One city of 20,000 receives 4.5 billion Ft — from the national budget, for no published reason.

Rationale

A named capital appropriation to a single municipality — Karcag, in Jász-Nagykun-Szolnok megye, population approximately 20,000 — for property development. A line-item capital grant earmarked in the national budget for one named municipality's development project is the clearest form of the public-choice pattern in this chapter. Karcag's roughly 20,000 residents receive a project worth approximately 225,000 Ft per resident; the cost is spread across the entire national taxpayer base, of whom that municipality's residents are a small fraction. There is no formula, no published criterion, no competitive allocation — the budget simply names the recipient. This is subjective allocation of national tax revenue to a geographically-concentrated beneficiary by political officeholders. The contrast with the Cím 1 formula grant is the whole point: the formula grant, whatever its other defects, at least allocates by rule; a named single-municipality earmark allocates by discretion. If Karcag's property development is worth doing, it can be financed by Karcag — from its own revenue, from borrowing serviced by the development's returns, or from the formula grant that funds every municipality on equal terms. Classified Immediate Cut: there is no protected reliance interest that abolition would violate; if the project is mid-contract, the honest treatment is to honour signed contracts through run-off and cut the unobligated remainder, but a forward appropriation for a named project carries no such claim by default.