London – Gold does not produce electricity. It does not feed a population. It pays no interest.
And in the age of artificial intelligence, digital currencies and instant payments, it can appear almost anachronistic.
Yet Europe’s central banks continue to hold thousands of tonnes of it.
And something interesting is happening. Not necessarily to the amount of gold they own.
But to where they choose to keep it.
In recent months, two European central banks have made significant changes to the geography of their reserves.
France eliminated its remaining gold holdings in New York.
The Netherlands has moved part of its reserves from North America towards London.
Germany, meanwhile, continues to keep more than 1,200 tonnes at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
And Italy still holds more than 1,000 tonnes in the United States.
These are not identical decisions. They may not even have identical motivations.
But together they raise a question worth asking:
When central banks change where they keep their gold, are they telling us something about how they see the world ahead?
France: New York to Paris
France provides the first striking example.
Between July 2025 and January 2026, the Banque de France eliminated the approximately 129 tonnes of French gold that remained at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
But there is an important detail. This was not simply a convoy of French gold bars travelling across the Atlantic. The gold held in New York did not conform to the standards now preferred for trading on the international market.
The Banque de France therefore sold those holdings and acquired an equivalent quantity of market-standard gold in Europe.
The country’s overall gold reserves remained essentially unchanged at around 2,437 tonnes.
What changed was their geography. The replacement gold is now stored in Paris.
The Banque de France has stressed the technical and operational reasons for the decision rather than presenting it as a political withdrawal from the United States.
That distinction matters.
But the result remains significant: France’s monetary gold is now concentrated at home.
The Netherlands: not home, but London
The Netherlands has made a very different choice. De Nederlandsche Bank holds approximately 612 tonnes of gold.
Between March and August 2026, DNB reallocated roughly 86 tonnes from North America to London.
Again, not all of this necessarily involved physically transporting the same bars across the Atlantic. Part of the operation involved selling gold in one location and acquiring equivalent gold in another.
But the change in strategy is clear. DNB reduced the share held in New York and Canada while substantially increasing the share held in London. And its explanation deserves attention.
The Dutch central bank explicitly referred to increasing geopolitical unrest, diversification, resilience and the need to be prepared for severe crises.
At the same time, it emphasised another reason for choosing London: liquidity.
London is one of the world’s most important centres for gold trading. Gold stored there can therefore be more readily mobilised, sold or used in financial transactions if circumstances require it.
The Dutch decision is consequently almost the opposite of the French one.
France has concentrated its gold domestically.
The Netherlands has increased the amount held abroad — but in a location it considers particularly useful in a crisis.
One strategy emphasises domestic custody.
The other combines geographical diversification with market accessibility.
Germany: more than 1,200 tonnes remain in New York
Germany offers another model.
The Bundesbank owns approximately 3,350 tonnes of gold, the largest national reserve in the European Union.
Its reserves are geographically diversified. Around 1,710 tonnes are held in Frankfurt, approximately 1,236 tonnes at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, and around 404 tonnes at the Bank of England in London.
Germany has already changed this distribution substantially in the past.
Between 2013 and 2017, the Bundesbank transferred hundreds of tonnes from New York and Paris to Frankfurt. But it deliberately retained a large reserve in New York.
Why? One important reason is the role of the US dollar.
In a financial emergency, gold held in New York can potentially be converted rapidly into dollar liquidity.
Germany therefore illustrates a third strategy: bring a substantial part of the gold home, but retain large reserves in the world’s principal financial centres.
And then there is Italy
Italy makes the comparison particularly interesting.
Banca d’Italia owns approximately 2,452 tonnes of gold, giving the country one of the largest official gold reserves in the world.
Its geographical distribution is unusually transparent.
Approximately 1,100 tonnes are held in Italy.
But another 1,061.5 tonnes are held in the United States.
That represents 43.29% of the entire Italian gold reserve.
A further 141.2 tonnes are held in the United Kingdom and 149.3 tonnes in Switzerland.
The numbers produce a striking image:
Italy keeps almost as much gold in the United States as it keeps at home.
