Plans for spending European Union recovery funds submitted by the four largest EU countries reflect rather different priorities. So far, only Italy is interested in borrowing from the EU.
European Union countries are starting to
set out how they plan to spend money from Next Generation EU (NGEU), the
EU’s landmark instrument for recovery from the coronavirus pandemic. In
late April, countries began submitting their recovery and resilience
plans. A first quick analysis shows that the plans of the four largest
EU countries, France, Germany, Italy and Spain,
reflect rather different priorities, even if all meet the minimum
expenditure benchmarks of 37% for climate and 20% for digitalisation.
Let’s briefly clarify what plans have been
submitted. The total funding envelope for NGEU amounts to €750 billion
at 2018 prices or €795 billion at current prices. NGEU includes seven
instruments, of which the largest is the Recovery and Resilience
Facility (RRF). This is composed of grants amounting to €312.5 billion
at 2018 prices or €337 billion at current prices, and loans amounting to
€360 billion at 2018 prices or €390 billion at current prices. Most
recovery plans relate to RRF only, but in Italy’s plan, ReactEU (another
component of NGEU) is also included. Italy also includes some extra
spending from national resources in its plan. Here, we focus on spending
financed by NGEU. It should be noted we do not examine whether spending
plans constitute new spending, or also cover spending that was planned
before the pandemic.
Of the four countries, only Italy’s plan
envisages borrowing under the RRF and thus the Italian plan amounts to a
much larger value (€205 billion = €69 billion RRF grants + €14 billion
ReactEU grants + €123 billion RRF loans) than, for example, the Spanish
plan, which amounts to €69 billion in RRF grants only. Nevertheless, the
Spanish plan indicates the country might apply for RRF loans in the
future.
The plans have rather diverse structures,
which makes their comparison difficult. In particular, the four largest
EU countries categorise differently the various spending priorities. On
the green and digital components of sub-headings, France and Germany
present precise numbers, Spain reports qualitative information, while
Italy has a separate digitalisation and two green categories, but does
not report whether other categories, such as education and health, have
digital or green components. Nevertheless, all countries report the
overall shares of green and digital spending. It would have been
advisable to use a common template for classifying and reporting various
spending categories and their green and digital components.
Thus, we can reasonably compare the
overall shares of planned green and digital spending, while grouping all
non-green and non-digital spending into a single group (Figure 1).
Germany plans to spend more than half of
the EU money it will receive on digitalisation, while the other three
countries will spend a quarter or less. In terms of euro values to be
spent on digital priorities, Italy plans to spend the most at €42
billion, followed by Spain (€16 billion), Germany (€15 billion) and
France (€10 billion).
France plans to spend half of its share of
the EU money on green priorities, while the other three countries will
spend around 40%. In terms of euro values to be spent on green
priorities, Italy plans to spend the most at €86 billion, followed by
Spain (€31 billion), France (€21 billion) and Germany (€11 billion).
Figure 1: Overall resource allocation in national plans
The sub-components of the plans also vary.
The German plan includes little funding for non-climate and non-digital
related policy areas, possibly because Germany is expected to receive
the lowest amount in euros. The plans of the other three countries are
much more diversified, and include policy priorities such as social
inclusion, education, research, health, and even culture and sports in
the case of Spain....
more at Bruegel
© Bruegel
Key
Hover over the blue highlighted
text to view the acronym meaning
Hover
over these icons for more information
Comments:
No Comments for this Article