I assess President Karol Nawrocki’s decision to sign the 2026 budget act and his intention to subsequently refer it to the Constitutional Tribunal primarily through the lens of its potential impact on economic stability in the current year.
Formally, this move ensures continuity in public finances, but at the same time it introduces additional uncertainty regarding future rulings. For businesses, consistency in decision-making and predictability of the legal and financial environment are crucial.
Entrepreneurs, investors, and financial institutions need a clear signal as to whether the adopted budgetary provisions are durable and free from significant legal risk. Referring the entire act—or key parts of it—to the Constitutional Tribunal, even after it has been signed, weakens that signal and increases interpretative uncertainty.
In justifying the decision, the President—through his spokesperson—pointed to the very high budget deficit and the growing level of public debt. However, the President cannot refer a budget act to the Constitutional Tribunal solely on the basis of a critical assessment of government policies reflected in the act’s provisions. He must indicate which specific articles of the Constitution are, in his view, violated by the budget law. As of today, this has not yet been made clear.
Nevertheless, despite the fact that since March 2024 the government has been disregarding rulings of the Constitutional Tribunal, under the current formula the burden of risk is shifted onto entities operating on the basis of the policies and financing mechanisms contained in the budget act challenged by the President. This does not support stability or long-term planning—particularly investment planning—and hampers business activity.
Source: ceo.com.pl
