Olympics in Germany: Is It Really Worth It? – The Cost of the Games

Minister of Finance Lars Klingbeil claims that the whole country would benefit from the Olympics. But the numbers tell a different story.

By Matthias Fett

DER SPIEGEL | Sport | Published: 23.02.2026

The 25th Winter Olympic Games in Milan and Cortina d'Ampezzo are over, and as is so often the case after major sporting events, the question arises: what remains?

Partially modernized or newly built sports venues, yes. But for the local residents? Or for Italian taxpayers? The costs for Milan-Cortina are likely to exceed initial projections.

Various studies estimate the additional expenditure at up to 85 percent. Total costs could amount to €5.9 billion. The Turin 2006 Games cost considerably less – €4.6 billion – but in that year the Italian state bore the lion's share at 79 percent of public costs. The Olympics are an expensive business, above all for the host countries.

"Yes, we can afford the Olympic Games, and we should afford the Olympic Games. They make our country stronger and better."

— Lars Klingbeil, SPD leader, Finance Minister and Vice-Chancellor

Italian state’s investments primarily flowed into transport infrastructure. An additional €200 million went into the regional tourism sector, to attract visitors from around the world even after the Games. To what extent these investments pay off in regions that are already partially popular travel destinations – accounting for around 35 percent of Italy's economic output – remains to be seen.

The Île-de-France region has a similarly high share (30 percent) of national economic output. It was the heart of Paris 2024. The Summer Games of two years ago were officially the first held under the International Olympic Committee's (IOC) "Agenda 2020+5". This is not only about reusing existing sports infrastructure, but also about sustainable economic management of the Games overall. Olympic gigantism has often been criticised and has deterred many potential candidate cities. Montreal 1976 serves as a cautionary tale – the city needed 30 years to pay off the debt it incurred. The same goes for Athens 2004, which is considered one of the causes of the Greek sovereign debt crisis.

And indeed, Paris managed to give the impression that this time everything went according to plan. Hamburg's Mayor Peter Tschentscher (SPD) referenced the fact that Hamburg's Olympic concept, like Paris, would not require "multi-billion-euro investments", and affirmed that Hamburg could afford to host the event. His party leader Lars Klingbeil, was even more forthcoming: "Yes, we can afford the Olympic Games, and we should afford the Olympic Games. They make our country stronger and better," Klingbeil told Bild am Sonntag. He said that Paris had shown it was possible to "even come out ahead". Germany wants to bid for the Summer Games – for 2036, 2040, or 2044 (the costs for the bid alone are already spiralling out of control). The last Olympic Games on German soil were held in Munich in 1972.

A Surplus of €76 Million – A 1.7% Gain

The problem is: the "surplus" Klingbeil refers to in relation to Paris does not fall within his area of responsibility. The Paris Games Organising Committee – largely funded by the IOC or private sources – spent a total of €4.42 billion and got €4.49 billion through ticket sales and sponsorships. A surplus of €76 million, a gain of 1.7 percent. The money was said to subsequently flow into French sport.

"Some actors desperately want to host mega-events – so they adjust the data to support their arguments. Worse still, people so often believe them."

— Sven Daniel Wolfe, Professor at the University of Neuchâtel

This figure may seem small, but in historical comparison it is an enormous achievement. According to a study by the University of Lausanne, the costs of Summer Olympic Games exceed their budgets by an average of 29 percent – a "structural" deficit. "The problem is not just that mega-events blow budgets – though they always do. The problem is also that this fact is consistently ignored," says Professor Sven Daniel Wolfe of the University of Neuchâtel, co-author of the study. "Some actors desperately want to host mega-events – so they adjust the data to support their arguments. Worse still, people so often believe them." Even the Paris 2024 Games were apparently embellished after the fact in some respects.

"In Paris we saw all sorts of promises that the Games would help solve all manner of long-standing socioeconomic problems in the northern banlieues – France's most economically disadvantaged areas," said Wolfe. But: "The Games were not successful in this regard. Instead, local residents report evictions, surveillance, and gentrification."

€6.6 Billion for Paris 2024

The actual costs for the taxpayer – Klingbeil's actual area of responsibility – amounted to over €6.6 billion, according to the French Court of Auditors, including infrastructure and security measures. Is this effort economically worthwhile? Politicians and sports officials have been claiming for years that you first have to spend money to earn it. But there is hardly any scientific evaluation of this. Because unlike the FIFA World Cup, which usually affects the entire country, the Olympic Games take place regionally and mostly in urban settings, making it more complicated to calculate a general "Olympic effect" on a country's GDP. A direct comparison between the 2014 FIFA World Cup in Brazil and the 2016 Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro yielded an effect on the regional GDP of minus 17 percentage points. For the economic output of the state of Rio de Janeiro, the World Cup was far less damaging than the Summer Games.

Growth Would Fizzle Out

For Paris 2024, the French Court of Auditors estimated, after accounting for all possible effects, an additional boost to economic growth of 0.07 percentage points. That would be €1.9 billion. However, the French statistics and economic studies office (INSEE) also recorded a decline in tourism in the Île-de-France region of 0.1 percentage points of GDP for 2024. US financial services firm S&P Global expects that for the current Winter Olympics in Italy, the predominantly state-funded projects and measures will not negatively affect Milan's credit rating. The host regions could at least benefit from increased tax revenues, it is said. And what does this mean for Germany and Klingbeil's assertion that the Games are worth hosting?

At the very least this: bearing the costs of the Olympic Games would be an enormous challenge for Germany. Both Milan-Cortina and Paris have shown that organising such sporting events is associated with high costs and considerable effort, even under the new IOC Agenda. According to a study by the University of Oxford, the past three Summer Games cost an average of €13 billion each. Rio de Janeiro alone cost €20 billion. The average of €13 billion would correspond to roughly 2.5 percent of the current 2026 federal budget (€524 billion). Given the very strained fiscal situation, such expenditure would be a major burden. From a macroeconomic perspective, Germany should not afford the Olympic Games.

Klingbeil claims that "the whole country will permanently benefit" if the Games are organised sustainably and invested in infrastructure as in Paris. But Germany's economic structure contradicts this thinking: unlike Paris 2024 or northern Italy 2026, which each account for at least 30 percent of national GDP, the share of Munich or Berlin is only around 4.7 percent, Hamburg 3.9 percent, and Rhine-Ruhr 14.4 percent of total German economic output.

Even exceptional and unprecedented growth in these regions would ultimately fizzle out on a national level.

Source: DER SPIEGEL | Original article in German by Matthias Fett |

Original article: