2024 EU budget audit and improvement plan

What the Parliament decided

• The Commission and all EU executive agencies were discharged for 2024, meaning they spent the money they received in a legal, regular and sound way.
• The ninth, tenth and eleventh European Development Funds (EDFs) were discharged, confirming that aid to poorer countries in Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific was used properly.
• The accounts for the entire 2024 EU budget and for the EDFs were closed, showing that the audit is finished and the money was spent as planned.
• The decision, the discharge resolution and the observations were sent to the Council, the Commission, the Court of Auditors, national parliaments and audit bodies, and will be published in the Official Journal, so all EU institutions and member‑state authorities are informed.

Why the Parliament looked at the budget

• Reviewed the 2024 EU accounts (spending, income, outstanding debts).
• Examined the Court of Auditors’ annual and special reports for errors, fraud or misuse.
• Studied the Commission’s own budget‑management and internal‑audit reports.
• Considered detailed replies to earlier questions about 2023.
• Took into account opinions from parliamentary committees (Foreign Affairs, Development, Environment, etc.).
• Considered the Council’s recommendation on discharge.
• Checked EU rules on budget management (financial regulations, the Treaty, etc.).

Key observations

• Rule of law: Concerns that Hungary and Slovakia still undermine judicial independence, press freedom and anti‑corruption rules, threatening proper use of EU money.
• Transparency: Calls for machine‑readable lists of final recipients of EU funds and better access to documents for the Court of Auditors and Parliament.
• Fraud & corruption: Fraud found in agriculture, research and health programmes; demands stronger checks, better reporting of recovered money and cooperation with the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.
• Climate & biodiversity: EU is not spending enough on climate‑friendly projects and the measurement of “climate spending” is too vague; clearer rules and more real results are needed.
• Cohesion policy: Money meant for poorer EU regions is still not being used quickly enough; many projects are delayed or not started, and the system for checking spending is weak.
• Migration & border management: More transparency on spending for border security and refugee assistance, and better coordination with third‑country partners.
• Defence: Defence spending is too low compared to current threats; more money is needed for modern weapons, cyber‑defence and joint training.
• External action & aid: Aid should be spent more effectively, especially in the poorest countries, and should avoid funding organisations that support human‑rights abuses.
• Internal administration: Concerns about the Commission’s own rules on document access, whistle‑blowing and the sale of office buildings; calls for greater openness.

Recommendations

• Strengthen rule‑of‑law conditionality – suspend or reduce funding to states that do not respect EU core values.
• Publish final‑recipient lists – in a clear, searchable format to prevent fraud and let citizens see who receives money.
• Improve audit and control – give the Court of Auditors full data access, use data‑mining tools, and ensure national audit bodies are competent.
• Boost climate spending – increase the budget share for climate projects and ensure those projects deliver results.
• Speed up cohesion spending – provide more support to regions that need it and ensure projects start and finish on time.
• Increase defence funding – especially for cyber‑defence, AI, drones and joint training.
• Make external aid more effective – focus on the poorest countries, avoid double‑funding, and ensure aid is not used to support human‑rights abuses.
• Improve internal transparency – follow the Commission’s own rules on document access, whistle‑blowing and procurement.

Bottom line
The European Parliament has finished its audit of the 2024 EU budget and cleared the Commission and all executive agencies for how they spent the money. It has also highlighted problems—such as rule‑of‑law backsliding, weak fraud controls, insufficient climate and defence spending—and set a list of actions the Commission must take to make EU finances more transparent, accountable and effective.

Broader context

Every year, the European Parliament checks whether the European Commission (the EU's executive body) spent the annual EU budget correctly. This process is called discharge and is similar to a company's board approving the annual accounts. It is required by EU law and has happened every year since the EU was founded.

The Court of Auditors is the EU's independent financial watchdog — think of it as an external auditor. Its findings feed directly into Parliament's decision.

The European Development Funds (EDFs) mentioned in the document are separate from the main EU budget and are funded directly by member states. They support development projects in poorer countries in Africa, the Caribbean, and the Pacific.

The European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO), referenced in the fraud section, is a relatively new EU body (active since 2021) that can investigate and prosecute fraud against the EU budget across member states.

Impact on people living in the EU

Impact on people living outside the EU

For people in African, Caribbean, and Pacific countries receiving EU development aid, Parliament's call for more effective and targeted aid — and stricter checks against funding organisations linked to human-rights abuses — could mean changes in which local projects or organisations receive EU support.