What changed

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

P10_TA(2025)0176

on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2021/1057 establishing the European Social Fund + (ESF+) as regards(ESF+): specific measures to address strategic challenges

(COM(2025)0164 – C100064-2025 – 2025/0085(COD))

Committee on Employment and Social Affairs

PE774.605

European Parliament legislative resolution of 10 September 2025 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2021/1057 establishing the European Social Fund + (ESF+) as regards specific measures to address strategic challenges (COM(2025)0164 – C10-0064/2025 – 2025/0085(COD))

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

– having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2025)0164),

– having regard to Article 294(2) and Articles 164, 175, 177 and 322 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C100064-2025),(C100064/2025),

– having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

– having regard to the budgetary assessment by the Committee on Budgets,

– having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 29 April 2025,

– having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 15 May 2025,

– having regard to the provisional agreement approved by the responsible committee under Rule 75(4) of its Rules of Procedure and the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 23 July 2025 to approve Parliament’s position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

– having regard to Rules 60 and 58 of its Rules of Procedure,

1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;

2. Takes note of the statement by the Commission annexed to this resolution, which will be published in the C series of the Official Journal of the European Union;

3. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

3. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;

Amendment 1

4. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Proposal for a regulation

P10_TC1-COD(2025)0085

Recital 1

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 10 September 2025 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) 2025/… of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2021/1057 establishing the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) as regards specific measures to address strategic challenges

Amendment 2

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) 2025/1913.)

Proposal for a regulation

ANNEX TO THE LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

Recital 1 a (new)

Statement of the Commission on the respect for rule of law on the occasion of the adoption of Regulation (EU) 2025/1913

Amendment 3

The Commission underlines that the respect for rule of law and fundamental rights is of utmost importance for the European Union. The Commission understands the intention of the co-legislators to ensure the protection of the Union budget with its amendments to the Commission proposal. The Commission remains committed to ensuring the Rule of Law is upheld in the implementation of the Funds and will assess any request for programme amendments in line with the Common Provisions Regulation (CPR), the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation and the provisions of the Mid-Term Review Regulation.

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 1 b (new)

Amendment 4

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 1 c (new)

Amendment 5

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 1 d (new)

Amendment 6

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 2

Amendment 7

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 3

Amendment 8

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 4

Amendment 9

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 8 a (new)

Amendment 10

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 5

Amendment 11

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 6

Amendment 12

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 8

Amendment 13

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 9

Amendment 14

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 9 a (new)

Amendment 15

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 11

Amendment 16

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1

Regulation (EU) 2021/1057

Article 5a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Justification

The minimum reprogramming threshold to be eligible to the 4,5% pre-financing should be lower as Member States should be incentivised to reprogramme to reasonable level. The one-off pre-financing for Eastern bordering regions should not be submitted to minimum reprogramming threshold taking into account the major challenges that these regions face, and the related subparagraph is moved in a new paragraph.

Amendment 17

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1

Regulation (EU) 2021/1057

Article 5a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

Amendment 18

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1

Regulation (EU) 2021/1057

Article 5a – paragraph 1 a (new)

Amendment 19

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1

Regulation (EU)2021/1057

Article 5a – paragraph 1 b (new)

Amendment 20

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1

Regulation (EU) 2021/1057

Article 5a – paragraph 2

Justification

The minimum reprogramming threshold to be eligible to the 4,5% pre-financing should be lower as Member States should be incentivised to reprogramme to reasonable level.

Amendment 21

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1

Regulation (EU) 2021/1057

Article 5a – paragraph 2 a (new)

Justification

In line with Articles 33 and 169 of the Financial Regulation.

Amendment 22

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1

Regulation (EU) 2021/1057

Article 5a – paragraph 3

Justification

The 95% co-financing rate for Eastern bordering regions should not be submitted to minimum reprogramming threshold taking into account the major challenges that these regions face.

Amendment 23

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1

Regulation (EU) 2021/1057

Article 5a – paragraph 4

Justification

Taking into account that a significant level of reprogramming is expected, Member States could need more time to provide a complementary assessment.

