Spain’s national budget has now gone 1,000 days without being replaced, leaving the government of Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez relying on accounts originally approved for 2023 while it tries to secure parliamentary backing for a new spending plan.
The milestone reflects an unusual period of political and fiscal uncertainty for one of the European Union’s largest economies. Sanchez’s coalition government, formed by the Socialist Party (PSOE) and Sumar, has completed its current term without passing a single new national budget.
Instead, the government has continued operating under the budget approved in 2022 for the 2023 financial year. Spain’s constitutional framework allows an existing budget to be extended when a new one has not been approved, a provision the government has repeatedly used as it has struggled to assemble enough parliamentary support for new accounts.
The issue dates back to Sanchez’s return as prime minister after the 2023 election, when his government did not have a parliamentary majority. The government initially pointed to the political difficulties created by the election results as a reason for not immediately presenting a new budget. Promises followed that new accounts would eventually be brought before parliament, but budgets for 2024 and 2025 never materialised. In June 2026, Sanchez also abandoned the prospect of approving a budget for 2026.
The situation has particular political resonance because Sanchez once took a very different position while in opposition. Speaking to then-prime minister Mariano Rajoy of the centre-right People’s Party, he argued that governing without a budget amounted to not governing at all.
Spain’s Constitution sets out a timetable for the national accounts. Article 134.3 requires the government to submit the budget to Congress at least three months before the previous year’s budget expires. At the same time, it provides for an extension of the existing budget if a new one has not been approved.
That provision has become the centre of a debate over how long such an extension can reasonably continue.
Cesar Garcia Novoa, professor of financial and tax law at the University of Santiago de Compostela, told Euronews that the mechanism was intended as a temporary solution rather than a substitute for regular budget-making. In his interpretation, the rules are designed around an extension of no more than one year and serve as an emergency mechanism.
Budget extensions are also used elsewhere in Europe, Garcia Novoa said, but generally in circumstances involving short-term political or institutional disruption. He cited Belgium’s government crises as an example.
Fernando Navarrete, a People’s Party member of the European Parliament’s budget committee, takes a similar view. He argues that the established understanding before Sanchez was that a budget extension would last for one year and that the absence of a parliamentary majority after that should lead to elections.
Navarrete has described the 1,000-day period as a democratic anomaly and said his party would seek to change the law if it formed the next government after elections due in 2027. He has also accused the government of depriving voters, through their elected representatives, of a regular parliamentary decision over how public money should be allocated.
Those criticisms are strongly disputed by the government.
Spain’s Finance Ministry argues that the absence of a new budget has not prevented it from taking measures in response to major economic pressures. Ministry sources told Euronews that the government has introduced measures aimed at protecting households from the effects of higher energy prices linked to the conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East.
Housing has become a particularly important test of that argument. The government points to the 7 billion euros allocated to the State Housing Plan covering 2026 to 2030. But because the housing programme was not included in the 2023 budget, financing it requires the government to use other legal and administrative mechanisms.
That is one of the areas where the dispute over budget extensions becomes more than a constitutional argument. Critics say extraordinary mechanisms were created for exceptional circumstances and should not become the normal way of financing new priorities. The government, meanwhile, argues that it has been able to act despite the absence of a new annual budget.
The disagreement also extends to Spain’s relationship with the European Union.
Since 2024, EU fiscal rules have required member states to present medium-term plans designed to maintain sustainable public finances while supporting investment and reforms. Spain has submitted such a plan, but critics argue that operating without a new national budget makes it harder to demonstrate how the government intends to deliver the commitments contained in it.
Garcia Novoa has argued that the prolonged use of the 2023 accounts restricts Spain’s ability to implement reforms expected by the EU and can weaken its credibility in Brussels.
Navarrete also claims that the European Commission has been concerned about Spain’s failure to approve budgets for 2024, 2025 and 2026, although he acknowledges that Brussels has not responded with particularly strong public criticism. The issue is largely treated as a domestic political problem.
The government points instead to Spain’s economic performance. Finance Ministry sources argue that the continued extension of the existing budget has not prevented the country from growing faster than the EU average or reaching record employment levels. They say a new budget for 2027 should build on that performance while strengthening the welfare state.
The next test will come with the government’s attempt to produce a 2027 budget.
The Finance Ministry says it intends to put forward new accounts and has already begun discussions with political parties in an effort to secure the votes needed for approval. The constitutional deadline for submitting the budget is 30 September, although the government was not expected to meet that date, according to the Euronews report published on 27 September.
The parliamentary arithmetic remains difficult. In July, Spain’s Congress rejected the government’s proposed deficit path for 2027-2029 for a second time, with the People’s Party, Vox and Junts voting against it. The rejection complicated the budget process, although it did not legally prevent the government from presenting the 2027 national budget using deficit targets already agreed with Brussels.
That leaves Spain facing a familiar question: whether the government can turn negotiations into an actual parliamentary majority.
For the Finance Ministry, the answer is clear. Its sources say they are confident the 2027 budget will be approved and that they are not considering another outcome.
Opposition figures remain sceptical. Navarrete has suggested that the government may ultimately use a failed budget vote as a reason to call a general election, although that is his political interpretation rather than an established government plan.
For now, Spain remains governed financially through a budget that was designed for a different year and a different set of economic priorities. The government has demonstrated that the constitutional extension mechanism can keep public finances operating for far longer than originally expected. The political argument is increasingly about what that prolonged arrangement means for parliamentary scrutiny, fiscal planning and the government’s ability to set new spending priorities.
Whether Spain finally breaks the cycle with a 2027 budget will depend not only on the Finance Ministry’s plans, but on whether Sanchez can secure the parliamentary support that has eluded his government throughout the current term.
