At least 500bn forints in Hungarian public money may have been channelled through opaque government decisions before the April election, including support for companies linked to the former ruling establishment.
Hungary’s former government, led by Viktor Orbán, signed dozens of unpublished decisions in the months before the vote to redistribute budget funds and provide financial backing to companies, foundations, associations, church organisations, sporting events and property purchases, according to a report by Népszava, citing information obtained by the news website 24.hu.
The disclosures raise fresh questions over the use of public money at a time when Hungary was facing serious pressure on its finances. They also suggest that state resources were directed towards businesses and organisations connected to the political network built around the former government, while the country’s consumption levels remained among the lowest in the EU.
Dozens of decisions kept from public view
Journalists at 24.hu obtained details of 55 decisions bearing Mr Orbán’s signature through a freedom of information request. A further 28 documents are believed to have remained classified, meaning the full scale of the decisions cannot yet be established.
Most of the published measures concerned reallocations within the state budget and funding for companies, foundations, associations, religious institutions, sports-related activities and property acquisitions. Sixteen businesses were due to receive a combined 47bn forints in support.
The pattern is significant because the decisions were not presented through the normal process of official publication. Miklós Ligeti, legal director of Transparency International Hungary, said using unpublished government decisions to distribute budget funds was unlawful. Such decisions, he said, should have been formally made public.
The absence of publication limited scrutiny over who received the money, on what terms and for what purpose. It also meant that decisions involving substantial sums could be taken without the level of transparency normally expected when public funds are allocated.
State-backed risk for companies linked to NER
One of the largest commitments involved Hungary’s state-owned Eximbank, the country’s export-import bank. The government used the bank and provided guarantees for bonds issued by two companies linked to the NER, the political and business system associated with the former ruling establishment.
The guarantees had a combined value of €500m, or about 200bn forints. They did not represent an immediate budget payment on the same basis as direct aid, but they placed substantial financial risk on the state. If the companies could not meet their obligations, public institutions could be exposed to the consequences.
That decision has intensified suspicions that government-backed finance was being used to protect or strengthen businesses close to those in power. The material does not identify the two companies by name, but the scale of the guarantees makes the arrangement one of the most consequential elements in the disclosed decisions.
Pressure on the public finances
The revelations come against a difficult economic backdrop. Hungary’s public finances were deteriorating, while household consumption was at one of the lowest levels in the European Union. Against that background, the distribution of hundreds of billions of forints to selected companies and other connected structures is likely to attract particular scrutiny.
The European Commission forecasts that Hungary’s budget deficit will reach 6.2% in 2026. That projection gives the spending decisions a broader significance: the issue is not simply whether individual allocations were lawful, but whether the former government used scarce state resources to support politically connected interests while fiscal constraints were tightening.
The available information remains incomplete. The 55 disclosed decisions provide evidence of the scale and range of the allocations, but the 28 documents believed to be classified could show whether the reported total of at least 500bn forints was an underestimate or clarify how the money was distributed. The unresolved question is whether further disclosure will reveal a wider pattern of state support for businesses tied to the former government.
Should Hungary prioritise full publication of the remaining decisions, or focus first on recovering any public money distributed through them?