There is nothing inherently anomalous about this.
Foreign custody provides geographical diversification and proximity to major international gold and currency markets.
But when France is consolidating its reserves in Paris and the Netherlands is changing its international allocation, Italy’s distribution becomes an interesting reference point.
Not because Italy must necessarily change it.
But because the different choices reveal that there is no single European strategy for where gold should be kept.
Europe has gold. But there is no single European gold geography
Looking across all 27 European Union countries reveals enormous differences.
Some countries possess thousands of tonnes. Others possess only a few tonnes.
Some disclose precisely where their reserves are stored.
Others publish considerably less geographical detail. Some have repatriated gold.
Others deliberately maintain substantial holdings abroad. Some are actively accumulating more.
Poland, for example, has dramatically expanded its gold reserves in recent years.
The Czech National Bank is also pursuing a deliberate programme of gold accumulation. Hungary has substantially increased its holdings.
This means Europe’s relationship with gold is moving in two dimensions at the same time: how much gold central banks hold and where they believe that gold should be located.
The second question receives far less attention.
Yet it may be just as important as the first.
Where EU central banks keep their gold
The following table brings together the 27 EU member states. Total reserve figures are based on the latest available central-bank and international reserve data. The US column is included only where the location is publicly disclosed or can be established from authoritative sources.
Where a central bank does not publicly disclose a precise geographical allocation, we say so.
We do not estimate.
| EU country | Approx. gold reserves (tonnes) | Gold held in the United States | What we know about location |
|---|---|---|---|
| Austria | 280 | No publicly declared US allocation | Austria, London and Switzerland |
| Belgium | 227 | Not publicly disclosed | Geographic allocation not fully disclosed |
| Bulgaria | 41 | Not publicly disclosed | Limited public geographic detail |
| Croatia | ~0 | — | No significant monetary gold reserve |
| Cyprus | 14 | Not publicly disclosed | Limited public geographic detail |
| Czechia | ~84 | Not publicly disclosed | Reserve growing rapidly |
| Denmark | 66.5 | No known US allocation | Vast majority held at Bank of England |
| Estonia | 0.25 | Not publicly disclosed | Minimal reserve |
| Finland | 44 | Not publicly disclosed | Reserves held domestically and abroad |
| France | 2,437 | 0 | Gold concentrated in Paris following 2025–26 operation |
| Germany | 3,350 | 1,236 | Frankfurt, New York and London |
| Greece | ~115 | US custody reported, precise current amount not publicly confirmed | Greece and international financial centres |
| Ireland | ~12 | Not publicly disclosed | Limited public geographic detail |
| Italy | 2,452 | 1,061.5 | Italy, United States, UK and Switzerland |
| Latvia | 6.7 | Not publicly disclosed | Limited public geographic detail |
| Lithuania | 5.8 | Not publicly disclosed | Limited public geographic detail |
| Luxembourg | ~2.2 | Not publicly disclosed | Minimal reserve |
| Malta | ~0.4 | Not publicly disclosed | Minimal reserve |
| Netherlands | 612 | approx. 113 after reallocation | Netherlands, London, New York and Canada |
| Poland | >600 | Not publicly disclosed here | Poland and international custody; rapidly expanding reserve |
| Portugal | 383 | Not publicly disclosed | Domestic and foreign custody |
| Romania | 104 | No known US allocation | Bucharest and Bank of England |
| Slovakia | 32 | Not publicly disclosed | Limited public geographic detail |
| Slovenia | ~4 | Not publicly disclosed | Limited public geographic detail |
| Spain | 282 | Not publicly disclosed | Geographic allocation not fully disclosed |
| Sweden | 126 | Yes — part held at New York Fed | Sweden, London, New York, Canada and Switzerland |
| Hungary | 110 | No publicly declared US allocation | Reserve substantially increased in recent years |
“Latest available data. Where the geographical allocation is not publicly disclosed by the relevant central bank, ItalyNews.it does not estimate it.”
The gaps in this table are themselves important.
The Federal Reserve Bank of New York does not publicly identify how much gold belongs to each individual foreign central bank.
