Slovak Fiscal Watchdog Says Government Failed to Prove Budget-Balance Exception

Why Slovakia's Fiscal Watchdog Is Challenging the Cabinet's Budget Plan

Slovakia's government has instructed the finance minister to prepare the next public-administration budget without the balanced result required by the constitutional law on budgetary responsibility. According to the Council for Budget Responsibility, the cabinet has not demonstrated the exception that would allow such a deficit plan.

The finance ministry's approach creates legal uncertainty around the budget itself: the fiscal council says the chosen procedure raises the risk that the approved budget will be challenged before the Constitutional Court.

The government argues that 2025 public spending linked to international treaty obligations and natural disasters exceeded 3 percent of GDP, which it claims entitles it to use the exception. The council, however, describes that reading as unsubstantiated and expedient at present, even though the constitutional law permits such an exception in principle.

The council adds that the threshold is exceeded by only €286 million, and only because the calculation includes all defence spending, the entire contribution to the EU budget and all eurofund co-financing. It will ask the finance ministry for the documents behind that position.

Where the Government's 3% GDP Exception Argument Breaks Down

The June Constitutional Court Standard

The council says the finance ministry's material does not show how it dealt with the Constitutional Court's judgment from June this year. In that ruling, the court stressed that the exception is meant to create room for spending caused by circumstances that arose suddenly, unexpectedly and could not be prepared for.

That distinction matters because the ministry's material, according to the council, does not separate the overall level of spending from a sudden and unexpected increase. The council says this conflicts with the court's interpretation.

Why the €286 Million Margin Is Fragile

The government's calculation exceeds the 3 percent threshold by only €286 million. The council argues that this margin rests on counting entire categories of spending — all defence expenditure, the full EU budget contribution and all eurofund co-financing — rather than isolating the exceptional, unplanned costs the law is designed to cover.

It also warns that political declarations or general membership of international organisations are not enough to trigger the exception. The council says several constitutional law experts publicly share that view.

What This Means for the Budget's Legal Status

Because the exception has not been substantiated, a future approved budget could face a motion to the Constitutional Court. That would not only challenge the government's fiscal choices but also put the certainty of public finances at risk.

The council notes that parliament does not have to approve a balanced budget. However, under the constitutional commitment to sustainable public finances, parliament should demonstrate a clear effort to improve the currently unsustainable fiscal position year on year.

What the Finance Ministry and Parliament Need to Do Next

For the Ministry of Finance:

• Provide the underlying data behind its 3% GDP exception claim. The council has formally asked for the documents, and without them the legal basis for the non-balanced budget remains open to challenge.
• Reconcile the budget material with the June Constitutional Court ruling by showing which costs were sudden, unexpected and impossible to prepare for — not total spending in broad categories such as defence, EU contributions and eurofund co-financing.

For parliament:

• Treat approval of a non-balanced budget as a decision with constitutional consequences, not a routine vote. The fiscal council expects a clear year-on-year improvement toward sustainable public finances.
• Consider whether the €286 million overrun of the 3 percent threshold is a credible shock-related exception before relying on it in the budget debate.

For anyone planning on the next budget:

• Factor in that the budget's legal validity is contested and that a Constitutional Court challenge is an explicit risk named by the fiscal council. Spending commitments based on the current deficit framework may have to be revised if the court reviews the procedure.