The debate on the 2028–2034 Multiannual Financial Framework concerns not only how funds are allocated but also how they are financed. Although major investment is needed to address current challenges, cuts to traditional spending areas and higher national contributions face strong resistance. New EU own resources could help resolve this dilemma. A recent study reviews proposals from the Commission and the European Parliament and considers further options, including taxes on financial transactions, kerosene and ultra-high wealth.

Launched in 2011, the European Semester has been continuously developed and is now a multifaceted tool for coordinating EU Member States’ economic, employment, social and environmental policies. Plans are underway to further strengthen it by linking it to the forthcoming Multiannual Financial Framework. Tying country-specific recommendations to payments from the EU budget should be viewed with great scepticism. Overall, strengthening its social dimension and democratic foundations is long overdue.

Negotiations on the Multiannual Financial Framework for 2028–2034 cover not only expenditure but also the issue of financing. Given the high level of investment required to tackle current challenges, the debate on new own resources is being reignited. The study assesses the current proposals from the Commission and the European Parliament, as well as other options, against four criteria: European added value, distributional effects, the capacity to address negative externalities and revenue potential.

At the end of April 2026, the European Commission published its communication, “A Simpler, Clearer and Better Enforced EU Rulebook”, setting out a new plan for how EU legislation should be adopted, applied and enforced in the future. Instead of offering genuine Better Regulation proposals, the Communication prioritises corporate interests and weakens democratic participation mechanisms.

Public services refer to the state’s responsibility to provide fundamental, essential services and infrastructure for everyone. They are essential for social cohesion, social security, participation and quality of life. To mark the tenth International Day of Services of General Interest on 23 June 2026, AK EUROPA organised an evening event on 24 June 2026 dedicated to this topic.

The European Parliament, Commission and Council jointly introduced the “One Europe, One Market” initiative at the end of April 2026 to strengthen Europe’s competitiveness and safeguard prosperity, security, global influence and independence. By the end of 2027, the EU aims to deepen the Single Market, diversify trade relations and strengthen its industrial capacities. The roadmap sets out 43 measures, including controversial proposals such as the planned agreement on “EU Inc.” by 2026.

While the European Union and Member States are strengthening their defence capabilities, concerns are growing over the social implications of increased security spending. This should not come at the expense of social expenditure, emphasized Claes-Mikael Ståhl in an AK EUROPA interview. Instead, security spending should be tied to social conditionalities, trade unions should be involved in decision-making, and a broad understanding of security should be developed.

As geopolitical tensions rise, the European Union and Member States are taking steps towards strengthening their defence. Alongside other important questions, this also raises concerns about trade-offs between defence spending and other areas, such as social spending, at both EU and national levels. AK EUROPA spoke with Claes-Mikael Ståhl, Deputy General Secretary of the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC), about current EU defence policy from a workers’ perspective.

With its proposal for the Multiannual Financial Framework 2028–2034, the European Commission launched the important yet controversial debate on the EU budget in mid-2025. The focus is on increased investment in competitiveness, security and defence. However, the European Parliament considers the draft to be insufficiently ambitious and is calling for a larger budget. In particular, the planned consolidation of funding programmes and cuts in traditional policy areas have met with criticism.