Diplomacy & Defense Think Tank News

The 0.7 per cent official development assistance/gross national income (ODA/GNI) target, adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1970, is best understood as a partially successful norm that is now in active retreat. In this paper we discuss the history of the target using Finnemore and Sikkink's (1998) norm life cycle framework. We compare the 0.7 to analogous targets in defence, climate, education, health, and biodiversity. We argue that systematic underperformance is a structural feature of politically negotiated international input targets. The rise and retreat of the 0.7 is then not a distinct feature of development finance. The NATO 2 per cent/5 per cent case demonstrates that cascade is achievable under conditions of salience and enforcement. However, these are conditions that the 0.7 has not had. We propose ways forward based on the 0.7 target’s original rationale.

The 0.7 per cent official development assistance/gross national income (ODA/GNI) target, adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1970, is best understood as a partially successful norm that is now in active retreat. In this paper we discuss the history of the target using Finnemore and Sikkink's (1998) norm life cycle framework. We compare the 0.7 to analogous targets in defence, climate, education, health, and biodiversity. We argue that systematic underperformance is a structural feature of politically negotiated international input targets. The rise and retreat of the 0.7 is then not a distinct feature of development finance. The NATO 2 per cent/5 per cent case demonstrates that cascade is achievable under conditions of salience and enforcement. However, these are conditions that the 0.7 has not had. We propose ways forward based on the 0.7 target’s original rationale.

The OECD’s aid committee turns 70 in 2031, as record aid cuts and a shift from solidarity to self-interest reshape why countries give. Where this leads is still open. Aid could become a genuine partnership, a deal between elites, a tool of geopolitical bargaining or a purely commercial transaction. Each path would change the committee’s role, and with it the future of the 0.7% aid target.

The OECD’s aid committee turns 70 in 2031, as record aid cuts and a shift from solidarity to self-interest reshape why countries give. Where this leads is still open. Aid could become a genuine partnership, a deal between elites, a tool of geopolitical bargaining or a purely commercial transaction. Each path would change the committee’s role, and with it the future of the 0.7% aid target.

The OECD’s aid committee turns 70 in 2031, as record aid cuts and a shift from solidarity to self-interest reshape why countries give. Where this leads is still open. Aid could become a genuine partnership, a deal between elites, a tool of geopolitical bargaining or a purely commercial transaction. Each path would change the committee’s role, and with it the future of the 0.7% aid target.

The discussion paper assesses whether and how newly established national development banks (NDBs), specifically the Development Bank Ghana (DBG) and the Development Bank of Nigeria (DBN), are growing into independent and impactful institutions capable of fostering sustainable development. It focuses on five analytical dimensions: (1) institutional independence, (2) the diversification of funding sources and the scaling up of operations, (3) the relationship between NDBs and participating financial institutions (PFIs), (4) collaboration between NDBs and development partners (DPs), namely multilateral development banks (MDBs) and bilateral development finance institutions and (5) sustainability and green finance. The research adopts a qualitative comparative case study methodology, drawing on 55 semi-structured interviews conducted across Ghana and Nigeria with representatives from NDBs, PFIs, DPs, civil society organisations and other relevant stakeholders such as finance ministries, central banks and providers of technical assistance. The data are analysed using qualitative content analysis and triangulation. The discussion paper aims to provide insights for policymakers, central banks and DPs, and inform the design of future NDBs regarding how they can become strong institutions that support long-term development objectives. 
Our results show that DBG and DBN have emerged as relevant actors within the Ghanaian and Nigerian development finance landscapes, particularly through their role in facilitating access to long-term and often concessional funding, which helps PFIs expanding lending to MSMEs and underserved sectors. Furthermore, the study finds that both institutions have established governance and accountability structures that, together with their wholesale lending models, provide substantial protection against political interference. In particular, strong support from DPs proved central to the establishment, growth and operationalisation of both NDBs. Beyond financial resources, DPs provided technical assistance, institutional capacity building, governance support and sustainability expertise. Another notable finding of the study is that DBG and DBN foster sustainability by embedding environmental and social principles into their strategies and operations, and making sustainability a core institutional priority, especially through wholesale lending, technical assistance and the integration of sustainability. At the same time, the study identifies several constraints related to limited funding volumes, high pricing, limited risk-sharing mechanisms, administrative burdens associated with DP engagement and challenges in adapting international sustainability standards to local contexts. Overall, the findings suggest that although DBG and DBN have generated substantial development value, established strong governance structures and demonstrated institutional independence, increasing their impact will require the mobilisation of additional funding to scale up their operations and activities.
 

