On the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2021/1057 establishing the European Social… Fund + (ESF+) as regards specific measures to address strategic challenges

for the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2021/1057 establishing the European Social Fund + (ESF+) as regards specific measures to address strategic challenges

(COM(2025)0164 – C100064/2025 – 2025/0085(COD))

The Committee on Budgets has carried out a budgetary assessment of the proposal under Rule 58 of the Rules of Procedure and has reached the following conclusions:

The Committee on Budgets,

A.whereas the proposal does not modify existing budgetary commitments and remains within the limits of the overall allocations for the period 2021-2027 and is therefore budgetary neutral;

B.whereas the combined effect of exceptional one-off 30 % pre-financing and 100 % co-financing on new EU priorities, as well as additional one-off pre-financing of 4.5 % (9.5 % for NUTS 2 regions that have borders with Russia, Belarus or Ukraine) for programmes that reallocate at least 15 % of their resources to the new priorities, leads to a partial frontloading of estimated payment appropriations of EUR 500 million in 2026, followed by lower payments in 2027;

C.whereas the extension of the eligibility period by one year – from the end of 2029 to the end of 2030 – for programmes that reallocate at least 15 % of their total allocation to new specific objectives creates payments in 2030 and changes the applicable decommitment rule for 2027 from year n+2 to year n+3;

Conclusions of the budgetary assessment

1.Determines that the proposal is compatible with the MFF Regulation; notes that the proposed measures are voluntary and do not involve any top-up of the initial allocation available to Member States;

2.Notes that the proposal requires additional human resources of EUR 376 000 per year in 2025, 2026 and 2027, for two establishment plan posts; notes that the additional needs will be covered by redeployment within the Directorate-General or other Commission services; notes, however, that the overall impact of redeployments within the Commission services has reached its limit;

3.Determines that the proposal is compatible with the Interinstitutional agreement on budgetary discipline (IIA); notes, however, that re-programming in the context of the mid-term review is considered not to alter the contribution to climate targets as set out in point 16 of the IIA; underlines that allocating resources to new objectives, including for the competitiveness, preparedness and strategic autonomy of the EU, could lead to shifting resources from interventions with a higher coefficient for calculation of support to climate change objectives to interventions with a lower coefficient, thus potentially reducing the expenditure supporting climate objectives; invites the Commission to take preventive action to counter this risk; calls on the Commission to assess the impact of the revised plans on the shares of expenditure supporting climate objectives; notes also that the ‘do no significant harm’ principle should apply to all European investments in line with the applicable legislation;

4.Considers that the proposal is compatible with the budgetary principles laid down in the Financial Regulation; notes, however, that the pre-financing paid in 2026 will be counted as payments made in 2025 for the purposes of calculating the amounts to be decommitted, in particular as regards respect for the principle of annuality;

5.Recalls the importance of the general regime of conditionality as set out in Article 6 of the Financial Regulation; urges the Commission and the Member States to ensure compliance with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and to respect the Union values enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union in the implementation of the budget;

6.Notes that the Commission does not expect any implications for the budget for 2025 beyond the redeployment of existing human resources; expects the Commission to take into account the current proposal and the updated payment needs for the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) in the budgetary procedure for 2026 following the actual re-programming by Member States and to keep Parliament informed in a timely manner of the progress of the mid-term review in the Member States; calls for a prudent approach to payment frontloading;

Recommendations as regards budget implementation

7.Notes that the proposal provides further flexibility and introduces incentives for Member States in the context of the mid-term review of cohesion policy to address strategic challenges that the EU is facing by redirecting resources to new EU priorities; underlines that cohesion policy should not be used again as a crisis response tool and maintains that this approach risks undermining its longer-term policy and investment objectives, including investments in regional development, skills, innovation and productivity; regrets that the Commission did not perform an impact assessment of the changes; acknowledges that the proposal offers a pragmatic, albeit unsatisfactory, way forward for dealing with insufficient budgetary flexibility and response capacity in the EU budget;

