On the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Erasmus+ programme for the period 2028-2034, and repealing Regulations (EU) 2021/817 and (EU) 2021/888

for the Committee on Culture and Education on the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Erasmus+ programme for the period 2028-2034, and repealing Regulations (EU) 2021/817 and (EU) 2021/888

(COM(2025) – C100170/2025 – 2025/0222(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 Erasmus+ programme is an EU flagship programme supporting education, training, youth, sport as well as volunteering and active citizenship in the future programming period, and which plays a central role in promoting European values, cross-border cooperation and youth engagement;

B.whereas the demand for the participation in the Erasmus+ programme through past programming periods has largely exceeded the available financial resources, resulting in reduced participation opportunities and a significant number of projects remaining unfunded;

1.Considers that the Erasmus+ programme envelope should be increased from [xxxx] to [xxxx] enabling it to pursue its successful actions, while taking into account the inflation rate; recalls the need to ensure an optimal integration of the European Solidarity Corps programme, also massively oversubscribed;

2.Recalls the targets of the Europe on the Move Council Recommendation, highlights that in order to meet these targets, the proposed budget seems to be insufficient and an increase is required;

3.Considers that sufficient human and technical, including IT, resources must be available from the outset and throughout the entire programming period of the next MFF to ensure an effective implementation of Erasmus+ programme;

4.Deplores the lack of breakdown of the budget of Erasmus+ programme, particularly compared to the situation in the current MFF; notes that this would give the Commission great latitude to shift and decide on spending priorities during implementation; recommends fixing indicative sub-envelopes in the basic act, in the fields of education and training, youth, sport and volunteering;

5.Deplores the lack of a sufficiently detailed indicative budgetary nomenclature proposed in the Legislative Financial and Digital Statement; considers that this will hamper oversight and the budgetary authority’s ability to steer accurately policy priorities in the annual budgetary procedure; expresses concerns that the overly aggregated budgetary architecture would facilitate transfers not subject to budgetary authority decision;

6.Insists that sufficiently detailed and sound legislation, with an appropriate level of governance, is a condition for proper budgetary decision-making and adequate parliamentary oversight during budget implementation; recommends introducing provisions to strengthen control over how the budget is mobilised and spent;

7.Calls for effective synergies between Erasmus+ and other programmes, in particular the European Competitiveness Fund, Horizon Europe, and NRPPs; stresses that enhanced synergies between instruments must not come to the expense of traceability of expenditure or the prerogatives of the budgetary authority; insists that the budgetary authority should retain full control over how resources are combined across instruments and over the effective contribution of each programme to Union priorities;

8.Stresses that the use of external assigned revenue under Erasmus+ programme must be clearly circumscribed, fully transparent and subject to effective parliamentary scrutiny; takes note in that regard of the provisions relating to financial contributions by any participating third country and other third parties;

9.Underlines that any change in the architecture, objectives and eligible actions under the programme will need to be appropriately reflected in the monitoring provisions under Annex I of the performance regulation, as part of the process of amending and negotiating that regulation;

10.Recalls that, in line with Article 6.3 of the Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509, in the implementation of the budget, Member States and the Commission shall ensure compliance with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and shall respect the Union values enshrined in Article 2 TEU. In this regard, calls for a comprehensive ex-ante screening in the award procedure process;

11.Urges the Commission to explore ways of applying a “smart conditionality” approach, ensuring that final beneficiaries and recipients can continue to benefit from Union funding in cases of breaches of the rule of law by national governments without weakening the application of Regulation 2020/2092;

12.Calls for at least 75% of the Programme’s budget to be implemented under indirect management, ensuring an adequate level of predictability of resources for the national agencies; emphasizes the need to avoid substantial reductions in the annual budget allocated to Member States from one year to the next;

13.Reminds that one of the biggest barriers to young people’s participation, especially for those from disadvantaged backgrounds, in the Programme seems to be an insufficient level of funding; calls for a revision of the current funding rules applicable to the mobility of students to ensure the grant amounts are adapted to meet their needs to enable broader participation in the Erasmus+ programme;

14.Insists for a structured cooperation with national agencies in the preparation of the work programmes and the revised funding rules.

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

Amendment 1

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 17

Or. en

Amendment 2

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 38 a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 3

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 51 a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 4

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 51 b (new)

Or. en

Amendment 5

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 1

Or. en

Amendment 6

Proposal for a regulation

Article 10 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Or. en

Justification

Since contribution from other third parties is already foreseen in Article 10 paragraph 1, there is a clear need to ensure that the Commission fully exploits it in a swift way while respecting the Financial Regulation.

Amendment 7

Proposal for a regulation

Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 8

Proposal for a regulation

Article 11 – paragraph 1

Or. en

Justification

The proposed Article 11.1 allows combined funding from a legal standpoint. The aim of this amendment is to request the Commission a clear view with an Action Plan in time how it intends to exploit these opportunities.

Amendment 9

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Or. en