The discussion paper assesses whether and how newly established national development banks (NDBs), specifically the Development Bank Ghana (DBG) and the Development Bank of Nigeria (DBN), are growing into independent and impactful institutions capable of fostering sustainable development. It focuses on five analytical dimensions: (1) institutional independence, (2) the diversification of funding sources and the scaling up of operations, (3) the relationship between NDBs and participating financial institutions (PFIs), (4) collaboration between NDBs and development partners (DPs), namely multilateral development banks (MDBs) and bilateral development finance institutions and (5) sustainability and green finance. The research adopts a qualitative comparative case study methodology, drawing on 55 semi-structured interviews conducted across Ghana and Nigeria with representatives from NDBs, PFIs, DPs, civil society organisations and other relevant stakeholders such as finance ministries, central banks and providers of technical assistance. The data are analysed using qualitative content analysis and triangulation. The discussion paper aims to provide insights for policymakers, central banks and DPs, and inform the design of future NDBs regarding how they can become strong institutions that support long-term development objectives. 
Our results show that DBG and DBN have emerged as relevant actors within the Ghanaian and Nigerian development finance landscapes, particularly through their role in facilitating access to long-term and often concessional funding, which helps PFIs expanding lending to MSMEs and underserved sectors. Furthermore, the study finds that both institutions have established governance and accountability structures that, together with their wholesale lending models, provide substantial protection against political interference. In particular, strong support from DPs proved central to the establishment, growth and operationalisation of both NDBs. Beyond financial resources, DPs provided technical assistance, institutional capacity building, governance support and sustainability expertise. Another notable finding of the study is that DBG and DBN foster sustainability by embedding environmental and social principles into their strategies and operations, and making sustainability a core institutional priority, especially through wholesale lending, technical assistance and the integration of sustainability. At the same time, the study identifies several constraints related to limited funding volumes, high pricing, limited risk-sharing mechanisms, administrative burdens associated with DP engagement and challenges in adapting international sustainability standards to local contexts. Overall, the findings suggest that although DBG and DBN have generated substantial development value, established strong governance structures and demonstrated institutional independence, increasing their impact will require the mobilisation of additional funding to scale up their operations and activities.
 

The discussion paper assesses whether and how newly established national development banks (NDBs), specifically the Development Bank Ghana (DBG) and the Development Bank of Nigeria (DBN), are growing into independent and impactful institutions capable of fostering sustainable development. It focuses on five analytical dimensions: (1) institutional independence, (2) the diversification of funding sources and the scaling up of operations, (3) the relationship between NDBs and participating financial institutions (PFIs), (4) collaboration between NDBs and development partners (DPs), namely multilateral development banks (MDBs) and bilateral development finance institutions and (5) sustainability and green finance. The research adopts a qualitative comparative case study methodology, drawing on 55 semi-structured interviews conducted across Ghana and Nigeria with representatives from NDBs, PFIs, DPs, civil society organisations and other relevant stakeholders such as finance ministries, central banks and providers of technical assistance. The data are analysed using qualitative content analysis and triangulation. The discussion paper aims to provide insights for policymakers, central banks and DPs, and inform the design of future NDBs regarding how they can become strong institutions that support long-term development objectives. 
Our results show that DBG and DBN have emerged as relevant actors within the Ghanaian and Nigerian development finance landscapes, particularly through their role in facilitating access to long-term and often concessional funding, which helps PFIs expanding lending to MSMEs and underserved sectors. Furthermore, the study finds that both institutions have established governance and accountability structures that, together with their wholesale lending models, provide substantial protection against political interference. In particular, strong support from DPs proved central to the establishment, growth and operationalisation of both NDBs. Beyond financial resources, DPs provided technical assistance, institutional capacity building, governance support and sustainability expertise. Another notable finding of the study is that DBG and DBN foster sustainability by embedding environmental and social principles into their strategies and operations, and making sustainability a core institutional priority, especially through wholesale lending, technical assistance and the integration of sustainability. At the same time, the study identifies several constraints related to limited funding volumes, high pricing, limited risk-sharing mechanisms, administrative burdens associated with DP engagement and challenges in adapting international sustainability standards to local contexts. Overall, the findings suggest that although DBG and DBN have generated substantial development value, established strong governance structures and demonstrated institutional independence, increasing their impact will require the mobilisation of additional funding to scale up their operations and activities.
 

