Erasmus+: as MEPs outline proposals, member states must protect flagship programme’s budget in MFF negotiations

The compromise builds on the June draft report of the Parliament’s Erasmus+ lead rapporteur Bogdan Zdrojewski, taking up many of the amendments proposed by the European University Association and partners.

Guided by the Committee on Budgets, the Parliament foresees €47.39 billion in current prices for the next Erasmus+ programme. This falls far short of the CULT Committee's initial proposal of approximately €58 billion, which was close to the higher education sector's €60 billion ask. However, the current proposal is still a necessary increase from the Commission's proposed €40.8 billion.

More broadly, the higher education sector will continue to face uncertainty about the next Erasmus+ programmes as long as an overall agreement on the EU’s next long-term budget (multiannual financial framework) is not reached.

Earlier this year, the then Cypriot Presidency of the Council of the EU proposed cutting 2% of the nearly €2 trillion MFF proposed by the Commission. However, several member states still regard this as insufficient and pressure to further lower the seven-year budget is mounting. If these cuts are applied systematically, the respective budgets for Erasmus+ and each of its components could fall significantly, also in consideration of inflation and rising prices.

It is therefore essential that the European Parliament stands firm on its budget proposal. As for the EU’s member states, in the MFF negotiations they should recognise the high return on a relatively low investment that Erasmus+ delivers and exempt the programme from budget cuts.

Through school, vocational education and training, adult and higher education, youth and sports, Erasmus+ benefits individual citizens of all ages, as well as our societies and economies. It also contributes to Europe’s global connectiveness and standing in times of geopolitical challenges.  

The current Irish Presidency of the Council of the EU is set to publish an updated negotiating box for the overall MFF ahead of a meeting of the European Council on 15-16 October.

Further analysis of the CULT Committee’s report:

The report includes dedicated sectoral allocations that were missing in the Commission’s proposal. This will bring much-needed predictability and transparency for beneficiaries and national agencies.

On the other hand, universities remain concerned that the education and training sectors in Erasmus+ are proposed to receive a ‘minimum budget share of 74.6%’. This is considerably lower than the 83% share in the current programme. Moreover, it could effectively translate into a smaller budget for higher education, despite a proposed 0.4% increase of the sector's share (from 34.6% to 35% of the education and training budget).

Other key points from the CULT Committee’s compromise amendments include:

• The new Erasmus+ scholarships in strategic educational fields (or ‘Talent and Excellence Development Opportunities’) are retained, but the Committee proposes to limit these to study abroad periods in joint study programmes, with stipulations to protect funding for existing actions. Importantly, this action must be co-funded by other Union sources – although the exact sources are not specified.
• The Committee introduces a target that at least 20% of participants in international mobility should be individuals with fewer opportunities, as well as for grants for this target group to reflect differences in living costs, housing, inflation and purchasing power. EUA welcomes this but also recommends that the cost adjustment should not be strictly limited to students with fewer opportunities, as the cost-of-living crisis affects students across the board. An additional concern is that the increased burden to adjust these grants would fall on the national agencies rather than being handled centrally.
• Finally, the report opposes shifting major decisions to Commission work programmes, restricts delegated acts and reinstates parliamentary oversight. However, it falls short of reintroducing the programme committee – an action that the Council of the EU did propose in its May 2026 Partial General Approach.

The European Parliament has achieved major progress in shaping the new programme. The CULT Committee's position is expected to head for a plenary vote by November, finalising the Parliament's mandate before negotiations with the Council of the EU.