Chronicles of a disagreement foretold. CEPS Commentary, 28 November 2012

In the wake of the collapsed talks on a new EU budget for 2014-20, a new CEPS Commentary by Jorge Núñez Ferrer allows that there is a good chance that agreement will be reached before the summer but that the instrument will remain largely disconnected from the fundamental needs of the EU, foremost of which is the imperative to address imbalances in the eurozone

Leveraging funding for energy efficiency in buildings in South East Europe. CEPS Policy Insights No 2019-05/28 March 2019

This paper addresses the possibility of creating financial instruments so that large scale energy efficiency renovation programmes can be substantially financed by the private sector. Aimed at decision-makers and those wishing to understand the issue, it avoids excessive technicalities. The paper presents some selected examples of financial instruments for energy efficiency that could represent possible blue prints for South East Europe. It concludes by proposing to develop variations of one of the simplest models to avoid ambitious, complex but ineffective instruments. A clear warning is given on the need for a careful ex-ante assessment of the legal framework, other barriers and the capacity of building associations to request loans on behalf of the owners. It also insists that business strategy development requires special attention

What Cameron should have known: Q &A. CEPS Commentary, 4 November 2014

The surprise revelation that the UK would be paying a surcharge to the EU budget of €2.1 billion sent Prime Minister Cameron into a rampage. How could this misunderstanding have arisen, as the resources mechanism of the EU budget uses a rather rigid method of calculation agreed by all member states? In this Commentary, CEPS budget specialist Jorge Núñez Ferrer has adopted a Q&A format to provide a straightforward technical explanation of how the surcharge came about in an attempt to dispel the Machiavellian phantasies it has inspired in journalists and eurosceptics alike

The Multiannual Financial Framework post-2020: Balancing political ambition and realism. CEPS Policy Paper No. 2016/2, 18 November 2016

The EU budget is suffering not simply from a technical crisis, but rather from a deep crisis of trust on the part of EU citizens. Public support for the mainstream political class in general and the EU institutions in particular is rapidly waning. Restoring this trust is the single-most important task in countering rising populism and the forces intent on dismantling the European Union. This paper argues that the EU budget offers one of the most visible tools available to express the principles of the European Union in concrete action; its improvement is therefore essential for building trust. It aims to offer food for thought to promote reflection on the future of the budget, in view of the challenges facing the EU

Reading between the lines of Council agreement on the MFF and Next Generation EU. CEPS Policy Insights 31 Jul 2020.

The recent agreement on the EU budget is an unprecedented and historic achievement for the European Union. It has broken a taboo and advanced the integration process. We all saw that the negotiations were arduous, but given the magnitude of the challenge facing the heads of state and government, it would have been naïve to expect otherwise. It is virtually impossible to find a comparable agreement between numerous countries in any other part of the world; by this measure alone it is impressive. Having said that, what has been agreed is complex and bewildering to many. While attention has focused on the Next Generation EU, the agreement also includes the ‘normal’ multiannual financial framework (MFF) 2021-27. Comments to the effect that the EU has deleted all funding for health, or much of the research budget, are based on the Next Generation EU ‘temporary’ measure and not on the underlying MFF. This paper aims to present a brief rundown of the actual changes in numbers and reflect on the meaning of the agreement

Suspended in legal limbo: Protecting investment in renewable energy in the EU. CEPS Policy Insights No 2018/03, January 2018

This paper focuses on the damage – and the potential for inflicting further damage – to investor confidence arising from legal uncertainties surrounding renewable energy support in some EU member states. A higher-than-expected expansion of the renewables sector, resulting in higher costs of the support, combined with the financial crisis, has driven some member states to radically curtail renewable energy support schemes. Loss-making investors unsuccessfully challenged these EU governments in national courts, arguing that their rights had been violated and denounced reforms that they considered to be retroactively punitive in nature. A number of EU-based international investors turned to international arbitration courts under the provisions of the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT), which protects cross-border investment in the energy sector. This move, however, has called into question the legal framework of the single market and EU state aid rules. A dispute on the jurisdiction of the ECT within the single market has ensued, which highlights a complex and unresolved situation. While the legal disputes accumulate, the concern is that investors may shy away from the EU as a result of the regulatory and legal uncertainties. The main aim of the paper is to provide some clarity for nonspecialists on a complex situation, and to highlight the need to find workable solutions that de facto restore investor confidence

“An appalling way to behave”. CEPS Commentary, 4 November 2014

Aside from David Cameron’s childish behaviour in protesting the additional payment of €2 billion due to the EU budget by December 1st, there is no point in discussing further whether the UK should contribute more to the EU budget. As underlined in this Commentary, the basic point is simple: clear rules on the contributions of member states were agreed, by common consent, whose implementation essentially involved putting numbers into a spreadsheet. This was done expressly in order to remove the political element out of a potentially contentious process. The authors accuse those countries that are now contesting the numbers as acting in bad faith. The EU cannot work if commonly agreed rules are thrown overboard whenever they do not suit a large member state

Cheers to a new solar system – and EU investment strategy. CEPS Commentary, 7 March 2017

It is the archetypal tragedy of the ‘Union’: if something doesn't work, the EU is to blame, if something does work, nobody knows about it. No credit goes to the Union. Nobody notices the million great things that the EU budget concretely supports, unless... unless a new planet is discovered. Well, seven planets, to be precise. No, in fact, nobody noticed this either – not even this. But it is now high time to give credit to the EU’s innovation policy and its financial arm, as well as to Belgium and its researchers, who are responsible for the discovery of the new solar system, TRAPPIST-1. Of course, reports that "Nasa discovers new solar system TRAPPIST-1 - where life may have evolved" did appear in the news, since it was NASA that made the announcement and also co-funded the project

The Impact of Brexit on the EU Budget: A non-catastrophic event. CEPS Policy Brief No. 347, September 2016

Given that the UK is one of the largest economies in the Europe Union – with per capita income above the EU average and therefore a net contributor – there have been concerns that the country’s decision to leave the EU could strongly impact the EU budget. On closer scrutiny, however, we find that the impact will be rather small due to the effects of the UK rebate and to the potential contribution the UK would be obliged to make as a condition to obtain access to the internal market. If the UK remains outside the internal market, tariff revenues would make up a considerable share of the ‘net loss’. On balance, the financial savings for the UK would be negligible and the impact on member states would be manageable. Also the impact on the classification of regions in EU Cohesion Policy is projected to be minimal and the European Fund for Strategic Investments is not affected by changes in membership

Cities: The Juncker Commission should not miss this key to growth, jobs and the environment. CEPS Commentary, 3 October 2014

Cities, more particularly ‘smart’ cities, could become a catalyst for economic and social development. For this to happen, Europe will need a new type of integrated infrastructure, a new urban governance and policy structure, as well as new finance and business models. Successful smart projects will eventually develop into new business models and companies. While the European Commission cannot mandate or regulate this top down, it has a role to play in nurturing new initiatives to allow Europe the possibility of developing its own Google and Apple