Preparing individuals to contribute to sustainability transformations has become an increasingly important challenge for higher education, professional training and leadership development. While research has identified a wide range of sustainability competences, comparatively less attention has been paid to how these competences can be fostered through purposefully designed learning environments. Drawing on nearly 20 years of experience with the Managing Global Governance (MGG) Academy of the German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS), this paper offers a practice-informed perspective on competence development for future changemakers.
The paper addresses two questions: what competences are particularly relevant for individuals seeking to contribute to sustainability transformations and global cooperation, and how can learning environments be designed to strengthen these competences? Building on experience from the MGG Academy and relating it to literature on sustainability competences, transformative learning and adult education, the paper develops a competence model organised around three complementary dimensions – sense-making, cooperation and transformation – and operationalises 11 competences by distinguishing the knowledge, skills and attitudinal components associated with them. The paper further derives six recommendations for learning design: intentionally curating diversity, fostering trust and psychological safety, enabling mutual learning, aligning learning activities with the intended competence development, creating structured opportunities for reflection, and designing learning for transfer to professional practice.
Rather than proposing a universal blueprint, the paper demonstrates how competence models can provide orientation for coherent programme design and how learning theory can be translated into practical educational approaches. It concludes that competence development constitutes an important contribution to sustainability transformations, while recognising that impact also depends on supportive organisational environments, professional networks and broader institutional conditions. By connecting theoretical insights with nearly two decades of practical experience, the paper contributes to the growing discussion on how learning and dialogue programmes can strengthen the people and relationships through which transformative change becomes possible.

Preparing individuals to contribute to sustainability transformations has become an increasingly important challenge for higher education, professional training and leadership development. While research has identified a wide range of sustainability competences, comparatively less attention has been paid to how these competences can be fostered through purposefully designed learning environments. Drawing on nearly 20 years of experience with the Managing Global Governance (MGG) Academy of the German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS), this paper offers a practice-informed perspective on competence development for future changemakers.
The paper addresses two questions: what competences are particularly relevant for individuals seeking to contribute to sustainability transformations and global cooperation, and how can learning environments be designed to strengthen these competences? Building on experience from the MGG Academy and relating it to literature on sustainability competences, transformative learning and adult education, the paper develops a competence model organised around three complementary dimensions – sense-making, cooperation and transformation – and operationalises 11 competences by distinguishing the knowledge, skills and attitudinal components associated with them. The paper further derives six recommendations for learning design: intentionally curating diversity, fostering trust and psychological safety, enabling mutual learning, aligning learning activities with the intended competence development, creating structured opportunities for reflection, and designing learning for transfer to professional practice.
Rather than proposing a universal blueprint, the paper demonstrates how competence models can provide orientation for coherent programme design and how learning theory can be translated into practical educational approaches. It concludes that competence development constitutes an important contribution to sustainability transformations, while recognising that impact also depends on supportive organisational environments, professional networks and broader institutional conditions. By connecting theoretical insights with nearly two decades of practical experience, the paper contributes to the growing discussion on how learning and dialogue programmes can strengthen the people and relationships through which transformative change becomes possible.

