EPICENTER

In LePoint.fr, Nicolas Marques, Director General of the Institut économique Molinari and part of the Epicenter network, argued that the European Union does not need a record Multiannual Financial Framework of €1,763 billion for 2028–2034. Marques questioned the 39% increase justified by geopolitical, climate and digital challenges, stressing that the EU has expanded far beyond its core mission of promoting the Single Market. Drawing on Epicenter’s Alternative EU Budget study, he noted that spending could be reduced by 13% (€220 billion) by refocusing on essential competences, while warning that new own resources would strengthen Brussels’ fiscal autonomy at the expense of member states and further undermine European competitiveness.

In Linkiesta.it, the Istituto Bruno Leoni, as part of the Epicenter network, argued that pensions should serve as a lever for economic growth rather than merely a source of public revenue. The editorial highlights that Europe, and especially Italy, holds substantial pension savings locked in low-productivity assets, while funded systems in the United States mobilise the equivalent of 150% of GDP compared with only 25% in the EU. Drawing on analysis from the IBL-Epicenter study on the next Multiannual Financial Framework, it notes that only Denmark, Sweden and the Netherlands have successfully turned pension systems into a driver of growth, and calls for greater freedom for pension funds to invest productively, full accountability of fund managers to workers, and the removal of tax disincentives that favour government bonds over productive assets.

In IlFoglio.it, Carlo Stagnaro of the Istituto Bruno Leoni, part of the Epicenter network, argued that the European Commission’s decision to exclude certain energy-related spending from the deficit calculation is a calculated concession rather than a genuine victory for Italy. While the flexibility (up to 0.3% of GDP per year) responds to requests from the Meloni government, the resources may only be used for Green Deal-aligned investments aimed at energy resilience and reducing fossil fuel dependence, not for emergency support or broad relief measures. Stagnaro warned that the measure risks simply encouraging higher public spending and further increasing Italy’s already elevated public debt, reflecting the Commission’s broader tendency to treat increased expenditure as the universal solution.

In Forbes.sk, the European Commission’s proposal for a €1.763 trillion Multiannual Financial Framework (2028–2034) – a substantial increase on the previous period – is examined in the context of higher spending and new own resources that would also affect Slovakia. The article highlights the risks of expanded EU-level taxation and increased fiscal transfers, consistent with the warnings raised in Epicenter’s Alternative EU Budget study, which calls for capping the budget at around 1% of GNI, rejecting permanent new revenue streams, and prioritising competitiveness and the Single Market over an ever-larger central budget.

In Fintag.cz, the Centre for Economic and Market Analyses (CETA), as part of the Epicenter network, warned that the European Commission’s proposals for the 2028–2034 Multiannual Financial Framework risk normalising uncontrolled joint EU borrowing. Analysts including Michael Fanta and Aleš Rod of CETA criticised the planned new own resources and the National and Regional Partnership Plans, which would institutionalise the joint debt introduced under NextGenerationEU without clear limits or exit mechanisms. The Epicenter Alternative EU Budget study recommends capping spending at 1% of GNI, maintaining fiscal neutrality, using common debt only as an exceptional tool, and strengthening competitiveness through deregulation rather than higher spending and new taxes.

In Metro.cz, the Centre for Economic and Market Analyses (CETA), as part of the Epicenter network, presented the network’s Alternative EU Budget study warning against the European Commission’s proposals for the 2028–2034 Multiannual Financial Framework. Analysts including Michael Fanta and Aleš Rod of CETA criticised the introduction of five new own resources (including the CORE corporate levy and e-waste contribution) and the normalisation of joint EU borrowing. The study recommends capping the budget at 1% of GNI, focusing spending on genuine European added value, simplifying funds, respecting subsidiarity, maintaining fiscal neutrality, and strengthening competitiveness through deregulation rather than subsidies.

In LiberoQuotidiano.it, Alberto Mingardi, Director of the Istituto Bruno Leoni and part of the Epicenter network, criticised proposals for new European taxes to finance an expanded Multiannual Financial Framework. Mingardi warned that the Commission’s plans for additional own resources, such as the CORE corporate levy, would increase the overall tax burden without delivering real value, arguing instead for a leaner EU budget capped at 1% of GNI with better prioritisation of spending.

In Ilfoglio.it, Luca Lo Schiavo and Carlo Stagnaro (Istituto Bruno Leoni) analysed Italy’s persistently high electricity bills and the multiple policy-driven causes behind them. The article references Epicenter’s study showing that Europe does not need additional resources for the next Multiannual Financial Framework: the EU can achieve its objectives by concentrating spending more effectively while remaining within the traditional 1% of GNI cap. The authors argue that auction revenues from the ETS should be used to reduce energy bills rather than feed an expanding EU budget, while calling for national measures to cut system charges, reduce bureaucracy, and accelerate genuine market reforms.

In ForbesBulgaria.com, Petar Ganev from the Institute for Market Economics (IME), as part of the Epicenter network, warned that Bulgaria’s support for a significantly larger EU budget through the ‘Friends of Cohesion’ group carries serious risks, including new European taxes and greater fiscal centralisation. The article presents the network’s Alternative EU Budget proposal, which caps the Multiannual Financial Framework at around 1% of GNI, calls for deep cuts to inefficient spending, and prioritises competitiveness and the Single Market over expanding fiscal transfers.