In the video: 95% percent of the 24.3 billion euro special fund misused

What they have calculated sounds like a sleight of hand, except that the pockets are particularly deep: it involves 500 billion euros of new debt.

• According to calculations by Institute of German Economy (IW) In Cologne, around 86 percent of the funds were misused in 2025.
• The Munich one Ifo Institute comes up with an even more drastic figure: 95 percent of the new debt was not used for additional investments in infrastructure.

The first trick: fraudulent labeling

This gives the term special fund a new sound. In fact, these are not assets, but debts. The 500 billion euros are to be raised over the years outside of the normal budget. The first trick is that these loans are not formally covered by the debt brake because they are simply booked in a secondary budget.

The political assurance when it was passed was therefore clear: if there is debt, then at least for the future. New investments should be financed. The money should not simply be used to continue paying for old expenses. But that’s exactly what seems to be happening now.

The second trick: shifting station for the columns of numbers

There is a second trick for this. It works like this: Projects that were planned anyway are taken out of the normal budget and moved to the special fund. On paper, this looks like an investment offensive. In reality it is a matter of shifting columns of numbers.

How this works can best be explained with a simple picture: Let’s imagine a family household in which the parents decide to save money for a new car. So the family sets up a special account. Shortly afterwards, the repairs to the heating system that were planned anyway are paid for from exactly this account. On paper, a car account still exists. Only it’s empty and the new heating system, which is due anyway, is in front of the door instead of the new car.

Mechanisms in the state budget

The mechanism works similarly in the state budget. Projects such as new roads, railway lines and bridges, digitalization projects or funding programs are simply moved from the regular budget to the special fund. This frees up money in the normal household, which can then be spent on other purposes and does not end up in additional investments.

Economists react soberly

IW economist Tobias Hentze, who carried out the calculations, describes the situation clearly: “One year after the Bundestag approved the special fund, disillusionment remains,” he said. “The Union and the SPD had the chance to resolve the investment backlog. They have not yet taken advantage of it.”

The finding is explosive because it calls into question the core political idea of ​​the special fund. The construction was intended to solve a problem that has plagued Germany for years: the state invests too little in infrastructure. Roads, rails, power grids and digital networks have been worn out over decades. Businesses complain about traffic jams, delayed trains and slow lines.

Paradoxical effects of reallocation

The special fund should enable a liberation here. But if the majority of the funds are not invested additionally, but are only used to pay for existing tasks, a paradoxical effect arises: the state takes on new debt, but there is no real boost in investment.

In such cases, economists speak of displacement or reallocation. For taxpayers, the result is easier to understand: debts increase without the additional investments growing at the same rate.

Damning findings

In its panel of economists, the Munich Ifo Institute comes to an even more damning verdict on what the government is doing than can be read in the Cologne diagnosis. According to the economists surveyed, around 95 percent of the new debt will not be used for additional infrastructure investments. The special fund? It fizzles out.

The Federal Audit Office has also been pointing out this danger since last year in its statements and reports to the Bundestag Budget Committee. Additional billions alone would not solve the structural problems of the infrastructure, explained the financial auditors. It is crucial that the money is actually used for additional investments. Otherwise, the special fund threatens to become a kind of subsidiary budget that creates political leeway without actually solving the economic problems.

Conclusion: Accounting tricks instead of real innovation

The conclusion of economists and the Court of Auditors is consistent: the special fund was decided under exceptional circumstances on the grounds that Germany urgently needs to invest more.

If it now turns out that a large part of the funds are not used additionally, the whole thing seems like a big accounting sleight of hand. The mountain of debt is growing – but the bridge remains broken.