Cuts to agricultural funding, reduced national sovereignty through tax centralization, and the risk of political pressure from the European Commission—these are, according to Piotr Müller of Law and Justice (PiS), the key flaws in the EU’s proposed budget for 2028–2034. Meanwhile, Krzysztof Hetman of the Polish People’s Party (PSL) criticizes the merger of agriculture’s second pillar with cohesion policy and calls for blocking the Mercosur trade deal, citing farmers’ concerns. Both MEPs stress a lack of transparency and dialogue from the European Commission during consultations.
“We take a very critical view of what Polish Commissioner Piotr Serafin has proposed—most notably, cutting EU agricultural funding by 22%. For our security, supply chains, and Polish farmers, this is crucial. It’s a negative proposal,” Müller told Newseria news agency.
Agricultural Budget Cut by Nearly a Third
The EU is currently drafting its budget for 2028–2034. The July proposal earmarks €300 billion for the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), down from €387 billion in the 2021–2027 budget. Nominally, that’s a 22.5% cut; adjusted for current prices, the reduction approaches 30%. Funds may not be reallocated to other purposes, and the CAP will cease to be a separate fund. Instead, it will be merged with cohesion policy and rural development, managed at the national level—marking the end of the CAP’s two-pillar structure.
“As for the first pillar, direct payments remain nominally intact. The problem lies in the second pillar—rural development and farm modernization—which is being lumped together with cohesion policy. We oppose this entirely, as it will create conflicts between traditional cohesion beneficiaries—entrepreneurs and local governments—and farmers,” says Hetman. “The budget debate has begun, and we will push for corrections.”
Sovereignty Concerns over Tax Centralization
Müller warns that several proposals transfer more powers from national governments to Brussels. One example is excise tax on tobacco products, which currently flows entirely to national budgets. Under the new plan, 15% of excise revenue would go to the EU budget to repay bonds and finance EU programs.
“I would prefer we continue deciding ourselves how to use these funds, rather than handing them to Brussels, which will then decide whether and how much comes back to Poland,” Müller argues.
Excise is one of several new revenue streams proposed to help finance the EU’s €2 trillion long-term budget.
Another controversial change is the elimination of national envelopes—previously guaranteed allocations for each member state. Instead, funding would depend on the discretionary decisions of the Commission.
“This would give the Commission a political weapon against those who, for example, oppose migration policy or the Mercosur agreement. They could use any excuse to block payments. We cannot agree to this, as it undermines sovereignty and national autonomy,” Müller says.
Mercosur Agreement Raises Alarm
The Mercosur trade deal with Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay remains a major concern for Polish farmers, who continue to demand its suspension. On September 3, the Commission adopted the final text of the deal. Following Polish pressure, it included a safeguard clause in case of agricultural oversupply affecting the EU market and a €6.3 billion agricultural reserve in the post-2027 budget for compensation. Nevertheless, Polish farmers—particularly cattle breeders, grain growers, and tobacco producers—remain skeptical, fearing competition from cheap imports.
According to Poland’s National Agricultural Support Center, exports of grain, meat, and tobacco products are among the strongest areas of Polish agriculture—now threatened by competition not only from Mercosur but also from India and China.
“Tobacco growers protested strongly. Regarding the India free trade talks, they needn’t worry—Ursula von der Leyen, learning from Mercosur, decided that agriculture will not be part of the India agreement,” says Hetman. “But for Mercosur, we are still working to build a blocking minority in the EU Council or find a way to stop the deal in the European Parliament.”
Ratification Battle Ahead
Adopting the deal requires a qualified majority: at least 55% of member states representing 65% of the EU population. In autumn 2023, an informal parliamentary group drafted a resolution requesting the Court of Justice of the EU to review the agreement for compliance with EU treaties and law. Signature collection is underway. If the case reaches the Court, the ratification process would be suspended until a ruling is issued.
“I hope the Commission learns from the criticism it has faced for months about its lack of transparency and honest communication—whether regarding Mercosur or amendments to the EU–Ukraine association agreement,” Hetman stresses. “This is not how public administration should function, nor how consultations should be conducted.”