Therefore, determining the geography of Europe’s gold requires examining disclosures from the European central banks themselves.
And the level of transparency varies significantly.
Why keep gold abroad at all?
To understand these choices, we need to abandon one common misconception.
Keeping gold abroad does not necessarily mean a country trusts another country more than itself.
There are practical reasons.
Gold held in London is close to the world’s largest wholesale gold market.
Gold held in New York is close to the dollar financial system.
Foreign storage creates geographical diversification.
In extreme circumstances, it can also provide immediate access to foreign-currency liquidity.
The geography of reserves is therefore partly a map of financial infrastructure.
But it is also a map of risk.
A central bank must consider questions that most citizens rarely need to ask.
What happens if domestic infrastructure becomes inaccessible?
What happens during war?
What happens during a severe financial crisis?
Where can gold be sold fastest?
Where can it most easily be exchanged for dollars, pounds or other currencies?
How much should remain under direct national control?
And how much should be distributed across trusted international financial centres?
There is no universal answer.
That is precisely why the different European choices are so revealing.
Gold as crisis infrastructure
We usually think about gold as an asset.
Perhaps central banks increasingly need to think about it as infrastructure for extreme circumstances.
DNB’s language is particularly revealing.
Its decision is explicitly connected to preparedness for severe crises.
That does not mean the Netherlands expects a crisis tomorrow.
Central banks exist partly to prepare for events they hope never happen.
But when institutions responsible for monetary stability begin reconsidering where their ultimate reserve asset should physically or legally reside, it deserves attention.
Because gold is unlike almost every other financial asset.
A government bond is somebody else’s liability.
A bank deposit depends on a bank.
A currency depends on an issuing central bank.
Physical gold does not represent another institution’s promise to pay.
That characteristic becomes particularly interesting when geopolitical trust becomes less predictable.
This is not necessarily a story about distrust of America
There is an obvious temptation to interpret European gold movements as evidence that central banks are losing confidence in the United States.
The evidence does not justify such a simple conclusion.
Germany continues to hold more than 1,200 tonnes in New York.
Italy holds more than 1,000 tonnes there.
New York remains one of the world’s most important centres for official gold custody.
London remains another.
France’s operation had explicit technical and market-standard motivations.
The Dutch decision combines geopolitical risk management with liquidity considerations.
The more interesting conclusion is therefore not:
Europe is withdrawing its gold from America.
It is: European central banks are making different choices about what “security” means.
For France, security increasingly means domestic custody.
For the Netherlands, it includes geographical diversification and immediate market liquidity.
For Germany, it means a combination of domestic control and access to London and New York.
For Italy, the existing balance still places almost equal quantities at home and in the United States.
Different countries.
Different histories.
Different calculations of risk.
The question beneath the gold
Gold reserves are normally reported as numbers.
3,350 tonnes.
2,452 tonnes.
2,437 tonnes.
612 tonnes.
But perhaps we should begin looking not only at the numbers.
We should look at the map.
Because where a country keeps its gold tells us something about what it wants that gold to be able to do.
Stored domestically, it represents sovereignty and direct control.
Stored in London, it offers access to the world’s principal gold market.
Stored in New York, it provides proximity to the dollar system.
Distributed between locations, it provides resilience.
None of these choices is inherently right or wrong.
But changes in those choices matter.
France changed its map.
The Netherlands has just changed its map.
Other European central banks may eventually do the same — or deliberately decide not to.
That is why the movement of 86 tonnes of Dutch gold is more than a story about 86 tonnes of Dutch gold.
It is an invitation to look at the geography of Europe’s monetary security.
And to ask: When central banks prepare for an uncertain future, where do they want their gold to be?
Perhaps the answer can tell us something about where they believe safety, liquidity — and trust — will be found when they need them most.
Observe. Understand. Share.
SOURCE
– De Nederlandsche Bank — “DNB improves tradability of gold reserves” (2 September 2026)
– Banca d’Italia — Gold reserves.
– Deutsche Bundesbank — Annual Accounts 2025
– Banque de France — 2025 Results
