🔍 Read the full analysis: What It Costs To Retire Around The World: I Fact-Checked The Viral $2 Million Graphic on ThorstenMeyerAI.com
Get business pricing on tech for your team
- Business-only prices and quantity discounts
- Tax-exempt purchasing
- Multiple users, one account, clear invoices
TL;DR
A viral graphic assigns retirement costs to 18 countries and multiplies each annual figure by 25, but it provides no traceable source or definition of the costs. Fact-checking by ThorstenMeyerAI.com says state pensions could substantially reduce the savings target for some retirees, while the 25-times rule may understate needs for people retiring at 50 or 55.
A fact-check published by ThorstenMeyerAI.com on November 4, 2026, says a viral graphic listing retirement costs for 18 countries uses a consistent calculation but lacks the sources and assumptions needed to verify its figures. The graphic puts the US target at $2 million, yet the fact-check says that amount does not account for Social Security and may mislead people about both their savings needs and the risks of retiring early.
The graphic, signed “The Business Guy,” lists annual retirement costs and corresponding savings totals. It claims a US retiree needs $80,000 a year and $2 million; its figures include $55,000 a year and $1.4 million for the United Kingdom, $24,000 and $600,000 for Thailand, and $14,000 and $350,000 for Kenya. The fact-checker could not find a study or method note behind the annual costs, and said the graphic does not specify whether they apply to one person or a couple, or whether housing, taxes and insurance are included.
The arithmetic is consistent: each total is approximately 25 times the annual cost, corresponding to a 4% initial withdrawal rate. But that check confirms the multiplication, not the underlying cost estimates. As a US comparison, the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ 2025 Consumer Expenditure Survey found that households headed by someone aged 65 or older spent an average of $64,445. Those households averaged 1.7 people, and 78% owned their home. Households headed by someone aged 55 to 64 spent $85,442 on average.
The report’s Social Security calculation changes the US example. The Social Security Administration estimated that, from January 2027, an aged couple in which both people receive benefits would get $3,355 a month, or $40,260 a year. If the couple spends $80,000 a year, the report calculates that savings need to cover $39,740. Multiplying that gap by 25 yields about $993,500, rather than $2 million. This is an illustration using an average benefit and a stated spending assumption, not a personalized retirement estimate.
Pensions Change the Savings Gap
The graphic presents its totals as if retirees must fund all annual spending from savings. That can overstate the required portfolio for people who receive public pensions, but it can also obscure whether the stated spending level is realistic for their household or destination. The report’s US and UK examples show how adding pension income changes the amount that savings must cover.
The opposite risk applies to people retiring well before the usual pension age. Morningstar’s 2025 retirement-income research gives a starting withdrawal rate of 3.9% for a 30-year retirement, 3.5% for 35 years and 3.3% for 40 years. The corresponding spending multiples are about 25.6, 28.6 and 30.3. On those assumptions, a 25-times target may be too low for someone who stops working at 50 or 55 and needs savings to last longer.
For readers weighing a move abroad, a low estimated cost of living is not the same as eligibility to reside there. The report says visa financial requirements can be far higher than a graphic’s annual living-cost estimate. Retirement planning depends on the interaction of spending, pension eligibility and timing, investment withdrawals, taxes, housing and residency rules—not on a country ranking alone.
Products Worth Considering
Apple MacBook Air 15-inch with M5 chip, 16GB Memory, 512GB SSD, and Liquid Retina Display
DJI Osmo Mobile 8 3-Axis Gimbal Stabilizer for Phones
LG UltraGear 27GX704A-B 27-inch QHD OLED Gaming Monitor
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
How the 25-Times Figure Works
The graphic’s totals follow a familiar retirement-planning rule: multiply annual spending by 25, equivalent to withdrawing 4% of a portfolio in the first year and adjusting withdrawals for inflation afterward. The rule is generally framed around a retirement lasting about 30 years. It does not, by itself, establish whether the annual spending figure is sound or account for pension income.
The report also compares the graphic’s country figures with a price-level model and says the assumptions appear inconsistent. It cites Costa Rica and Spain as having the same price level in its model, while the graphic lists Costa Rica as 42% cheaper. The source provides no underlying method for the graphic, so that comparison cannot establish how its figures were produced.
Public benefits also differ by country and by individual record. The report cites the UK government’s full new State Pension rate of £241.30 a week; a person whose National Insurance record began after April 2016 generally needs 35 qualifying years for the full rate. Two full pensions total £25,095.20 a year. Using the European Central Bank’s November 2, 2026 reference rates, the report converts that to about $33,676 and estimates a roughly $21,300 annual gap against the graphic’s $55,000 UK figure. The calculation assumes two people qualify for the full rate.
“The arithmetic is right. Almost everything that matters is missing: a source, a definition of who is retiring, and state pensions.”
— Thorsten Meyer, ThorstenMeyerAI.com
Missing Assumptions Limit Comparisons
The source of the graphic’s annual costs remains unidentified. Without a methodology, it is not possible to confirm whether its country estimates represent typical spending, a particular lifestyle, one person or a household, or whether they include rent, health insurance and taxes. The fact-check says the numbers cannot be called false on the available evidence, but their basis cannot be verified.
The pension examples are also conditional. Average Social Security benefits and full UK State Pension rates are not guaranteed amounts for every reader. Eligibility, benefit levels and the age at which payments begin vary; a pension that starts at 67 does not fund the years before it begins for someone retiring at 55. The supplied material does not provide comparable pension calculations for all 18 countries, nor does it establish a single cost-of-living method across them.
The report’s excerpts do not include the full details of Morningstar’s assumptions, such as all portfolio and market conditions behind its withdrawal-rate estimates. The figures should be read as research scenarios, not as a promise that a particular withdrawal rate will succeed for any individual household.
Check Costs Against Personal Benefits
The next step for anyone using the graphic is to replace its broad country figures with a household budget and verified benefit estimates. That means checking expected pension income and start dates, residency eligibility, housing costs, taxes and healthcare coverage for the specific destination. The viral graphic itself would need to publish its sources and define its assumptions before its country totals could be independently assessed.
People considering retirement before age 65 also need to model a longer period without wages or pension income. The Morningstar rates cited in the report suggest that a 35- or 40-year plan requires a lower initial withdrawal rate than the 30-year rule of thumb. The report does not offer a universal replacement target; its figures show why a single 25-times multiple cannot answer every retirement question.
Key Questions
Is the graphic’s $2 million US figure mathematically correct?
Yes, as a calculation: $80,000 multiplied by 25 equals $2 million. That verifies the arithmetic, not the $80,000 spending estimate or the graphic’s unstated assumptions.
Why does the fact-check give a lower US savings estimate?
It subtracts an estimated $40,260 in annual Social Security for a couple where both receive benefits from the assumed $80,000 annual spending. Multiplying the remaining $39,740 by 25 produces about $993,500. The result depends on those assumptions and is not a personal forecast.
Does the 25-times rule work for someone retiring at 55?
It may be too low for a longer retirement. The report cites Morningstar estimates of 3.5% for a 35-year period and 3.3% for 40 years, compared with 3.9% for 30 years. Those are research scenarios, not guaranteed safe rates for every portfolio.
Can the country rankings be trusted?
Not on the information provided. The graphic has no traceable source or explanation of whether its costs cover a single person or couple, housing, insurance or taxes. The fact-check also questions whether its country figures use a consistent price basis.
Source: ThorstenMeyerAI.com