Amendment 24

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

Regulation (EU) 2021/1057

Article 12a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

Amendment 25

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3

Regulation (EU) 2021/1057

Article 12c – title

Amendment 26

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3

Regulation (EU) 2021/1057

Article 12 c – paragraph 1

Amendment 27

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3

Regulation (EU) 2021/1057

Article 12c – paragraph 5

Amendment 28

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3

Regulation (EU) 2021/1057

Article 12d – paragraph 1

Amendment 29

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3

Regulation (EU) 2021/1057

Article 12d – paragraph 5

Amendment 30

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)

Regulation (EU) 2021/1057

Article 12d a (new)

ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur declares that she received input from the following entities or persons in the preparation of the report, prior to the adoption thereof in committee:

The list above is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur.

Where natural persons are identified in the list by their name, by their function or by both, the rapporteur declares that she has submitted to the concerned natural persons the European Parliament's Data Protection Notice No 484 (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/data-protect/index.do), which sets out the conditions applicable to the processing of their personal data and the rights linked to that processing.

18.6.2025

BUDGETARY ASSESSMENT OF THE COMMITTEE ON BUDGETS

for the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs

on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2021/1057 establishing the European Social Fund + (ESF+) as regards specific measures to address strategic challenges

(COM(2025)0164 – C100064/2025 – 2025/0085(COD))

Rapporteur for budgetary assessment: JeanMarc Germain

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 the proposal does not modify existing budgetary commitments and remains within the limits of the overall allocations for the period 2021-2027 and is therefore budgetary neutral;

B. whereas the combined effect of exceptional one-off 30 % pre-financing and 100 % co-financing on new EU priorities, as well as additional one-off pre-financing of 4.5 % (9.5 % for NUTS 2 regions that have borders with Russia, Belarus or Ukraine) for programmes that reallocate at least 15 % of their resources to the new priorities, leads to a partial frontloading of estimated payment appropriations of EUR 500 million in 2026, followed by lower payments in 2027;

C. whereas the extension of the eligibility period by one year – from the end of 2029 to the end of 2030 – for programmes that reallocate at least 15 % of their total allocation to new specific objectives creates payments in 2030 and changes the applicable decommitment rule for 2027 from year n+2 to year n+3;

Conclusions of the budgetary assessment

1. Determines that the proposal is compatible with the MFF Regulation; notes that the proposed measures are voluntary and do not involve any top-up of the initial allocation available to Member States;

2. Notes that the proposal requires additional human resources of EUR 376 000 per year in 2025, 2026 and 2027, for two establishment plan posts; notes that the additional needs will be covered by redeployment within the Directorate-General or other Commission services; notes, however, that the overall impact of redeployments within the Commission services has reached its limit;

3. Determines that the proposal is compatible with the Interinstitutional agreement on budgetary discipline (IIA); notes, however, that re-programming in the context of the mid-term review is considered not to alter the contribution to climate targets as set out in point 16 of the IIA; underlines that allocating resources to new objectives, including for the competitiveness, preparedness and strategic autonomy of the EU, could lead to shifting resources from interventions with a higher coefficient for calculation of support to climate change objectives to interventions with a lower coefficient, thus potentially reducing the expenditure supporting climate objectives; invites the Commission to take preventive action to counter this risk; calls on the Commission to assess the impact of the revised plans on the shares of expenditure supporting climate objectives; notes also that the ‘do no significant harm’ principle should apply to all European investments in line with the applicable legislation;

4. Considers that the proposal is compatible with the budgetary principles laid down in the Financial Regulation; notes, however, that the pre-financing paid in 2026 will be counted as payments made in 2025 for the purposes of calculating the amounts to be decommitted, in particular as regards respect for the principle of annuality;

5. Recalls the importance of the general regime of conditionality as set out in Article 6 of the Financial Regulation; urges the Commission and the Member States to ensure compliance with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and to respect the Union values enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union in the implementation of the budget;

