American Taxpayers Are Funding Europe’s Welfare States—Through Military Guarantees

President Trump has long insisted that Europeans must spend more on their own defense. Just today, he drove the point home again: “We have an ocean in between. Why is the United States in for so much more money?” Vice President Vance echoed the same message in Munich two weeks ago, making it clear that the era of an endless, free American security umbrella may be coming to an end. So how has Europe managed to free-ride on U.S. military protection for so long, and where did all the money they didn’t spend on defense go?

For decades, American military protection has allowed European governments to divert resources that should have gone to defense into expansive social programs. NATO’s Article 5, which promises collective defense, has functioned as Europe’s blank check. In theory, it ensures mutual aid if a member is attacked. In practice, it’s a gold-plated insurance policy—underwritten by the U.S.—that lets Europe act with impunity, secure in the knowledge that American forces will step in when needed. The result? Decades of European military underinvestment, with American taxpayers left footing the bill.

Europe Funds Welfare by Skimping on Defense

Europe’s welfare states—renowned for generous benefits, excessive labor protections, and early retirements—are often hailed as proof of a superior economic model. But this isn’t a triumph of governance or ingenuity. It’s a byproduct of offloading national defense onto the United States. By leaning on American security guarantees, European nations redirect funds that would go to militaries into their expansive social systems.

The imbalance is striking. American taxpayers, who lack comparable government benefits, indirectly subsidize a European model where citizens work less, retire earlier, and enjoy broader protections. A factory worker in Ohio or a small business owner in Texas pays taxes that bolster the security of nations whose workers clock shorter hours, take longer vacations, and retire years sooner. The inequity is hard to ignore.