Source: European Parliament
Question for written answer E-002544/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Michalis Hadjipantela (PPE)
There are growing concerns about the effectiveness of fraud prevention and detection in the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF). The Commission relies primarily on national control systems, despite significant differences in Member States’ experience with EU funding and administrative capacity. Disbursements occur following the Commission’s assessment that milestones and targets have been met, without verifying the actual costs incurred by beneficiaries.
European Court of Auditors Special Reports 13/2025[1] and 11/2023[2] identify cases where estimated costs were higher than actual expenditures, yet Member States received full funding for their estimated costs.
The ability of the EU Anti-Fraud Office to intervene is limited by restricted access to national databases. Moreover, Member States are not legally obliged to report irregularities via the Irregularity Management System or use ARACHNE.
Given the scale of RRF funding and the variation in administrative capacities, clearer safeguards are needed to ensure value for money and avoid unintended financial gains at the expense of the EU budget.
Considering the above:
- 1.To what extent does the Commission monitor RRF disbursements that exceed actual project costs to safeguard the EU budget?
- 2.What measures are being considered to enhance transparency around actual RRF spending and prevent the misuse of unspent funds, given the lack of cost verification at the final recipient level?
Submitted: 25.6.2025