This is getting off topic now, but in answer to your question:
In the US, it's more like a little over $4k per meter when you get the warranty, shipping, sales tax (depending on what state) and TruVolt software stuff turned on. Z540 cal goes on top of that. The lower price doesn't include the advanced software license - at least not when we got the sales demo and the written quote from Keysight.
Note the "Typical Configured" price of over $3800:
http://www.keysight.com/en/pd-2520154-pn-34470A/digital-multimeter-7-digit-performance-truevolt-dmm?cc=US&lc=engAnd again - at least when we patiently waded thru the sales demo in 2015, this meter -was not- nearly as stable in 6.5 digit mode as an LM399-based 3456a, which you can get for maybe around $300 (or somewhere around that) on eBay (a basic 3456a cal runs about $100 or $175 for Z540). In fact the demo 34470a not only drifted faster in four hours as did a 3456a drifts in a month (new '56a spec was 8ppm/day, older ones we have all measure at < 4ppm per month and are 1ppm or less per day), the 34470a drifted faster in four hours than all FIVE 3456a's 30 day spec in the same room. And of course against the 3458a's there is no contest, but the 34470a is not in competition with that one. Tell me again why you'd want this meter if you're after good stability over even 24hrs - and why is it a an example of a good Vref module design technique? At any price??
Here's a real sample in the lab: In comparison to a used, working Z540 calibrated 3458a that we've got a total of about $4300 invested after first year (24hr hr spec of 0.5ppm plus .05ppm of range on 10VDC range - which is what about all quality LTZ -based devices are capable of, with or without voodoo slots on the Vref module)...and on 34470a you get 8ppm + 2ppm (10DCV range) per 24 hrs (see datasheet):
http://www.keysight.com/en/pd-2520154-pn-34470A/digital-multimeter-7-digit-performance-truevolt-dmm?cc=US&lc=engAlso note that 34470a input bias current is "<30pA"...So we'll take that as meaning up to 29.9pA, which means you're not going to be throwing out your decent analog null meter anytime soon (Keithley 155's / Fluke 845's are < 200fA and even well below that if they are dialed in carefully).
So the disappointing question I'm left with is this: If you're Keysight, and you have all the design and development work done on a perfectly good working 3458a LTZ module where you already have lots of inventory - and at this point your Vref cost is really only the BOM parts cost - why on Earth do you try to design a medicore, cheap-ass LTZ Vref to build a 7.5 digit meter with only medicore stability? There wasn't say $10~$15 (volume cost for better resistors and caps) left over in the budget to use a
PROVEN GOOD LTZ module design you already own that requires no engineering dev work? Software will never compensate for higher drift rates on an LTZ module - In other words your LTZ-based device is never going to be more stable than the Vref module itself.
Maybe the rest of the meter is so dismal that they can't get better than even 2 or 4ppm per day drift (which is still not that great). Maybe they just gave up trying at some point.
Again - people might not need the high stability and they like the smaller size / faster reading per second of 34470a. And that's what they should get. The 34470a serves as a good example of "Build to a price point" LTZ module technique that gets you relative medicore stability performance. You get what you pay for, and sometimes if you pay less for an older, much more stable unit - you're getting more. IF real stability and good quality binding posts are more important to you than the fluffy display - then 34470a is not a really a good choice for a lot of low-ppm measures.