6. Notes that the Commission does not expect any implications for the budget for 2025 beyond the redeployment of existing human resources; expects the Commission to take into account the current proposal and the updated payment needs for the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) in the budgetary procedure for 2026 following the actual re-programming by Member States and to keep Parliament informed in a timely manner of the progress of the mid-term review in the Member States; calls for a prudent approach to payment frontloading;

Recommendations as regards budget implementation

7. Notes that the proposal provides further flexibility and introduces incentives for Member States in the context of the mid-term review of cohesion policy to address strategic challenges that the EU is facing by redirecting resources to new EU priorities; underlines that cohesion policy should not be used again as a crisis response tool and maintains that this approach risks undermining its longer-term policy and investment objectives, including investments in regional development, skills, innovation and productivity; regrets that the Commission did not perform an impact assessment of the changes; acknowledges that the proposal offers a pragmatic, albeit unsatisfactory, way forward for dealing with insufficient budgetary flexibility and response capacity in the EU budget;

8. Recalls that the ESF+ is an essential pillar of cohesion policy and its main objective is to support Member States and regions in achieving social inclusion and social cohesion, to activate the labour market and to deliver on the principles and the headline targets of the European Pillar of Social Rights by supporting investments in people and systems in the policy area of employment and social policies; highlights that the Member States should ensure safeguards in the regulatory framework to prevent the dismantling of the core objectives of cohesion policy; underlines the need to ensure that the implementation of the amended ESF+ Regulation is accompanied by measures for simplification and strengthening of administrative capacities in order to drive investments in key sectors and increase the absorption rate;

9. Underlines that the combined effect of reallocating a minimum of 15 % of resources and of lifting of the 20 % ceiling for transfer towards Strategic Technologies for Europe Platform (STEP) objectives may have a negative impact on the achievements of targets initially set in the ESF+ Regulation and could result in some initially planned actions for later years not materialising owing to a discontinuity in matching objectives with resources, while noting the need to adapt to new priorities, taking into account the recent geopolitical dynamics;

10. Notes that payments to 2021-2027 cohesion policy programmes were of a very low level in the first years of implementation, leading to an increase in payment needs towards the later years; recalls that this actual payment cycle does not coincide with the more linear payment profile set out in the MFF Regulation and that this situation results in a serious risk of exceeding payment ceilings; recalls that the gradual increase in payments towards the later part of the programming period is a feature of multiannual programmes; considers that the frontloading of payments towards 2026 could have an impact on the pressure on payments;

11. Recalls that the STEP Regulation and the RESTORE Amending Regulation of 2024 were accompanied by a frontloading of payment appropriations in the budgets for 2024 and for 2025; notes that the total amount of payment appropriations in the 2026 draft budget is very close to the payment ceiling and is concerned, in this respect, about the high level of uncertainty with regard to the volume of payment claims in 2026; highlights the difficulties in predicting the take-up of the newly introduced flexibilities and incentives and in estimating payment needs, as also underpinned by the ongoing trend of increasing inaccuracy of payment forecasts by Member States; calls on the Commission to closely monitor payment developments and provide timely information to Parliament in this regard, and to propose any remedial action to the budgetary authority if needed;

12. Recalls that 100 % co-financing without additional resources leads to a lower total amount of financial support through the programme; insists that broadening the scope of investment must not lead to a reduction in financial support for the initial priorities of investing in employment, social services, inclusive education and skills, and of providing assistance to the most vulnerable, including children; recalls that mandatory co-financing is an important principle of cohesion policy funding;

13. Requests that the Commission provide traceable information in the form of timely reports on transfers to ensure that the impact of the mid-term review is clearly identifiable for the budgetary authority;

14. Calls on the Commission to maintain consistency in applying conditionality across all EU funding streams and insists that amendments in Parliament’s reading are essential to close any loophole; demands rigorous enforcement of conditionality mechanisms and explicitly rejects any reallocation of blocked cohesion policy funds if this would circumvent the rule-of-law-related requirements established in the Common Provisions Regulation; underlines that rule of law conditionality is a fundamental principle that must apply to all EU funds without exception;

