The multiannual financial framework after 2027: Financing the EU’s global ambitions

#
Guillaume Meurice via Pexels

Authors

In this publication, Alexei Jones, Mariella Di Ciommo and Andrew Sherriff examine the EU's upcoming negotiations for the EU's next long-term budget. In light of recent political developments, the paper focuses on how geopolitical shifts and internal dynamics could influence the MFF and in particular the financing for EU external action. 

% Complete

    Summary

    This framing paper sets the scene for the EU’s post-2027 multiannual financial framework (MFF) negotiations, examining the key issues that are influencing the discussions. The paper looks at how they might shape the budget’s priorities, size and structure with a focus on EU external action. 

    The MFF, currently covering over €1.2 trillion of EU spending, is both a highly political and technical plan. The post-2027 MFF must address unprecedented geopolitical instability, ongoing wars in Ukraine and the Middle East, economic competitiveness, strategic autonomy and migration priorities. While calls for a complete overhaul are growing, entrenched negotiation dynamics and institutional path dependencies may constrain radical reform, each scenario presenting trade-offs for EU external action.

    Negotiations will unfold at four interconnected levels: the overall budget, thematic headings, instruments and within instruments. The external action heading, including instruments like NDICI-Global Europe, must make a strong case for funding to align with the EU’s strategic domestic and global goals. The paper emphasises that sustaining external action funding is vital for EU interests, credibility and influence as a global actor and cooperation partner.

    Future funding must balance flexibility to address immediate priorities, like Ukraine, with long-term goals such as sustainable development, climate action and stronger international partnerships. The paper warns against overly transactional approaches that favour short-term EU interests over mutual benefits and highlights the strategic risks of external funding cuts.

    Loading Conversation