Office of the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights

Rationale

This funds the salaries of the Commissioner, the deputy commissioners, the investigating lawyers, and the NPM inspection staff. The work is the institution: complaint investigation, on-site inspection of detention facilities, and the constitutional-complaint and statutory-review functions are labour-intensive professional activity that cannot be substituted by capital or by contract-out without dissolving the function itself. An ombudsman exists to give a citizen a route to challenge the state without paying for it — a forty-thousand-forint filing fee would defeat the purpose, because the complainant is, by construction, someone in dispute with a public authority. The function is rights-protection: securing a remedy against involuntary harm inflicted by the state on a citizen who, in the detention cases, cannot walk away. Personnel cost is the irreducible core of that function. Keep does not preclude an operating-efficiency review — the staff complement is set by statute and could be examined — but it precludes phase-out.

Rationale

Operating costs — premises, utilities, travel, IT, translation, the materials of complaint-handling and inspection work. The NPM mandate is travel-intensive by design: the inspection teams must physically reach detention sites across the country, unannounced, which makes a non-trivial operating budget intrinsic to the function rather than overhead padding. At 712.0 millió Ft this is roughly 21% of the chapter envelope, which is unremarkable for a small inspectorate-style institution. The line is retained because the function it supports is retained. As with personnel, this does not exempt the line from an ordinary value-for-money review of procurement and premises, but the review is internal management, not a transition.

Rationale

This is the employer-side payroll levy on the personnel line — social contribution tax (SzocHo) and related employer contributions. It is not a discretionary policy choice; it is the mechanical payroll cost attached to the Keep-classified salary line. It is worth noting what this figure reveals about the structure of Hungarian labour taxation generally: 315.7 millió Ft of employer contribution sits on top of 2,248.0 millió Ft of gross personnel spending, a ratio of roughly 14% — the visible employer wedge. The classified salaries themselves are already net of the 15% SZJA and the 18.5% employee TB-járulék withheld before take-home, and the staff then pay 27% ÁFA on most of what they spend. The same cumulative wedge that this chapter pays as an employer falls on every working household in the country; the cost grounding belongs in the tax chapters, but the line is a reminder that the state is a payer of its own payroll taxes as well as the recipient. The line follows the personnel line: Keep.

Rationale

The chapter's only capital line — equipment, IT hardware, and similar asset purchases for the Office. At 88.0 millió Ft it is a routine asset-renewal allocation for an institution of this size, not a discrete capital project with its own glide path. It carries no multi-year contractual commitment visible in the chapter data that would require a phase-out horizon. It is retained because the institution it equips is retained.

Rationale

A residual operating line of 5.0 millió Ft — 0.15% of the chapter envelope. The amount is too small to carry an independent classification argument; it moves with the institution. Even if the line funded something the framework would question, abolishing a 5.0 millió Ft line would cost more in administrative attention than it would return. It is retained as part of the operating envelope of a Keep-classified institution.