Preparing individuals to contribute to sustainability transformations has become an increasingly important challenge for higher education, professional training and leadership development. While research has identified a wide range of sustainability competences, comparatively less attention has been paid to how these competences can be fostered through purposefully designed learning environments. Drawing on nearly 20 years of experience with the Managing Global Governance (MGG) Academy of the German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS), this paper offers a practice-informed perspective on competence development for future changemakers.
The paper addresses two questions: what competences are particularly relevant for individuals seeking to contribute to sustainability transformations and global cooperation, and how can learning environments be designed to strengthen these competences? Building on experience from the MGG Academy and relating it to literature on sustainability competences, transformative learning and adult education, the paper develops a competence model organised around three complementary dimensions – sense-making, cooperation and transformation – and operationalises 11 competences by distinguishing the knowledge, skills and attitudinal components associated with them. The paper further derives six recommendations for learning design: intentionally curating diversity, fostering trust and psychological safety, enabling mutual learning, aligning learning activities with the intended competence development, creating structured opportunities for reflection, and designing learning for transfer to professional practice.
Rather than proposing a universal blueprint, the paper demonstrates how competence models can provide orientation for coherent programme design and how learning theory can be translated into practical educational approaches. It concludes that competence development constitutes an important contribution to sustainability transformations, while recognising that impact also depends on supportive organisational environments, professional networks and broader institutional conditions. By connecting theoretical insights with nearly two decades of practical experience, the paper contributes to the growing discussion on how learning and dialogue programmes can strengthen the people and relationships through which transformative change becomes possible.

Pete Hegseth affirme que l'exécution sera publique, mais un expert juridique déclare que cette décision « sans précédent » se situe sur un « terrain juridique incertain ».

Le Premier ministre Benjamin Netanyahu a refusé d'assumer une quelconque responsabilité personnelle dans ce qui s'est passé ou d'ordonner une enquête d'État.

US-Präsident Donald Trump spricht von «konstruktiven Gesprächen» mit Teheran. Vor den Midterms soll es keinen Angriff auf den Iran geben, verkündet Trump weiter.

Jetzt bist du der Boss an der Seitenlinie! Stell deine Servette-Startelf auf. Einloggen und direkt ab an die Taktiktafel.

Dans une vidéo qui fait le buzz sur les réseaux sociaux, Bally Bagayoko, maire de la ville française de Saint-Denis, en banlieue parisienne, se tient face aux forces de l'ordre lors d'une manifestation à Paris mardi. Protégeant avec son corps de jeunes manifestants et criant « arrêtez » à l'endroit des forces de l'ordre prêtes à charger la foule,

Zum 1. Oktober hat die Bundesregierung die Energiesteuer auf Benzin und Diesel für drei Monate gesenkt. Rechnerisch werden die Kraftstoffe damit knapp 17 Cent pro Liter billiger. Ob diese Entlastung die Verbraucher*innen erreicht, ist bislang unklar. Die Abteilung Unternehmen und Märkte im ...

Zusammenfassung:

8. Oktober 2026 – in diesem Sommer haben verheerende Waldbrände für Schlagzeilen gesorgt. Im Fokus standen die Brände in den spanischen Provinzen Ávila und Madrid sowie an der französischen Atlantikküste bei Bordeaux. Doch auch Deutschland blieb nicht verschont: Ende Juli brannten bei Jüterbog in Brandenburg rund 300 Hektar auf einem ehemaligen Truppenübungsplatz, Mitte August folgte im Hürtgenwald in der Eifel der größte Waldbrand in Nordrhein-Westfalen seit Beginn der bundesweiten Aufzeichnungen 1991. Diese Studie zeigt auf Basis aktueller Satellitendaten, dass bis Ende September 2026 in der gesamten EU und auch in Deutschland die drittgrößte Fläche seit 2016 von Vegetationsbränden betroffen war. In Deutschland brannte mehr als doppelt so viel Fläche wie im Durchschnitt der vergangenen zehn Jahre. Dies deutet auf eine Trendwende hin. Mit zunehmenden Hitze- und Trockenperioden dürften die ökologischen und wirtschaftlichen Folgen von Bränden deutlich zunehmen. Dies unterstreicht die Bedeutung von Klimaschutz sowie einer besseren Vorbereitung auf Vegetationsbrände, etwa durch Aufklärung der Bevölkerung und den Einsatz neuer Technik zur Brandbekämpfung.

