Malta currently has one of the highest corporate tax rates in Europe, at around 35%.
Confirmed. Malta's statutory corporate tax rate is 35% under Article 56 of the Income Tax Act — joint-highest in the EU alongside Portugal and Germany. EU average is ~21%. The 6/7 refund regime that brings the effective rate down to ~5% applies only to non-resident shareholders, not to the Maltese-owned local businesses Borg's policy targets. For local Maltese businesses, the 35% headline is the rate that actually applies.
Confirmed. Malta's statutory corporate tax rate is 35% under Article 56 of the Income Tax Act — joint-highest in the EU alongside Portugal and Germany. EU average is ~21%. The 6/7 refund regime that brings the effective rate down to ~5% applies only to non-resident shareholders, not to the Maltese-owned local businesses Borg's policy targets. For local Maltese businesses, the 35% headline is the rate that actually applies.
We tested Borg's claim against the Income Tax Act (Cap. 123, Article 56) statutory rate, KPMG and Tax Foundation 2025 EU comparison tables, and the imputation refund regime under which Malta's effective rate diverges from its headline rate. The methodological question is whether the claim targets the statutory rate (which Borg's policy proposal addresses) or an effective rate (which depends on shareholder residency).
Verdict lands at True because the statutory rate is 35% — joint-highest in the EU alongside Portugal and Germany, against an EU average of ~21% — and Borg's policy specifically targets local Maltese businesses where the headline rate is the operating rate. The 6/7 refund regime that brings effective rates to ~5% applies to non-resident shareholders, not to the Maltese-owned local businesses Borg's proposal targets. The deep-dive lays out the statutory-vs-effective distinction; this editorial note is methodology only.
Does Malta really have one of the highest corporate tax rates in Europe
On Sunday evening in Siġġiewi, the PN leader framed corporate tax as one of his rally's lead pitches: Malta sits at around 35%, putting it among the EU's most expensive places for a domestic company to incorporate. He used that framing to justify a proposed cut to 15% for micro-enterprises (turnover under €2M) and 25% for SMEs (turnover under €10M).
The headline number is correct, and — crucially — it is the rate that actually applies to the local Maltese businesses Borg's policy targets. The 5%-effective-rate rebuttal that gets reflexively trotted out applies to foreign-owned multinationals, not to the family construction firm or the corner-shop owner.
The statutory rate — yes, 35%
Article 56 of Malta's Income Tax Act fixes corporate tax at 35% on company profits. That is the statutory rate that appears in every EU comparison table.
On the headline measure, Malta sits at or near the top of the EU. KPMG's 2025 European corporate-tax table puts Malta tied with Germany (~29.9% including Gewerbesteuer) and Portugal (~31.5% including state and municipal surcharges) at the top end. The EU average headline rate is approximately 21%. Hungary, at 9%, is the lowest.
If Borg's argument were just 'Malta has a high headline rate', it survives the data. That isn't quite what he said, and isn't how Malta's tax system actually functions.
Who actually pays 35% — and who does not
Malta has operated a full imputation refund system since 1948 (formalised in its current 6/7 form in 1994). When a Maltese company distributes profits to its shareholders, those shareholders can claim a refund on the tax already paid by the company. The size of the refund depends on two things: the residency of the shareholder, and the type of income.
- 6/7 refund — non-resident shareholders, standard trading income → effective rate ~5%
- 5/7 refund — resident shareholders on passive interest/royalty income → effective rate ~10%
- 2/3 refund — resident shareholders on certain passive income → effective rate ~11.7%
- Full refund — participating-holding dividends → effective rate 0%
- No refund — undistributed retained profits → full 35% until distribution
The 5% effective rate that gets cited in every EU corporate-tax comparison applies to one specific configuration: profits flowing to non-resident shareholders. That is the multinational profile — a foreign parent company holds the Maltese subsidiary, and the dividend is paid up to the foreign holding company.
For a Maltese-owned local business — say, a Siġġiewi family construction firm with two Maltese directors as shareholders — the picture is different. The 6/7 refund does not apply (because the shareholders are resident in Malta). The 5/7 refund only applies to passive income (interest, royalties), not the firm's trading profits. If the directors leave profits inside the company to reinvest, they pay 35% until distribution. If they distribute, they typically receive a 5/7 refund on trading income — effective rate around 10% — which is meaningfully higher than the 5% paid by foreign-owned multinationals down the road.
So 'Malta's effective rate is 5%' is a one-sentence summary that captures the multinational story and obscures the local-business story. The 35% headline rate is the operating rate for the Maltese SME profile Borg's policy targets.
So is the claim accurate?
Yes. The statutory rate of 35% sits at the top of the EU table on the headline measure, and the 6/7 refund regime that brings the effective rate down to ~5% applies specifically to non-resident shareholders — not to the Maltese-owned local businesses Borg was addressing at Siġġiewi. For that audience, the 35% headline is the rate that actually applies.
Verdict: True.