15. Considers that the actual take-up of the proposal may depend on various factors, such as the effectiveness of the 15 % re-allocation threshold and the availability of more favourable funding options under other Union programmes; considers that the proposed condition of the reallocation of at least 15 % of the funds to new priorities may be too high and unsuitable for single national programmes, as it could create implementation complications; highlights the importance of preventing double financing and calls on the Member States and the Commission to ensure that support for new types of investment is in addition to support under other Union programmes, including the EDF, EDIP and SAFE;

16. Notes that the mid-term review may reduce the amount of funds at risk of decommitment; recalls that an amount equivalent to the cumulative decommitments made on outstanding commitments since 2021 can be made available for the European Union Recovery Instrument (EURI); asks the Commission to provide further analysis of the impact of the mid-term review on the EURI instrument.

AMENDMENT

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

Amendment 1

Proposal for a regulation

Recital [9] a (new)

ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR FOR BUDGETARY ASSESSMENT HAS RECEIVED INPUT

The rapporteur for budgetary assessment declares under his exclusive responsibility that he did not receive input from any entity or person to be mentioned in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR BUDGETARY ASSESSMENT

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR BUDGETARY ASSESSMENT

17.6.2025

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON SECURITY AND DEFENCE

for the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs

on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on Amending Regulation (EU) 2021/1057 establishing the European Social Fund + (ESF+) as regards specific measures to address strategic challenges

((COM(2025)0164 – C100064/2025 – (2025/0085(COD))

Rapporteur for opinion: Urmas Paet

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on Security and Defence submits the following to the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, as the committee responsible:

Amendment 1

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 2

Amendment 2

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 2 a (new)

Amendment 3

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1

Regulation (EU) 2021/1057

Article 5a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Amendment 4

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1

Regulation (EU) 2021/1057

Article 5a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

Amendment 5

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1

Regulation (EU) 2021/1057

Article 5a – paragraph 2

Amendment 6

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1

Regulation (EU) 2021/1057

Article 5a – paragraph 2a (new)

Amendment 7

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1

Regulation (EU) 2021/1057

Article 5a – paragraph 3

Amendment 8

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3

Regulation (EU) 2021/1057

Article 12c – title

Amendment 9

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3

Regulation (EU) 2021/1057

Article 12c – paragraph 1

Amendment 10

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3

Regulation (EU) 2021/1057

Article 12c – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1

Amendment 11

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3

Regulation (EU) 2021/1057

Article 12c – paragraph 5a (new)

ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

The rapporteur for the opinion declares under his exclusive responsibility that he did not receive input from any entity or person to be mentioned in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL BY THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

25.6.2025

LETTER OF THE COMMITTEE ON REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Ms Li Andersson

Chair

Committee on Employment and Social Affairs

BRUSSELS

Subject: Opinion on Amending Regulation (EU) 2021/1057 establishing the European Social Fund + (ESF+) as regards specific measures to address strategic challenges (2025/0085(COD) - COM(2025)0164 – C10-0064/2025)

Dear Ms Andersson,

Under the procedure referred to above, the Committee on Regional Development was asked to submit an opinion to your Committee.

At its meeting of 9 April 2025, REGI committee decided to send the opinion in the form of a letter. It discussed the matter at its meeting of 13 May 2025 and adopted the opinion at its meeting of 25 June 2025.

