From the 2026 budget audit
14 billion to finish buildings already mostly built — then the line closes.
A short two-year phase-out to complete the near-finished state construction stock, after which no new projects may enter this line and it reaches zero.
14,000.0 millió Ft in 2026 covering the final-stage completion of buildings already substantially built — a finite commitment, not an open programme.
What you see — and what you don't
The seen: state buildings brought to usable completion rather than left as half-finished structures. The unseen: the structural discipline this phase-out imposes — once the current near-complete stock is done, no further projects enter this line, meaning future state building decisions face the appraisal test at their own start rather than accumulating as legacy completion costs.
Objection
"Surely it makes no sense to stop funding buildings that are almost finished — that would just waste what has already been spent."
Answer
It does make sense to finish near-complete buildings — that is exactly what this phase-out does. The reform is not abandonment: it funds completion of the existing near-finished stock and then closes the line. What it ends is the pattern of a standing 'nearing completion' budget that perpetually absorbs the tail-end costs of a continuous pipeline of discretionary state construction. The line has a closing date; future projects do not enter it.
Share if you think a government building programme should have a defined end, not an open line that rolls forward every year.
The analyst's verdict
Building Investments Nearing Completion
Rationale
This line funds construction projects that are near completion — the final instalments needed to finish state building works already substantially built. The classification logic is distinct from every other building line in the chapter, and it turns on sunk cost and reliance. A project that is 80% or 90% complete represents capital already committed: the saving has already been redirected, the structure already stands, and stopping at near-completion would strand a half-finished asset that yields nothing. Whatever the original merit of approving these projects — and for the prestige projects among them, the frame's verdict on the *approval decision* would have been negative — the decision now facing the 2026 budget is not whether to start them but whether to finish what is built. Finishing a near-complete structure so it can be used is the rational completion of a commitment already made; abandoning it is pure waste. This is therefore a Phase-Out, not a Keep and not an Immediate Cut. It is a Phase-Out because the line has no enduring rationale — once the current near-complete stock is finished, there is no recurring function for a "buildings nearing completion" line; it should reach zero. It is not an Immediate Cut because abrupt removal would strand genuinely near-finished assets and breach contracts in their final stage. The horizon is short — two years — because the protected category is finite and discrete: the buildings currently near completion, and no others. Future projects do not enter this line; they would face the frame's approval test at their own start.
Transition mechanism
Phase-Out over two years, linear, covering completion of the currently near-finished stock. Year 1 funds the bulk of outstanding completion work; Year 2 funds the residual tail; the line then closes. No new project may be admitted to this line — it is a closing legacy line by construction, not a standing programme.
Affected groups
Construction contractors on final-stage contracts (honoured to completion); the eventual public users of the completed buildings; taxpayers, who fund a closing finite line rather than an open-ended one.
Free Society Institute
Support independent analysis
Our research is free, open, and unsponsored. If you find it valuable, help us keep it that way.