The European Court of Auditors (ECA) has warned that the European Commission’s proposal for the European Union’s 2028-2034 budget does not guarantee that money can be followed to its final recipients, nor does it spell out what happens to member states that break the rules.
In a review published on November 4, the Luxembourg-based auditors found that Brussels had fully taken up one of the 28 improvements they identified in June 2025. Nineteen had been partially addressed and eight remained untouched.
The weakest points concern the new funding model, under which payments would be released when member states meet set objectives rather than against costs actually incurred. The approach is borrowed from the post-pandemic recovery fund and would be extended to much of EU spending over the next seven years.
The auditors said the proposals still focused on whether milestones had been ticked off rather than on what the investments had delivered. Payments could be authorised on the basis of member states’ own declarations without mandatory prior checks, they said.
The ECA also objected that definitive cuts in funding for irregularities could be delayed until February 2036, which it said would blunt the deterrent effect of penalties. It called for clarity on when misused money must be recovered.
The review repeats concerns the ECA raised in April, when it said the Commission’s overhaul of the budget did not guarantee better spending.
A further warning concerns the plan to merge farm subsidies and cohesion funding into a single €865 billion fund run through national plans drawn up by each member state. Concentrating planning in one document per country could weaken regions’ say over how money is shared out, the auditors said.
They acknowledged progress on simplification, with the budget’s headings cut from seven to four and the number of programmes from 52 to 16. They cautioned, though, that these changes alone would not reduce red tape for beneficiaries.
The auditors also faulted Brussels for failing to define “European added value” in law, which they said could make the results of EU investment harder to compare.
On revenue, the ECA said adding five new income streams, taking the total to nine, would add complexity and could push up administrative costs for national governments and the Commission alike. Cutting VAT and customs losses would reduce the need for new contributions, it said.
The review recognised tougher safeguards for the rule of law in the proposal but warned that some provisions could weaken the sanctions foreseen for breaches.
Jan Gregor, the ECA member responsible for the review, said the EU needed a budget that showed clearly what the bloc could deliver while ensuring sound management, accountability and transparency. The findings “could serve as a guiding compass” for lawmakers as negotiations between the European Parliament and member states continue, the auditors said.
