IMF: population up 25% in a decade

TL;DR

In a Selected Issues paper on Malta (IMF Country Report No. 26/30, February 2026), International Monetary Fund staff listed the drivers of Malta’s housing boom, including “population growth (Malta’s population rose by 25 percent over a decade, largely due to immigration)”. We tested the figure and the cause against Eurostat’s demographic accounts for every ten-year window to 2026.

1. “Largely due to immigration” is right. Net migration made up 93–97% of Malta’s population growth in every ten-year window since 2010–2020. Births minus deaths added about 5,000–8,000 people a decade.
2. “25 percent over a decade” is right for the decades to 2020–2022, and low for the latest one. Growth was 24.4% (2010–2020), 24.4% (2011–2021) and 24.6% (2012–2022). For the decade to 1 January 2025, the latest year available when the paper was written, it was 30.9% (438,805 to 574,250). The paper gives no years.
3. The comparison makes the point stronger, not weaker. The EU-27 population grew 1.9% from 2015 to 2025. Malta’s growth over that decade was about sixteen times the EU’s.
4. Verdict: largely supported (high confidence). The substance, rapid growth driven by migration, holds. The 25% understates the most recent decade by about six points; the paper does not say which decade it means.

1. Supported
2. Largely supported
3. Not substantiated
4. Misleading
5. Contradicted

IN THIS REPORT

1 The claim and what we could verify

The sentence is in paragraph 6 of the paper “Growth-at-Risk in Malta” in Malta: Selected Issues (IMF Country Report No. 26/30, February 2026) [1], a background paper to the 2025 Article IV consultation. It is a parenthesis in a list of drivers of house prices. The IMF’s own site refuses automated downloads, so we read the paper in full from an Internet Archive copy taken on 17 May 2026. Selected Issues papers carry the views of their staff authors and not necessarily those of the IMF’s Executive Board; we attribute the sentence to IMF staff.

2 Method

Question. Over which decades did Malta’s population grow by about 25%, and how much of the growth came from migration?

Evidence. We downloaded Eurostat’s population change by component (demo_gind, updated 30 September 2026) for Malta and the EU-27 (tools/cc-112-report/fetch.py) and computed growth for every ten-year window from 1 January 2005–2015 to 1 January 2016–2026 (calc.py; outputs in data/cc-112/checks.csv). The migration share is net migration (including Eurostat’s statistical adjustment) as a share of the sum of natural change and net migration over the window. The sum of components differs slightly from the change in the population stock because of census revisions.

Grades. Official statistics, grade C. No literature is needed to test the figure. Verdicts follow the five-point scale in Appendix A.

3 What the data show

Malta’s population rose from 402,668 on 1 January 2005 to 588,254 on 1 January 2026. Growth over ten years rose from 9% (2005–2015) to about 24% for the decades ending in 2020–2022, when the pandemic slowed migration, and to 29–32% for the decades ending in 2023–2026.

4 Where the evidence points different ways

5 Testing the claim

6 Verdict and requests for evidence

Why. The causal part is plainly right. The figure matches the decades ending in 2020–2022 but understates the most recent decade by about six points. Because the figure errs low, it does not exaggerate the point it supports: that population growth has pushed up demand for housing. What this verdict does not say. It does not assess the paper’s housing analysis or its policy advice, and it says nothing for or against immigration; it tests a number and its stated cause.

Evidence we are asking for

• From the paper’s authors: the years and data source behind “25 percent over a decade”.

7 Limitations

• Net migration in Eurostat’s accounts includes a statistical adjustment; it is not a count of arrivals minus departures alone.
• Population figures before and after the 2021 census are not fully consistent; the components and the change in the stock differ by a few thousand over some windows.
• We read the IMF paper from an Internet Archive copy because the IMF site refuses automated access.

References

1. [1] International Monetary Fund (Feb 2026). Malta: Selected Issues. IMF Country Report No. 26/30, “Growth-at-Risk in Malta”, para. 6. Read from the Internet Archive copy of 17 May 2026. https://www.imf.org/-/media/files/publications/cr/2026/english/1mltea2026002-source-pdf.pdf
2. [2] Eurostat. Population change – demographic balance and crude rates at national level (demo_gind), updated 30 Sep 2026, retrieved 5 Oct 2026. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/demo_gind/default/table
3. [3] MiŻien. CC-088 claim record (NSO population 588,254).
4. [4] MiŻien. Calculation script and outputs: tools/cc-112-report/calc.py; data/cc-112/checks.csv.

Appendix A: series standards and verdict scale

Every investigation in this series follows the same rules so that verdicts are comparable and challengeable.

Confidence

High: multiple independent lines of evidence agree. Moderate: evidence is relevant but incomplete or indirect. Low: evidence is thin, second-hand or conflicting.

Evidence grades

A experiment · B observational study with a control or gradient · C review, guidance or official statistics · D assertion or anecdote. ◆ marks a source known only second-hand.

Standards

• Quote the speaker, not the headline, with outlet and date, and link the original where possible.
• Separate the claim from the evidence offered for it, and say who made which statement.
• Grade the evidence and show differing views side by side where the evidence is unsettled.
• State what we could not access or verify, and what would change the verdict either way.
• Ask for the missing evidence in specific, answerable requests.
• Offer a right of reply where a check finds a claim Not substantiated, Misleading or Contradicted (or a pledge Not measurable, Off track or Missed), before wider circulation, and append responses.
• Correct errors openly with a version number and change log.
• Whistle-blow only on evidence: a verdict of Misleading or Contradicted requires documents or data that can be shown, not inference.
• Check every side. Government, opposition, NGOs and developers are held to the same standard.

Appendix B: revision log