In her 2026 EU State of the Union address, Ursula von der Leyen stressed the importance of EU social action and highlighted the upcoming 10th anniversary of the European Pillar of Social Rights as a milestone of EU social policy. However, if the EU Member States and Parliament approve the European Commission’s proposal for the EU’s next Multi-Annual Financial Framework (MFF), there will be less funding for social services that put the European Pillar of Social Rights into action.
A European Social Fund – without the funds
The European Social Fund (ESF+), the EU’s longest-standing funding instrument for social policy, will, for the first time in EU history, have no formal budget. It currently provides €142.7 billion in support for social policies, of which €95.8 billion is for national and regional ESF+ programmes. Under current rules, at least 25% of ESF+ must go to social inclusion. 3% is earmarked for Europe’s most deprived. If the Commission’s proposal is accepted, these guarantees will disappear. Instead, the Commission has proposed merging Regional, Cohesion, Agriculture, Fisheries, Climate, Migration, and Social funds into one much larger general fund and leaves it to Member States to decide how to distribute it across all those policy fields. How would this work in practice?
A super fund – with up to 60% cuts in social programmes
Member States will be asked to use this super fund to finance National and Regional Partnership Plans, which must be approved by the Commission. However, it is unclear how much control it will have in practice, as it will face pressure to approve the plans on time for their start in January 2028. The only safeguard for ensuring investment in social programmes is the obligation to allocate at least 14% of the Plan’s Budget to social objectives. But that 14% is less than the current national and regional ESF+ programmes, calculated at current prices. In fact, if Member States stick to the minimum line, that would mean a 25-60% cut to most national and regional ESF+ programmes, and even if they invest the maximum, it will still mean social programme cuts in most EU Member States. Cuts to traditional ESF+ programmes could be even higher because the eligible actions to reach the EU’s ‘Social Objectives’ are much more broadly defined than the eligible actions of the current ESF+. This means Member States will need to make tough choices about many more options to fund as ‘social’ action. So, what counts as social action?
National and Regional Partnership Plans – with weak safeguards for social inclusion
Every action that can count as contributing to ‘EU social objectives’ is listed in Annex I of the new Performance Regulation. Besides traditional ESF+ actions such as improving access to employment or addressing material deprivation, the list includes actions such as the “digitalisation of health care”, counted as 40% social, and the “development and construction of new buildings for healthcare infrastructure” or “student accommodation”, which are now classed as 100% social. If such projects can count as social, very little funding may remain for traditional ESF+ social programmes.
For example, if Germany applied this counting method to its current Next Generation EU-funded 3 billion EUR investment in hospital digitalisation, it would already reach half of the 14% or 2,14 billion EUR social spending minimum with just one action. If we add 2-3 large infrastructure programmes for care homes or student housing, the social quota is fulfilled. In this context, some organisations speak of the risk of social washing. So, what can be done?
Speaking up – without mobilisation, the social sector will suffer
The social sector across Europe, including ESN, has mobilised since the MFF Proposal to secure an ESF+ with its own dedicated budget. In April 2026, the European Parliament supported this by adopting a position calling for an ESF+ with its own budget. As the European Parliament and EU Member States will enter into budget negotiations soon, social services must continue to highlight to MEPs and national governments the importance of a financially separate ESF.
At the same time, we are not sure whether the Parliament and Member States will agree on a separate ESF+ budget, at least on the right terms. Therefore, MEPs and Member States should amend Annex I of the Performance Regulation to ensure that social funding is not diluted by a broader definition of eligible actions. Otherwise, we may end up with plans that will include social washing rather than social action. A key date here is the European Parliament's plenary vote on this file, currently scheduled for 14 December 2026.
Meanwhile, EU Member States are already drafting their National and Regional Partnership Plans. The social sector needs to be part of this process. Social services and local authorities must urgently engage with national and regional governments to make clear that social projects are crucially needed now, as well as under the new MFF.
