The European Commission is focusing its efforts on new corporate taxes to cover rising expenditures. This move comes as several member states oppose higher contributions. Brussels is also aiming for increased EU own resources, relying on structural reforms to the financial framework. Defense financing is also coming into focus due to rising geopolitical risks. In addition, the Commission is planning higher corporate levies to broaden the revenue base and reduce dependence on national budgets. (wiwo: 05.12.25)
Corporate Taxes as the Core of the New EU Financial Strategy
The Commission defines large companies as a key source of future revenue. New corporate taxes are intended to provide more reliable financing and close the gap created by the rejection of additional contributions. Complementary instruments are also being considered: higher costs in emissions trading, stricter CO₂ offsetting, and higher corporate levies. These measures are intended to stabilize the financial framework without placing a greater burden on national budgets. However, representatives of energy-intensive industries warn of significant risks, pointing to a weak construction sector. Companies argue that rising corporate levies would be difficult to bear during a recession.
The debate also touches upon the structure of EU own resources. Critics are demanding cuts to existing programs, but the Commission is pursuing a course that envisages greater use of EU funds. The planned reorganization of the financial framework is also causing tension, as countries with high net contributions want to avoid additional burdens.
New priorities in the European budget framework
A draft for the period from 2028 onwards outlines a budget framework comprising three central funds: defense, competitiveness, and a combined fund for cohesion and agricultural policy. This structure is intended to create clearer objectives and make reforms more measurable. National governments will be required to submit strategies that include defined indicators. The Commission is linking payments more closely to progress and aligning resources more strongly with strategic objectives. While this formally strengthens national policy options, strict requirements limit this freedom.
In this context, the debate on corporate levies takes on particular significance. The Commission argues that large companies benefit from the stability of the single market and should therefore contribute more. Critics, however, point to rising costs in the industrial sector and emphasize the risk of a competitive disadvantage. The conflict is intensifying because several countries are demanding austerity measures while simultaneously rejecting additional financial burdens.
Dispute over Defense Financing and National Responsibility
Defense financing is the biggest political point of contention. Some states are pushing for joint European bonds to accelerate military modernization. Germany, however, rejects this and is relying on national solutions. The government emphasizes that the German military budget contributes its share to the SAFE program, but that no expansion is necessary. Highly indebted states face a dilemma: the security situation demands higher spending, but fiscal constraints are tight.
The Commission points to the link between security stability and economic performance. A viable solution is therefore closely tied to the question of how EU own resources, the financial framework, and corporate levies will be structured in the future. Discussions on corporate taxes also reveal that no member state will accept additional burdens, while at the same time demanding more from the EU. This tension will shape the political agenda for the coming years.