
The wealthiest segment of society holds a major advantage: it possesses assets capable of appreciating in value, as well as financial buffers that allow it to weather crises.
Owning real estate, equities, and financial products offers opportunities unavailable to households living exclusively off their wages.
The real estate market recovery serves as a prime example. For the owner who had the capacity to retain their property during the crisis, the subsequent price surge meant an increase in net worth. For the one forced to sell or who never owned a home, that same surge meant a higher cost of entry into the market.
It cannot be argued that every member of the richest 10% profited from the crisis.
The ECB, after all, notes that inflation eroded the real value of assets, including deposits, stocks, and real estate.
Nevertheless, affluent households possess greater capacity to diversify their investments and absorb economic shocks.
The bottom line is that asset ownership creates opportunities to participate in the recovery, whereas the absence of assets leaves a household more dependent on labor income.
Inflation as a mechanism for widening poverty
The inflationary crisis of 2021–2023 arrived to burden a society that had not yet fully recovered the losses of the previous decade.
The ECB finds that inflation weighed most heavily on lower income brackets.
In 2022, the cost of inflation corresponded to 12.28% of the current income of the poorest income quintile, compared to 5.69% for the richest.
The gap is indicative of the unequal impact of high prices.
Poorer households spend a larger share of their income on food, energy, and basic goods. They do not have the luxury of easily cutting back on these expenses.
The ECB also records that 73% of Eurozone households believed economic inequalities had widened following the onset of the inflationary crisis.
Among those perceiving an increase in inequality, 93% cited the cost of living as a primary cause and 84% specifically identified inflation.
The significance of this development for Greece is particular.
Rising prices eroded the real purchasing power of wages and pensions, while saving capacity contracted even further. For families lacking financial reserves, covering basic necessities became steadily harder.
Inflation did not merely raise the cost of living. It heightened financial insecurity and curtailed the ability of poorer households to recover the wealth they had lost during the previous crisis.
Poverty in Greece: The recovery did not reach everyone
Eurostat data for 2025 show that 27.5% of the Greek population, more than one in four residents, was at risk of poverty or social exclusion.
The corresponding rate in the European Union was 20.9%.
Greece continues to rank among the countries with the highest rates of poverty and social exclusion in the EU.
Even more revealing is the picture of energy poverty.
According to ELSTAT data for 2025, 18.1% of the population reported being unable to keep their home adequately warm. Within the poorest income bracket, the rate reached 35.9%.
These figures show that the housing burden is not limited to paying rent or a mortgage. It extends to the cost of heating, cooling, and electricity, namely expenses indispensable for decent living conditions.
Poverty, therefore, is not reflected solely in the income someone receives.
It is also reflected in how much of that income remains after paying for housing, utility bills, and basic necessities.
The new housing inequality and the exclusion of younger generations
A recovery in the housing market does not necessarily mean improved access to shelter.
For those who already own real estate, rising prices boost their net worth. For those trying to buy their first home, however, the exact same trend increases the required capital and makes access to homeownership harder.
In Greece, the problem is particularly acute for young people and households lacking family wealth.
The rising cost of housing, combined with incomes that fail to keep pace with price increases, creates an ever-widening chasm between property owners and non-owners.
Housing is thus transformed into a mechanism for transmitting economic inequalities from one generation to the next.
Those who inherit real estate start from a clearly more advantageous position, while those without family assets depend exclusively on their earned income and their access to bank lending.
Economic recovery does not mean recovery for all
The two ECB studies, combined with the data on Greece, highlight a major contradiction in Greek economic reality.
The economy may be recovering in terms of headline indicators, yet the distribution of wealth and the ability of households to share in that recovery remain unequal.
The sovereign debt crisis weakened the asset position of a large share of society.
The collapse of the real estate market worsened inequalities, while the subsequent rebound in home prices did not equally benefit those who had lost their property or had never managed to acquire a home.
Subsequently, inflation curtailed the purchasing power of lower incomes more severely, while rising interest rates disproportionately burdened the most vulnerable borrowers.
Greece faces a particularly severe housing imbalance: 36% of disposable income goes toward housing, 43% of the population...
For Greece, the substantive question is not merely how much GDP grows or how high property prices climb. It is who has the ability to acquire a home, who can save, who shares in wealth growth, and who is forced to allocate an ever-larger portion of their income just to cover basic needs.
An economic recovery cannot be considered complete when aggregate wealth rises while a large segment of society is unable to build assets, secure decent housing, and preserve its purchasing power: the end of the "Greek dream."
www.bankingnews.gr
Σχόλια αναγνωστών