Tax expenditures (TEs) in Germany represent a significant portion of government spending, amounting to 1.7 percent of GDP in 2026. Over the last decade, revenue forgone reported by the German federal government has remained consistently below 2.0 percent of GDP. This is below the global average of 4.0 percent of GDP (see Redonda, von Haldenwang, & Aliu, 2026), and less than most of Germany’s neighbours. However, it is important to note that official TE reporting is incomplete, as acknowledged by the German Federal Ministry of Finance (BMF) itself. Recent changes in TE use have been motivated above all by three rationales: First, TEs have been employed as primary crisis response measures, mainly in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic, the Russian war on Ukraine and the US-Iran war. Second, they are used to promote the transition towards zero carbon of the German energy system, including housing, transportation and manufacturing. Third, TEs are granted to promote growth or compensate high energy costs. Since 1967, Germany reports on tax expenditures (TEs) and direct subsidies under the Act to Promote Economic Stability and Growth (“Stability and Growth Act”). Reporting covers all provisions that have an economic objective. The “Subsidy Report” is submitted to parliament every second year, with the most recent one (number 30) published in September 2025 (BMF, 2025). By law, the report should be submitted to parliament “together” with the government draft for the federal budget of the coming year, but usually the report trails the draft budget for several weeks, sometimes even months. As previous editions, the 30th Subsidy Report contains two lists of TEs. One (“Annex 2”) presents 107 TEs that fall under the reporting mandate of the Stability and Growth Act. The other one (“Annex 3”) lists 52 provisions that result in revenue forgone, but do not fall under the mandate of the subsidy report as such, though the distinction between both lists is not fully consistent. Also, just 72 out of the 107 TEs presented in Annex 2 and only 18 of the 52 provisions listed in Annex 3 come with revenue forgone estimates. Based on the federal government’s budget draft for 2027, the quantified TEs of Annexes 2 and 3 amount to 76.5 billion Euro in 2026 (after 74.3 billion Euro in 2025). Annex 2 provisions are presented in great detail, each with its own data sheet. This reporting practice has earned Germany a relatively high score on the Global Tax Expenditures Transparency Index, where it ranks 6th out of 116 assessed countries (Redonda et al., 2026). In contrast, Annex 3 provisions are presented in one single list with much less information. In addition, multiple provisions that would technically qualify as TEs are not reported at all. As a result, it is almost impossible for political decision-makers and the public in general to gain a complete overview of all the TEs in use, their fiscal cost and the impacts they have. Inconsistent reporting is partly due to the lack of a well-defined tax benchmark system, complicating the identification of TEs and estimations of revenue forgone. The criteria applied to decide whether a specific provision is a TE or part of the benchmark tax system are not always clear. For instance, lower value added tax (VAT) rates for food are part of Germany’s benchmark system and not reported, while lower VAT rates for cultural activities are considered a TE. The federal subsidy guidelines, issued in 2006 and amended in 2015, ask for a regular evaluation of all subsidies in use. Against this backdrop, two major rounds of evaluations have been commissioned by the BMF. The first round in 2007-2009 covered roughly the biggest 20 TEs listed in the subsidy report. Together, these TEs resulted in revenue forgone of 18.1 billion Euro