The Committee on Regional Development:

1. Underlines the crucial role that cohesion policy and sectoral programmes, in spite of the fact that they are not crisis management instruments, have repeatedly and efficiently played in helping regions to respond effectively to emergencies and asymmetric shocks such as the COVID-19 crisis, Brexit, the energy crisis and the refugee crisis caused by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, as well as natural disasters;

2. Is aware of the rapidly evolving economic, societal, environmental and geopolitical context, as well as the housing crisis, and shares the need for more flexibility in assessing the extent to which cohesion policy programmes can help respond to these changes; nevertheless is of the firm opinion that the capacity to offer flexible responses to unpredictable challenges should not come at the expense of the clear long-term strategic focus and objectives of cohesion policy, in accordance with Article 174 TFEU;

3. Reiterates that ESF+ stands as positive example of EU solidarity and that its main objective is to support Member States and regions to achieve social inclusion, social cohesion, to activate the labour market and to deliver on the principles and the headline targets of the European Pillar of Social Rights that are far from met yet; stresses that the reprogramming of resources under the ESF+ should ensure that adjustment measures in response to strategic challenges do not undermine its social approach, but strengthen its capacity to combat inequality;

4. Underlines the fact that cohesion policy shall first and foremost ensure social cohesion, not defence spending; nonetheless acknowledges that flexibility of the policy from the point of view of the beneficiaries is a key point, and stresses the need to provide regions with greater flexibility already when programming the funding, in order to cater for their particular needs and specificities, particularly border regions; furthermore acknowledges that investment in defence capabilities through the development of skills and training, while safeguarding social standards, is already possible under the ESF+ established by Regulation (EU) 2021/1057;

5. Acknowledges that investment in defence capabilities and in adaptation linked to decarbonisation makes a key contribution to the promotion of the competitiveness, preparedness and strategic autonomy of the EU, and requires having people with the right skills; in general, recognises the importance of the development of skills through lifelong learning and training models, targeted in particular at young people not in education, employment and training (NEET) and unemployed people, and targeted also at teachers, trainers, mentors, coaches, as well as entrepreneurs and researchers; encourages in this regard private sector involvement to enhance skills development and labour market integration, ensuring that ESF+ investments translate into tangible economic benefits; calls for stronger partnerships between businesses, educational institutions, and regional authorities to align training programs with labour market demands, fostering innovation and job creation;

6. Stresses the strategic importance of strong external border regions for the security and resilience of the EU; welcomes the focus given by the legislative proposal to the challenges the Eastern border regions are facing since the Russian aggression against Ukraine began; supports the proposal that programmes under the Investment for jobs and growth goal, with NUTS 2 regions that have borders with Russia, Belarus or Ukraine, should benefit from the possibility of a one-off 9.5% pre-financing of the programme allocation in 2026 and a 100% Union financing;

7. Reaffirms that cohesion policy and ESF+ should reach all EU regions, especially those affected by transformation processes, while keeping a focus on least developed regions and people; stresses that cohesion policy should be deepened where possible, with a view to remain the EU’s main long-term investment instrument for reducing disparities, ensuring economic, social and territorial cohesion, and stimulating regional and local sustainable growth in line with EU strategies;

8. Reiterates the importance of compliance with horizontal enabling conditions, and stresses that funds suspended under Regulation 2020/2092 should not be subject to amended programmes or transfers;

9. Encourages the European Commission to allow for targeted simplification measures in Member States where administrative capacity constraints may hinder full or efficient absorption of ESF+ and cohesion funds, and to provide technical assistance to local and regional authorities to ensure efficient implementation and spending; furthermore stresses the importance of simplifying the rules and procedures to limit bureaucratic burden;

10. Believes that the ESF+ strengthens a pro-European identity in the entire EU and should be communicated as such and that local and regional authorities, in light of their role as both beneficiary and managing authority, as well as social partners shall be meaningfully involved in the formulation of new legislative proposals and in the revision of programmes pursuant to the mid-term review, in order to guarantee more effectiveness and coordination between the ESF+ and the broader cohesion and regional policy and its financing tools;

11. Suggests laying down measures to facilitate access for Outermost Regions to flexibilities introduced by the mid-term review, such as lowering to 10% the amounts of reallocations to one or more dedicated priorities established in the second subparagraph of Art. 5a(1), and in the first subparagraph of Art. 5a(2), which are required to benefit from the additional one-off pre-financing.

Yours sincerely,

Dragoş BENEA

ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

The Chair declares under his exclusive responsibility that he did not receive input from any entity or person to be mentioned in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL BY THE COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE