my n=1 experience (father of two, from Italy and living in Italy):

I think the "too expensive" is part of the problem. Not the only one, but certainly a part.

Very few people here choose to have a child in their 20s, and this matches with "other things to do in life" but then, when you get into your 30s or 35 at most, I think the feeling of wanting a child is definitely there.

And, at that point, the "too expensive" and "too logistically difficult" parts start to get relevant. Even when childcare is there and you can afford it, a kid is often ill in its first three years of life, and requires a lot of attention. If both people in a family work, it's going to be a tremendous effort, and raising my two kids WAS a tremendous effort when they were very young; employers don't usually care a lot, and you don't have time to recharge.

Personally, I was able to go with two kids because all four grandparents live reasonably close, are retired and willing to help, and they had enough savings to help us buying a flat. If we were doing everything on our own, I don't know if I'd have had a second kid.

I know a few people making more money who are childless or with just one kid, because they (correctly) realize that, otherwise, it would be too difficult to go on with their career. And without their career they couldn't afford their flat/house, or a decent lifestyle for their children.

So, I think it's a mix of reasons. What it would help, btw, is getting recurrent, actual money for a child (at least for the first child), like, I don't need to think about how much it will cost me, I even get some money on top so I can pay baby sitters, travelling grandparents, et cetera. On the contrary, you need to pay for childcare out of your pocket (some regions offer reimbursements, but they depend on income limits that may make it very hard to have a kid in the first place) and even in school/pre-school you've got some expenses (meals, transports) that aren't state-paid (currently it's about 200 EUR/month for my two kids for a not-so-great refectory service).

Taxation isn't based on family size, so I get very little state contribution for my children, and I pay the same taxes as a single person, even though I do a lot of "work" - which is for me since the kids are mine, but it's for the future of my nation as well. I understand nobody forced me to have kids, but if nobody does, there's no future, nobody to pay pensions, et cetera. Kidless people expect "somebody somehow" to take care of them when they're older, because it makes sense in a large nation with a proper birth rate, but it could be not true anymore in this future.

So yeah, there's a mix of reasons, but calling the economical reasons _minor_ is just wrong IMHO. More people have no desire for kids because they've got other things to do. But quite a lot of people with desire for kids have a very difficult time in having how many kids they like. I think a better tax planning would make it possible for the state to achieve the desired replacement rate - I think it's about 1.8 - 1.9 children per couple - to lead to a slow population decrease - which is not a problem per se, it's the sharpness of the decline which will be a problem.