EFOR: Political parties spent over 1.1 billion lei in 2024, relying more on private financing

Political parties in Romania reported expenses exceeding 1.1 billion lei in 2024, while the state paid over one billion lei from public funds for campaign reimbursements and annual party subsidies, according to a report by Expert Forum (EFOR).Expert Forum analyzed party financing in 2024, a year that saw four rounds of elections, leading to the highest revenues parties have ever reported."Parties mobilized to raise as much money as possible from donors, loans, and membership fees, relying far less on subsidies compared to previous years. Only PSD declared loans of nearly 100 million lei. Although no official statistics exist, data collected by EFOR show that political parties whose financial statements are published by the Ministry of Finance had revenues of almost 960 million lei and expenses of over 1.1 billion lei. The state paid over one billion lei for campaign reimbursements and annual subsidies. We analyzed more than 200 names of main donors ? individuals and companies ? published in the Official Gazette to better understand the sources of funds that flowed massively into the 2024 campaigns. This is not an exhaustive analysis, but includes only the parties with the largest declared sums: PSD, PNL [the National Liberal Party], USR [Save Romania Union], AUR [the Alliance for the Union of Romanians], and PUSL [Social Liberal Humanist Party]," the report states.According to EFOR, parties in 2024 relied more heavily on private financing than on subsidies, unlike in previous years. The purpose of this financing model appears to be securing reimbursements from public funds alongside the use of subsidies, creating additional pressure on the state budget and raising transparency concerns."Although we identified relatively few cases of donors who could not justify their donations or loans according to their asset declarations, such cases exist. We do not have complete financial details, but simple correlations raise questions about how some individuals donate almost all the money they earn or even more than they could justify. These calculations should serve as a warning signal for the authorities. We marked these cases in red, bold," shows the report.EFOR found only a few cases where a donor gave money to two or more parties. In rare instances, individuals or companies affiliated with one party donated to another."These data need to be put in context: such donations sometimes occurred years apart. For example, FCSB SA, controlled by George Becali, directed funds to both AUR and PSD. A PSD deputy financed both PSD and PNL in 2024. Recently, we identified a case where the leader of the social-democrats in the Iasi County Council financed the National Liberal Party through a company. Financing multiple parties at the same time is a way to gain influence or hedge bets on which party will succeed. In a few cases, we found no information about donors who gave up to 660,000 lei to parties ? 30 cases. While these are likely private individuals with little online footprint, in most cases at least minimal information exists. We also identified donors who appear to have borrowed money from others to lend to the party. In several dozen cases, these loans were not included in asset declarations ? it is possible some were repaid, removing the obligation to publish them, but since we do not have that information, we noted it where applicable," the report adds.Among legal entities, several companies created very recently, even as late as March-April 2024, provided loans to parties just one month after being founded, in amounts clearly beyond their economic capacity. Most of these companies were linked to PSD."It is likely these funds came from associates transferring money to the party. It is worth noting that a legal entity can lend a party a larger sum, but this can also be a way to avoid transparent donations or loans through the creation of shell companies. In any case, such practices are not necessarily transparent and may raise questions about the source of funds and the purpose of the donation. (...) Among legal entities, we identified several networks of donors who donated through multiple companies and also personally. In some cases, it is questionable whether the legal threshold was exceeded, which does not allow an associate/shareholder to direct money without considering limits," the report explains.EFOR details multiple cases of PSD loans.***PSD - Loans from one of the owners of the NUBA club, the management of Rotary Construc?ii, or individuals with economic ties to Ciolacu's nephew.Jean Sasu, co-owner of the NUBA club and partner in several companies, lent PSD 3.7 million lei personally and through companies, with an additional 1.6 million lei from a firm owned by his wife, Ana Maria Sasu.Some companies providing loans, such as EUPHORICH WORLD, ISC ESTATE, Youth Essentials, and Trade Sphere Brokers, were founded shortly before the loan and had limited revenue.Trade Sphere Brokers, owned by Laura Niculae, who organizes NUBA events, lent PSD 1.6 million lei. Alexandru and Ana Maria Besciu lent PSD a total of 3.2 million lei through their separate companies BAV IT Business Consulting and Youth Essentials, linked to the Sasu family. The Moise family (Elena, Sebastian, Ionela) lent PSD both personally and through Redpoint Management Solutions and Elite Architectural Design.Vali Porojan, manager of the Ludus Sugar Factory, provided PSD a loan of 650,000 lei, while her former company TRANSILVANIA JUU TAKU GROUP SRL lent the party 1.6 million lei.Several companies owned by Mihai Tufan or by Emilia and Mihai Anastasescu, prominent business figures, made donations to PSD, as did multiple executives from Rotary Constructii.In addition, individuals from Constanta, associated with the Polaris Group, donated funds to PSD (Maria Latea, Ionut Nicolae Tartoaga).Likewise, PSD also received loans from people with economic ties to Mihai Cristian Ciolacu ? considered by the press to be the nephew of former Prime Minister Marcel Ciolacu ? such as Sandu Adriana Denisa, through the companies Solar Energy and EVOFARM LOGISTIC.***PNL - funds from Cristian Busoi and Rares Bogdan; PUSL - financing from the Voiculescu familyExpert Forum notes various intra-party loans in the case of PNL, with the most active donors being Cristian Busoi and Rares Bogdan.For PUSL, most donors are linked to Dan Voiculescu, his family, or companies in his portfolio."Although legal, we still question why companies or business people ? many likely not party members ? were so generous with parties in an election year. Especially since donations from individuals were rare in previous years. We note that some of these companies or other entities owned by individuals in this list also received money from parties during campaigns or through subsidies. This may indicate a system where money circulates among entities. AEP [the Permanent Electoral Authority]did not conduct the annual audit of political parties as required by law. Therefore, most of these funds were not verified but were reimbursed by the state. It is understandable that with four elections in a year, an institution with only 14 central staff, responsible for these audits, could not carry out checks alongside election controls. At the same time, we are talking about over 700 million lei reimbursed from public funds, with audit results likely to be available in 2026," Expert Forum concludes.   AUR files challenges with Constitutional Court on laws Bolojan gov't pledged responsibility for    The Alliance for the Union of Romanians (AUR) has filed four constitutionality challenges with the Constitutional Court against the packages of laws the Bolojan Government pledged responsibility for.AUR highlighted that the projects were adopted "without parliamentary debate, without consulting the Romanians and without a democratic vote"."Through this maneuver, the Executive has usurped the role of Parliament and trampled on the fundamental principles of the rule of law. The analysis of the projects adopted through this abusive procedure shows an alarming picture: constitutional violations of exceptional gravity, a systematic attack on the separation of powers in the state and a deliberate attempt to concentrate legislative power in the hands of the Government. Invoking "emergency" to justify the exceptional procedure represents an institutional lie. Problems such as the excessive budget deficit or the health crisis did not appear overnight. They date back years, during which successive governments refused to act democratically. The artificial creation of the emergency and its use as a pretext to bypass Parliament represents constitutional fraud and a defiance of the principle of good faith," reads a press release of AUR.AUR hopes that the Constitutional Court judges "will reject these projects in their entirety and send a firm signal that Romanian democracy cannot be abolished through legislative artifice."