Making sweeping changes to the EU budget does not necessarily make it better

Press release

Luxembourg, 27 April 2026

Making sweeping changes to the EU budget does not necessarily make it better

The European Commission is suggesting a major overhaul of the EU’s long-term budget
EU auditors flag risks to the European Parliament and the Council ahead of negotiations
Key takeaways from 12 audit opinions summarised in an overview

The significant and manifold changes the European Commission has proposed for the EU’s long-term budget may ultimately not make funding and spending methods for implementing EU policies and programmes after 2028 better, according to the European Court of Auditors (ECA). As certain parts of the proposed arrangements fundamentally change the way EU spending is planned, managed and scrutinised, the auditors warn of risks to sound financial management and call for stronger safeguards. In a document published today that summarises their concerns, they reiterate warnings to EU policymakers as they embark on negotiating the outcome of the proposed budget of almost €2 trillion for the 2028-2034 period.

In a dozen opinions the ECA has issued since January on the Commission’s proposals for the new multiannual financial framework (MFF), the auditors give their views on a wide range of areas, ranging from competitiveness, research and culture, to cohesion, agriculture, and international support.

“The legislative proposals for the EU’s next multi-year budget show that this is not business as usual, but a major overhaul,” said ECA President Tony Murphy. “As the EU’s financial watchdog, we highlight risks and challenges in a dozen opinions on the Commission’s proposals for the 2028-2034 EU budget. Many of the changes proposed are no guarantee of better spending in the future”.

In July and September 2025, the Commission made several legislative proposals for the EU’s 2028-2034 budget. To start with, it put forward a financial allocation of almost €2 trillion, an increase of 59 % compared to the current 2021-2027 budget of €1.2 trillion. As a result, national contributions to the budget would increase by 81 %, to €235 billion. To finance the bloc’s policies, the EU’s executive proposed that own revenue streams should be increased from four to nine: these include new resources based on non-collected e-waste, tobacco excise duties, and a corporate resource for Europe. At the same time, it proposed a marked decline – by 20 percentage points – in the proportion of EU funding to be implemented together with the member states. It also suggested a sizeable new European Fund of €865 billion for cohesion and agriculture centred around a single national and regional partnership plan, and a substantial increase in funding to strengthen the EU’s defence-industrial base and enhance defence capabilities. In addition, there would be a major shift towards financing not linked to costs, and an option for member states to finance their plans through repayable EU loans of up to €150 billion, which is a significant novelty at this scale.

The auditors warn that if the new revenue streams are not approved, there will be a significant budget shortfall, meaning that member states’ contributions will have to be increased or the budget’s ambition scaled back. In addition, they note the large increase in EU debt that would result from the proposed borrowing. In terms of spending, merging different policies could compromise the achievement of their objectives and require trade-offs between priorities. For large parts of the budget, spending priorities will be in the hands of member states with diverging interests. For example, significant divergence between member states’ plans could weaken the alignment of agricultural spending with EU priorities, distort competition, and create an uneven playing field for farmers. Furthermore, greater flexibility should not mean spending more money without securing more effective outcomes. The proposed performance framework suffers from weak design, which does not allow to measure what results EU spending has achieved and what EU citizens are ultimately getting for their money. At the same time, arrangements for providing assurance that EU money is being spent soundly are, for significant parts of the budget, too reliant on what is often weak oversight by member states. Lastly, the proposals are not clear enough in giving the auditors unrestricted rights to access information.

Background

The figures in this press release are based on current prices. The ECA’s 12 opinions on the proposed 2028-2034 EU budget, with links to the complete documents and the related press releases, both in 24 EU languages, are available in a dedicated section on the ECA’s website. These opinions have been requested by the Parliament and the Council, and contribute to the process leading to an agreement on the EU’s new long-term budget. The key takeaways from these opinions are summarised in the overview document “EU budget 2028-2034 – The ECA’s view: Many changes may not make it better”. This document is currently available in English only; other languages will be available in due course.

Contact:

ECA press office: press@eca.europa.eu