An earlier version showed a single recent year as 3D extruded heights. But the gap between the largest and smallest contributors was too wide. Small states nearly vanished, and the map became hard to read.
So it was rebuilt as annual circle sizes across the whole period. That trades a one-year ranking for the shape of change over twenty-five years — enlargement, and the UK's departure, on one map. The chart is less about who pays most in any single frame, and more about how the mix of contributors shifts as the union grows and contracts.
These are absolute amounts in euros, shown as published. They are not adjusted for inflation over the twenty-five years. They are not normalized to economic size. So a larger economy tends to show a larger circle, mostly because it is larger.
A circle's position is one reference point per country. It is not a capital, a tax location, or where money actually moves. In dense areas like the Benelux, the points are placed for map legibility. Overlapping circles also brighten where they meet, so nearby countries can merge into one mass. That is why the largest contributor does not always look like the largest circle.
Some members receive a rebate on their GNI-based contributions. It is not drawn as a separate layer, and it is not subtracted here. The figures are the Commission's final totals. Displayed values are rounded, so the labels are less precise than the underlying data.
A contribution is not a simple membership fee. It is also not the whole of EU revenue. This chart uses only national contributions. It leaves out traditional own resources, such as the customs duties that members collect for the EU. So it shows money paid in on one revenue line, not the full picture of EU finances.
Paying more does not mean losing more. The chart carries no measure of what a country receives in return. That includes budget spending, single-market access, trade, investment, and the movement of labour and capital. So it cannot be read as a profit-or-loss account of EU membership. The Commission itself warns against judging membership on contributions alone.
A circle is also a national total, not a per-capita figure. Its size is not the burden on any single citizen.