Skip to content
Adopted text

Possibilities for simplification of cohesion funds

TA-10-2025-0188 · P10_TA(2025)0188 · PE769.947

Official HTML ↗ PDF DOCX
✦ In shortFull text
✦ In short · AI summary of this text, generated 4 Sept 2026

Written by a language model from the full text only; every figure comes from the text. The paragraph links open the paragraph a statement rests on — check the text itself before relying on it.

Parliament's resolution on simplifying cohesion funds stresses that simplification must not undermine cohesion policy's core goals of reducing disparities and supporting long-term investment. It calls for upholding shared management, partnership, and place-based approaches, and for reducing administrative burdens on beneficiaries, including through digitalisation and simplified cost options. It asks the Commission to propose timely legislation for 2028-2034, maintain or increase cohesion funding, and improve coordination between funds. It opposes centralisation and single national programmes, and calls for stronger involvement of local and regional authorities. It urges measures to prevent fraud and double funding, including mandatory use of IT tools, and calls for a strengthened single audit approach.

Key points

  1. Warns against diverting cohesion funds to crises and calls for a dedicated emergency instrument within the EU budget.
  2. Insists on binding partnership principle and strict verification by the Commission.
  3. Calls on Member States to avoid gold-plating and on the Commission to make timely proposals for 2028-2034.
  4. Calls for maintaining or increasing cohesion budget and for better coordination of EU and national funding.
  5. Calls for a single set of rules and one audit trail, and a unified IT interface in each Member State.
  6. Calls for a single European platform for access to EU funds, with real-time data exchange.
  7. Opposes top-down centralisation and single national programmes; supports place-based programmes at NUTS 2 level.
  8. Calls for increased pre-financing and simplified co-financing rules, especially for rural, cross-border and insular areas.
  9. Calls for mandatory use of EDES and ARACHNE for all EU funds and for measures to prevent double funding.
  10. Calls for standardisation and broader use of simplified cost options and financing not linked to costs.
  11. Calls for moving away from statistical extrapolation for financial corrections, targeting only systemic irregularities and deliberate fraud.

Who is affected

  • Local and regional authorities, beneficiaries, and managing authorities will see reduced administrative burdens and more direct access to funding.
  • Smaller beneficiaries, including SMEs and civil society, may benefit from simplified procedures and increased pre-financing.
  • Eastern border regions of the EU may receive additional support, including one-off pre-financing.

Figures and deadlines

  • 9.5 % pre-financing of the programme allocation for NUTS 2 regions bordering Russia, Belarus or Ukraine.
  • 100 % EU financing for those programmes.
  • 54 to 58 % of public investments by governments are carried out by local and regional authorities.
  • Over 50 multiannual programmes in 2021-2027 and 40 % centrally managed under the current MFF.

Legal basis: Articles 4, 162, 174 to 178, and 349 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union