In November 2024, the Ministry of Finance used 2,389.4 million euros left over from the European funds of the Recovery Plan to cover pensions for passive classes and minimum supplements, as certified by the Court of Auditors in its report on the General Account of the State. The European Commission, consulted about the maneuver, maintains that the treasury operation does not violate the community framework, although it continues to analyze the case.
The movement was executed in two steps. On November 6, the Treasury authorized a credit increase for 1,722.1 million. Thirteen days later, a transfer of another 667.3 million was added. The money came in both cases from service 50, the section where the resources of the Recovery and Resilience Mechanism (MRR) are allocated and which on paper can only be allocated to actions of the Recovery Plan.
Justice forces Social Security to give a pension of 1,147.04 euros for absolute permanent disability to a management secretary with ‘failed back syndrome’
It has already come into force: discontinuous permanent workers have the right to have each day worked multiplied by 1.5 to access their retirement pension sooner.
The Treasury alleges that the credits were surplus, that their use did not compromise the objectives agreed with Brussels and that spending on pensions was “unavoidable” in the face of a budget extension that did not cover everything.
The European Commission does not rule out that reading. “It is entirely possible that a Member State will have to pre-finance certain investments before receiving a subsequent MRR disbursement. Similarly, it can also use the liquidity from MRR payments to cover other expenses,” explains a community spokesperson. These treasury operations, he adds, “have no impact on the financial interests of the Union,” although Brussels clarifies that it is still “reviewing the information.”
The Court of Auditors does not settle the matter with the same serenity. It approves the report with a favorable opinion, but states that “the action has been carried out under legal bases that should have been better justified.” Instead of treating it as a caveat, the most serious objection to an audit, it is included in the minor section called “Other results that do not affect the opinion.”
Internal discrepancy in the supervisory body
This reduction has opened an unusual crack in the institution. The councilors Javier Morillas and Isabel Fernández Torres have signed two dissenting votes. According to Morillas’ dissenting opinion, the initial draft did classify the operation as a reservation and warned that “the regulations only contemplate transfers of credits between sections within the Recovery Plan.” The allegations of the Secretary of State for Budgets and Expenses made those passages disappear.
“The rules in this regard are clear and the foundations used are not solid,” Morillas says. Fernández Torres considers that the approved opinion “does not comply with either the literality or the purpose” of the legal framework of European funds and attributes the episode to “the management difficulties derived from the absence of a budget.”
The opposition takes the case to Brussels
PP and Vox have transferred the matter to the European Commission. Five popular MEPs, including Isabel Benjumea and Esteban González Pons, maintain in a registered question that the MRR regulations “expressly prohibit the use of these resources to cover current expenses.” Vox raises, for its part, whether the operation “may lead to a suspension, reduction or cancellation of future injections.”
The Court itself places the case in an exceptional scenario. The lack of Budgets for 2024 forced the Executive to process modifications for 77,341.9 million to meet commitments not contemplated in the extension. And the supervisory body once again warns about the negative net worth of Social Security, which reaches 106,138.7 million for the eighth consecutive year and is supported by State loans equivalent to 7.91% of GDP.