per year (Thöne et al., 2009). To the best of our knowledge, at the time this was the biggest evaluation of tax expenditures ever conducted worldwide. Ten years later, 2017-2019, a second round of evaluations was commissioned, which was meant to cover the next twenty largest TEs plus several closely related smaller TEs, increasing the total coverage of this evaluation round to 33 measures with revenue forgone of 7.4 billion Euro per year (Thöne & Gerhards, 2019). Even with these two rounds of evaluations, however, the federal government has not fully lived up to the principles it is supposed to follow. 50 out of the 107 TEs listed in Annex 2 of the 30th Subsidy Report, representing over a third (34 percent) of the revenue forgone, have never been evaluated. The figure rises to 66 percent when the provisions listed in Annex 3 of the report are included, as these are not subject to regular evaluations. As an additional point, only 17 out of 107 TEs come with a time limit and only two TEs are granted with decreasing benefits over time. TEs play an important role in German environmental and climate policy. On the one hand, they are used as environmental TEs (ETEs) to advance environmental protection and climate policy, above all in mobility, energy and heating. Revenue forgone from ETEs in 2026 amounted to 5.8 billion Euro. On the other hand, TEs are the dominant form of environmentally harmful subsidies. According to a report published by the German Federal Environment Agency (UBA), they resulted in 48.4 billion Euro of revenue forgone in 2018 (Burger & Bretschneider, 2022). A new report published bei the Bertelsmann Foundation focuses specifically on subsidies that are harmful to the climate (Fiedler et al., 2026). It shows that TEs falling under this category generated revenue forgone in the range of 47.3 billion Euro in 2024, including 18,2 billion Euro classified as only “partially harmful”. Sustainability was introduced as an aspect of TE reporting in 2015, understood as a broad concept that combines economic performance, the preservation of natural resources and social cohesion from a long-term development perspective. This is in line with the common worldwide understanding of sustainability and implies that the evaluation score obtained by each TE in this category may reflect very different properties, not only environmental or climate-related ones. In fact, the 30th Subsidy Report lists 15 cases where TEs are meant to support the preservation of natural resources, against 36 cases where the aim is social cohesion and 93 cases that point at economic sustainability. All in all, Germany has been slow in reforming its TE regime. As a recurrent observation, the Federal Court of Auditors highlights that the government has done too little to follow up on the recommendations that came out of the various evaluations since 2009. Against this background, three actions seem to be particularly relevant. To start, the federal government needs to address the lack of clarity regarding the German benchmark tax system. A comprehensive stock-taking review could help to determine which provisions should be classified as “structural” parts of the benchmark system, and which are “non-structural” and thus to be considered TEs and reported in future subsidy reports. In the medium term, this initiative could result in TEs no longer being viewed exclusively within the context of economic objectives, but encompassing social and other policy goals as well. This would be in line with international good practice in TE reporting. Consistent with these standards, TE reports should also be submitted to and adopted by parliament as an integral part of the annual budget. In addition, a clear evaluation framework with regular intervals and broad coverage should be implemented.

