In July, the Government mandated the Independent Authority for Fiscal Responsibility (Airef) to produce a new report on the sustainability of the pension system and have it ready by June 2026, just over a year after the one already published by the organization in March, which, while granting a pass, warned that the health of the accounts was worsening. Although with the calendar in hand, the Airef was not due to carry out this review again until three years later, the Government requested this new diagnosis under pressure from Brussels: the European Commission was irritated that the review took into account fiscal transfers to Social Security. Faced with this scenario, the Airef expressed its opposition to this new assignment because it does not see the point in repeating the exam, as President Cristina Herrero said on Tuesday in the Toledo Pact Commission in Congress. Furthermore, it sees in this request a “private” use of its resources by the central government and thus a “diminution” of its independence. On Tuesday itself, sources from the organization went further: they confirmed that Airef is paralyzing this new examination because it believes that the government’s request does not comply with the law that regulates its functions.
Herrero told Congress on Tuesday that the Airef’s control capacity has already been “diminished” by the conditions posed by the Government at the first examination. “This decrease”, added Herrero, “is aggravated by the reform of the royal decree a few months ago, which provides for an additional relationship with a duration of one year compared to what we have done”. As Herrero highlighted and the decree underlines, the justification crystallized in Official State Gazette is that the exam is repeated “to take into account the great shock in the definitive macroeconomic data of recent years (given the upward revision of GDP in 2022 and 2023) and have sufficient data to evaluate economic reforms.” Sources close to the negotiation of this decree maintain that the main reason, however, was pressure from Brussels.
“The thesis is that we can include GDP growth. For this reason, forgive me, the Airef is not necessary, the government itself or the (European Commission) can do it. I don’t think it will improve because we include an extra year,” Herrero added, before underlining: “We find it difficult to place this position in the context of a fiscal supervisor who exercises his evaluation and supervision functions on all public administrations.” In this Executive order, a “private use” of Airef’s resources is appreciated and it is suggested that this way of acting risks transforming the organization into a “state agency”.
Wrong way, according to Airef
But, beyond this rejection of the suitability of the analysis, Herrero also discusses the formula chosen by the Government. The decree provides, in fact, an “evaluation report on measures to strengthen the revenue of the public pension system”. According to the organic law that regulates the functioning of Airef, this body can issue three types of documents: reports, opinions and studies. “It cannot be a complaint,” Herrero said, “because our organic law says that reports are nothing other than those established by law.” He said the State Attorney’s Office, who they consulted on the matter, supports this interpretation. The organization refuses to provide EL PAÍS with the Lawyer’s response. “Since it is not binding,” Herrero insisted on the opinion of the State Attorney’s Office, “remember that the relationships must be what the organic law says, neither more nor less.”
In this scenario, Airef interprets that the assignment is poorly planned and that it should be a study, which the institution would carry out within the time allowed by its available resources (given the many other requests and obligations compared to other administrations, including regional and local ones) and with the methodology chosen by the institution. For this reason, the institution led by Cristina Herrero – whose mandate expires in March 2026 – does not guarantee that this new exam will be ready within the required period (June 2026), emphasizes that its preparation has not begun and considers it paralyzed. In short, he believes that until it comes to requiring a study rather than a report, the commission will have a fundamental problem.
Questioned on this matter by this newspaper, the Ministry of Social Security defends the “independence” of Airef and believes that the aforementioned report from the State Prosecutor’s Office confirms that it is “guaranteed”. “The Public Prosecutor’s Office also concludes that this new report, requested by the Government from the Airef and foreseen in the final clause – the automatic increase in income in the event of an increase in pension expenditure consolidated in the latest reform – must be considered within the scope of the studies of the Airef Law. This means that it is not optional”, adds the ministry chaired by Elma Saiz.
Scraping approved
The Government barely approved the previous revision of the pension system, of only one tenth of GDP. In March, Airef estimated net spending equal to 13.2% of GDP on average between 2022 and 2050, just a tenth below the threshold from which an adjustment should have been applied. This withdrawn approval was obtained after a controversial methodological change imposed by the Government in that examination, which involved transfers from the State to Social Security (funds that do not come from contributions) even if they were not originally foreseen. The Airef only counted the transfers it deemed legitimate (about three-tenths of the 1.3 points of GDP they represent), but the change was strongly criticized by this supervisory body, an anger that increased after learning of the new ordinance.
Beyond the dispute over this second exam, Herrero insisted on the message he has conveyed in each of his appearances on the pension system: that although the spending rules established by the Government are respected, the pressure is increasing (given the retirement of the populous generation of baby boomthe increase in the amount of benefits, the revaluation of pensions according to the CPI or the low birth rate, among other factors) and will increase by approximately 3.4 points of GDP until 2050 (up to 16.1%), which will require an increase in transfers of 2.4 points of GDP.
Furthermore, Herrero criticized the “methodological weaknesses” and “temporal inconsistency” that he observes in the current evaluation rules. And at the same time, he insisted on a message he has already launched on other occasions: “When they ask me if the pension system is sustainable, my answer is that it is as sustainable as spending on defense, healthcare or education. In fact, our point is that a rule on pension spending is not necessary.” The basic reflection is that an overall vision is considered more appropriate and that it is up to the political power to choose how much to dedicate to each point.
For its part, the Ministry of Social Security claims some of the positive aspects it appreciated in Herrero’s reflections. Among these, it stands out that “Airef recognizes the impact of measures such as incentives for delayed retirement, which went from around 5% in 2021 to over 11% in 2025” or the impact of the entry of migrants: “In 2025, Airef estimated an entry of 400,000 people, and now recognizes that this estimate is insufficient and could approach 600,000 people, similar to the previous year”.
In the Commission, several right-wing deputies insisted on the fact that increasing the amount dedicated to pensions takes resources away from other relevant items, while those on the left believe that the good performance of macroeconomic data guarantees the sustainability of the system.