8.Recalls that the ESF+ is an essential pillar of cohesion policy and its main objective is to support Member States and regions in achieving social inclusion and social cohesion, to activate the labour market and to deliver on the principles and the headline targets of the European Pillar of Social Rights by supporting investments in people and systems in the policy area of employment and social policies; highlights that the Member States should ensure safeguards in the regulatory framework to prevent the dismantling of the core objectives of cohesion policy; underlines the need to ensure that the implementation of the amended ESF+ Regulation is accompanied by measures for simplification and strengthening of administrative capacities in order to drive investments in key sectors and increase the absorption rate;

9.Underlines that the combined effect of reallocating a minimum of 15 % of resources and of lifting of the 20 % ceiling for transfer towards Strategic Technologies for Europe Platform (STEP) objectives may have a negative impact on the achievements of targets initially set in the ESF+ Regulation and could result in some initially planned actions for later years not materialising owing to a discontinuity in matching objectives with resources, while noting the need to adapt to new priorities, taking into account the recent geopolitical dynamics;

10.Notes that payments to 2021-2027 cohesion policy programmes were of a very low level in the first years of implementation, leading to an increase in payment needs towards the later years; recalls that this actual payment cycle does not coincide with the more linear payment profile set out in the MFF Regulation and that this situation results in a serious risk of exceeding payment ceilings; recalls that the gradual increase in payments towards the later part of the programming period is a feature of multiannual programmes; considers that the frontloading of payments towards 2026 could have an impact on the pressure on payments;

11.Recalls that the STEP Regulation and the RESTORE Amending Regulation of 2024 were accompanied by a frontloading of payment appropriations in the budgets for 2024 and for 2025; notes that the total amount of payment appropriations in the 2026 draft budget is very close to the payment ceiling and is concerned, in this respect, about the high level of uncertainty with regard to the volume of payment claims in 2026; highlights the difficulties in predicting the take-up of the newly introduced flexibilities and incentives and in estimating payment needs, as also underpinned by the ongoing trend of increasing inaccuracy of payment forecasts by Member States; calls on the Commission to closely monitor payment developments and provide timely information to Parliament in this regard, and to propose any remedial action to the budgetary authority if needed;

12.Recalls that 100 % co-financing without additional resources leads to a lower total amount of financial support through the programme; insists that broadening the scope of investment must not lead to a reduction in financial support for the initial priorities of investing in employment, social services, inclusive education and skills, and of providing assistance to the most vulnerable, including children; recalls that mandatory co-financing is an important principle of cohesion policy funding;

13.Requests that the Commission provide traceable information in the form of timely reports on transfers to ensure that the impact of the mid-term review is clearly identifiable for the budgetary authority;

14.Calls on the Commission to maintain consistency in applying conditionality across all EU funding streams and insists that amendments in Parliament’s reading are essential to close any loophole; demands rigorous enforcement of conditionality mechanisms and explicitly rejects any reallocation of blocked cohesion policy funds if this would circumvent the rule-of-law-related requirements established in the Common Provisions Regulation; underlines that rule of law conditionality is a fundamental principle that must apply to all EU funds without exception;

15.Considers that the actual take-up of the proposal may depend on various factors, such as the effectiveness of the 15 % re-allocation threshold and the availability of more favourable funding options under other Union programmes; considers that the proposed condition of the reallocation of at least 15 % of the funds to new priorities may be too high and unsuitable for single national programmes, as it could create implementation complications; highlights the importance of preventing double financing and calls on the Member States and the Commission to ensure that support for new types of investment is in addition to support under other Union programmes, including the EDF, EDIP and SAFE;

16.Notes that the mid-term review may reduce the amount of funds at risk of decommitment; recalls that an amount equivalent to the cumulative decommitments made on outstanding commitments since 2021 can be made available for the European Union Recovery Instrument (EURI); asks the Commission to provide further analysis of the impact of the mid-term review on the EURI instrument.

AMENDMENT

As part of its budgetary assessment, the Committee on Budgets also submits the following amendment to the proposal:

Amendment 1

Proposal for a regulation

Recital [9] a (new)

The rapporteur for budgetary assessment declares under his exclusive responsibility that he did not receive input from any entity or person to be mentioned in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.