Decade of local finances: two crises and in between.

Local borrowing

At the start of the past decade, local governments had to borrow amidst a restrictive fiscal environment (Figure 20). National grants and other own-source revenue had declined. Yet, borrowing by governments at the subnational level was relatively low unless the regional level was also taken into account. As larger entities, regional (state) governments are generally viewed as more creditworthy and are in a better position to secure access to credit and use loan financing. However, as the decade progressed, stricter local borrowing regulations and a steadily improving overall budget balance led to lower annual borrowing overall; by 2013, local governments were posting surpluses and only regional governments in federal countries had recourse to debt financing.

The turning point in the decade-long trend in subnational government budget spending was 2016. With general government budgets in a more stable position, subnational governments started to actively borrow again in 2019. However, since more conservative policies were being followed by local governments, borrowing remained at a low level. Specific forms of debt were invested in the funding of ecological investments (see Annex 3 on EU green bond standards and green loans in France).

The first year of the pandemic placed the financial burden squarely on the national budget and on the regional governments. In Austria, fiscal rules specific to a federal country were developed for the subnational governments under the Austrian Stability Pact (see Box 2 above).

Local governments operate under a balanced budget requirement and borrowing is a minor source of budget revenue. Local debt policy options are partly influenced by municipal borrowing and debt regulations. Subnational governments in the CEMR countries followed a variety of borrowing policies. In most cases however, local borrowing potential was principally determined by the creditworthiness of the national budget.

In 2010, the highest level of borrowing by subnational governments was in the federal countries, with Spain, Austria and Germany coming in at the top of the list (Figure 21). Larger economies, such as those of the Netherlands, Poland and Norway, actively used loan financing as well. Countries with underfunded local governments and/or those accumulating debt to cofinance EU funds (e.g. Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Hungary) can also be found in this group. At the other end are the small countries with controlled local borrowing opportunities that use this financing option less actively (e.g. Western Balkan countries).

Local indebtedness

Subnational government debt is at a manageable level in the 36 countries where comparative data was available (Table 7). As a result of strict fiscal rules and regulated borrowing procedures, accumulated debt was kept stable and below 4% of GDP at the lowest tier (see Box 20 on the progressive form of local debt regulations in Estonia). By way of comparison, general government debt had increased by the middle of the decade to 67% of GDP (and to 81% in 2020).

Accumulated debt of the regional governments (the states in federal countries) reached 15% of GDP and rose even further in the first year of the pandemic (17.5%). Nevertheless, these federal regional governments, with their higher own-source revenue base and larger budgets, borrowed more actively.