Taxpayers Association of Europe (TAE) Demands: Stop the Discussion on EU Own Resources!
As President of the Taxpayers Association of Europe (TAE), I view the proposals regarding EU own resources—discussed yesterday in the European Parliament—and the planned massive expansion of the EU budget within the framework of the 2028–2034 Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) with extreme scepticism.
According to the proposal put forward for discussion by the European Parliament, the upcoming financial framework would rise to approximately €1.9 or just under €2.0 trillion, representing a near-doubling compared to current levels. Such a leap is in no way compatible with the economic reality facing many Member States and their taxpayers. Rather than pursuing ever-newer sources of revenue, there is a looming risk here of a creeping decoupling of EU finances from the direct control of the Member States—and, by extension, from the taxpayers themselves.
Specifically, numerous new own resources are currently under consideration. The European Commission has put forward five key proposals: revenues from the Emissions Trading System (ETS), the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), a levy on uncollected electronic waste, own resources derived from tobacco excise duties (TEDOR), and a new corporate levy known as CORE (Corporate Resource for Europe). The CORE proposal, in particular, warrants critical scrutiny, as this planned EU corporate tax is based on revenue rather than profit. Consequently, it would impose a burden even on companies with low margins or returns on sales—or those even operating at a loss—representing a clear violation of fundamental principles of economic capacity.
The European Parliament is now going even further, calling for additional own resources, including a digital levy, as well as levies on cryptocurrency transactions, online gaming, and gambling. The objective is clearly discernible: to secure an ever-broader and more autonomous revenue base for the EU. In other words, the aim is to eliminate—or at least reduce—the need for cumbersome negotiations, replacing them instead with revenue streams that flow automatically.
The protectionist dimension of these plans is particularly concerning. New levies specifically targeting companies and imports will not go unanswered on the international stage. Countries such as the USA and China will respond with harsh countermeasures—with the result that trade conflicts will escalate and European companies will come under additional pressure. Ultimately, taxpayers will pay twice: once through new EU levies, and a second time through higher prices, as major market players pass rising costs on to consumers.
The introduction of additional "own resources" may appear politically convenient, yet it obscures the actual burden placed upon citizens and businesses. Especially in times of economic strain, what is needed is budgetary discipline, efficiency, and clear priorities—not an expansion of spending without corresponding reforms on the expenditure side. And, not to be forgotten: savings and new priorities within the EU budget.
It is surprising that the EU Parliament now appears to be siding with the Commission regarding EU own resources—that it now seeks to make common cause with it. Until now, we had the impression that the EU Parliament viewed EU own resources with the same degree of scepticism as we at the Taxpayers Association.
Consequently, the Council now bears an even greater responsibility to halt this misguided trend and to defend the interests of the Member States and their taxpayers. What is at stake is nothing less than the protection of the financial sovereignty of the national states.
Europe must not be allowed to become a self-service shop. Should the envisaged course of action actually be implemented, it would threaten to trigger a dangerous shift in power to the detriment of the national states. This would constitute a fundamental breach—one that, in the worst-case scenario, would so severely shake confidence in the European Union that its very foundations would be called into question. This could then sound the death knell for the European Union.
Brussels/Munich, April 29, 2026