Tax expenditures (TEs) in Germany represent a significant portion of government spending, amounting to 1.7 percent of GDP in 2026. Over the last decade, revenue forgone reported by the German federal government has remained consistently below 2.0 percent of GDP. This is below the global average of 4.0 percent of GDP (see Redonda, von Haldenwang, & Aliu, 2026), and less than most of Germany’s neighbours. However, it is important to note that official TE reporting is incomplete, as acknowledged by the German Federal Ministry of Finance (BMF) itself. Recent changes in TE use have been motivated above all by three rationales: First, TEs have been employed as primary crisis response measures, mainly in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic, the Russian war on Ukraine and the US-Iran war. Second, they are used to promote the transition towards zero carbon of the German energy system, including housing, transportation and manufacturing. Third, TEs are granted to promote growth or compensate high energy costs. Since 1967, Germany reports on tax expenditures (TEs) and direct subsidies under the Act to Promote Economic Stability and Growth (“Stability and Growth Act”). Reporting covers all provisions that have an economic objective. The “Subsidy Report” is submitted to parliament every second year, with the most recent one (number 30) published in September 2025 (BMF, 2025). By law, the report should be submitted to parliament “together” with the government draft for the federal budget of the coming year, but usually the report trails the draft budget for several weeks, sometimes even months. As previous editions, the 30th Subsidy Report contains two lists of TEs. One (“Annex 2”) presents 107 TEs that fall under the reporting mandate of the Stability and Growth Act. The other one (“Annex 3”) lists 52 provisions that result in revenue forgone, but do not fall under the mandate of the subsidy report as such, though the distinction between both lists is not fully consistent. Also, just 72 out of the 107 TEs presented in Annex 2 and only 18 of the 52 provisions listed in Annex 3 come with revenue forgone estimates. Based on the federal government’s budget draft for 2027, the quantified TEs of Annexes 2 and 3 amount to 76.5 billion Euro in 2026 (after 74.3 billion Euro in 2025). Annex 2 provisions are presented in great detail, each with its own data sheet. This reporting practice has earned Germany a relatively high score on the Global Tax Expenditures Transparency Index, where it ranks 6th out of 116 assessed countries (Redonda et al., 2026). In contrast, Annex 3 provisions are presented in one single list with much less information. In addition, multiple provisions that would technically qualify as TEs are not reported at all. As a result, it is almost impossible for political decision-makers and the public in general to gain a complete overview of all the TEs in use, their fiscal cost and the impacts they have. Inconsistent reporting is partly due to the lack of a well-defined tax benchmark system, complicating the identification of TEs and estimations of revenue forgone. The criteria applied to decide whether a specific provision is a TE or part of the benchmark tax system are not always clear. For instance, lower value added tax (VAT) rates for food are part of Germany’s benchmark system and not reported, while lower VAT rates for cultural activities are considered a TE. The federal subsidy guidelines, issued in 2006 and amended in 2015, ask for a regular evaluation of all subsidies in use. Against this backdrop, two major rounds of evaluations have been commissioned by the BMF. The first round in 2007-2009 covered roughly the biggest 20 TEs listed in the subsidy report. Together, these TEs resulted in revenue forgone of 18.1 billion Euro per year (Thöne et al., 2009). To the best of our knowledge, at the time this was the biggest evaluation of tax expenditures ever conducted worldwide. Ten years later, 2017-2019, a second round of evaluations was commissioned, which was meant to cover the next twenty largest TEs plus several closely related smaller TEs, increasing the total coverage of this evaluation round to 33 measures with revenue forgone of 7.4 billion Euro per year (Thöne & Gerhards, 2019). Even with these two rounds of evaluations, however, the federal government has not fully lived up to the principles it is supposed to follow. 50 out of the 107 TEs listed in Annex 2 of the 30th Subsidy Report, representing over a third (34 percent) of the revenue forgone, have never been evaluated. The figure rises to 66 percent when the provisions listed in Annex 3 of the report are included, as these are not subject to regular evaluations. As an additional point, only 17 out of 107 TEs come with a time limit and only two TEs are granted with decreasing benefits over time. TEs play an important role in German environmental and climate policy. On the one hand, they are used as environmental TEs (ETEs) to advance environmental protection and climate policy, above all in mobility, energy and heating. Revenue forgone from ETEs in 2026 amounted to 5.8 billion Euro. On the other hand, TEs are the dominant form of environmentally harmful subsidies. According to a report published by the German Federal Environment Agency (UBA), they resulted in 48.4 billion Euro of revenue forgone in 2018 (Burger & Bretschneider, 2022). A new report published bei the Bertelsmann Foundation focuses specifically on subsidies that are harmful to the climate (Fiedler et al., 2026). It shows that TEs falling under this category generated revenue forgone in the range of 47.3 billion Euro in 2024, including 18,2 billion Euro classified as only “partially harmful”. Sustainability was introduced as an aspect of TE reporting in 2015, understood as a broad concept that combines economic performance, the preservation of natural resources and social cohesion from a long-term development perspective. This is in line with the common worldwide understanding of sustainability and implies that the evaluation score obtained by each TE in this category may reflect very different properties, not only environmental or climate-related ones. In fact, the 30th Subsidy Report lists 15 cases where TEs are meant to support the preservation of natural resources, against 36 cases where the aim is social cohesion and 93 cases that point at economic sustainability. All in all, Germany has been slow in reforming its TE regime. As a recurrent observation, the Federal Court of Auditors highlights that the government has done too little to follow up on the recommendations that came out of the various evaluations since 2009. Against this background, three actions seem to be particularly relevant. To start, the federal government needs to address the lack of clarity regarding the German benchmark tax system. A comprehensive stock-taking review could help to determine which provisions should be classified as “structural” parts of the benchmark system, and which are “non-structural” and thus to be considered TEs and reported in future subsidy reports. In the medium term, this initiative could result in TEs no longer being viewed exclusively within the context of economic objectives, but encompassing social and other policy goals as well. This would be in line with international good practice in TE reporting. Consistent with these standards, TE reports should also be submitted to and adopted by parliament as an integral part of the annual budget. In addition, a clear evaluation framework with regular intervals and broad coverage should be implemented.