‘Socially conscious, but dodges tough questions on equity and sustainability’ – Marie Briguglio, Associate professor of economics at the University of Malta
Q: How would you rate Budget 2026 out of 10, and why?
A: A budget with no taxes starts by losing half the marks as it does only half its job. So, I can rank it out of 5 (for the way money is spent). Here it does well on various fronts, including the cash for cars, incentives for innovation, and health expenditures, though it is somewhat fishy on other fronts (you guessed it), and limited on some fronts like volunteering and research. I am also quite uncomfortable with a narrative that makes people without children feel (and pay) like they are second-class citizens. So I’ll give it a 3 on 5.
Q: Which measure do you consider the most impactful?
A: The biggest impact occurs where money is spent on those who are most vulnerable. I am very glad to see mental health clinics, anything spent on health infrastructure and on prevention (e.g. gyms – though I would argue middle-aged people need more incentive than teens), on the elderly, particularly in terms of keeping them in their community (e.g. the carer subsidy), on victims of domestic violence, and legal reforms.
Q: What measure did you hope to see included?
A: I hoped to see the whole budget evaluated for its impact on wellbeing and life satisfaction – which is a key metric in Vision 2050. I hoped to see a whole budget that includes both carrots (expenditures) and sticks (disincentives). I also hoped to see a budget that considers the impact on all demographic groups, including single people (who, of course, only earn one salary without the benefit of sharing costs). In terms of concrete measures, I hoped to see more emphasis on the issue of time use. Satisfaction with time use is quite poor, and initiatives could have included flexible working arrangements, reducing commute time, promoting lifelong learning through training during work hours, and at least an evaluation of shorter work weeks and living wages. In terms of environmental issues, I did hope to see something more taxing on private car use, of course. Considering the media coverage on noise this year, I thought that there would be some responsiveness to this. I note the mentions of regeneration, agricultural land transfers, and so on, and can only hope that these are not Trojan horses for more development.
Q: What were you surprised to see missing?
A: Measures relating to the foreign population living in Malta. I find it very difficult to reconcile the huge emphasis on our lack of fertility while the reality out there is one of overpopulation given our current capacity. I would have liked an exposition of the positive and negative impacts of foreign influx of labour on rents, wages, the economy at large as well as quality of life, and some idea of the medium-term plan for this – including the integration of migrants and how to live with this new reality. There was a hint at reducing dependence, but not much else. Fertility incentives will only bear fruit, if at all, in the longer term, but in the meantime, the public sentiment is one of frustration and confusion.
Q: If you were finance minister, what would have been your top priority?
A: It would not have been fertility rates. I think I would have tackled head-on the issue of living with a large and foreign population in Malta, in the present day and the medium-term plans of this economic model. Even the growth sectors of the economy are population-dependent: the increase in tourism by almost 13 per cent is not without its consequences, as anyone living in areas like Sliema is well aware. It is probably also time to address unexplained wealth and tax avoidance by the very rich – something that the minister has hinted at. Likewise, it is high time we reduced the number of cars on the road (using parking fees, circulation taxes, etc…) to make way for other modes of transport. The minister has hinted at this too, but sadly it did not make the budget. I guess there is a reason I am not finance minister. Popularity would not be my strong point!
‘Delivers relief and resilience, but housing remains the missing link’ – Clint Azzopardi Flores, economist and former Labour MEP candidate
Q: How would you rate Budget 2026 out of 10, and why?
A: Eight out of 10, and here’s why. I’ve long advocated for a fiscal stimulus that supports families, not just to address Malta’s declining fertility rate, but to restore household resilience. Budget 2026 delivers this. It offers breathing space to those hit hardest by three years of abnormal inflation, thereby easing daily expenses for what they intend to plan on, inter alia, housing and education bills. Last year’s tax cuts were universal. This year’s tax cuts are more targeted and spread over three years to avoid fuelling inflation. Even though I don’t have children myself, I fully support the approach. It reflects a principled commitment to social equity and economic recovery. The finance minister exceeded expectations on this front.
Q: Which measure do you consider the most impactful?
A: Personal taxation tops the list. This was, by far, the most substantial proposal. However, equally important are the measures targeted at businesses, especially the €100 million budget to incentivise AI, IoT, cybersecurity, e-sports, blockchain, and robotics. I would have preferred a broader allocation of expenditure on this area, aligning more with the Draghi report, which could yield even stronger productivity gains over time – higher total factor productivity. The 175% deduction for research and innovation, accelerated depreciation on digital investments, and a new investment tax credit covering 60% of qualifying costs are also significant. Meanwhile, wage support and Micro Invest enhancements will ease operational burdens. These forward-looking measures align Malta with global innovation trends, strengthen value-adding industries, and equip both families and businesses for the next phase of economic transformation.
Q: What measure did you hope to see included?
A: Stronger ambition on social housing, affordable housing, and rent incentives. Budget 2026 could have sent clearer signals to stabilise the rental market – not just through subsidies, which could risk driving up rental prices – but through regulatory frameworks such as rental indexation and enhanced tax incentives or exemptions for longer leases. Housing is a structural issue, and targeted intervention for low- and middle-income families is certainly needed. One of the underlying problems is the positive correlation between economic growth and property prices, often driven by speculation. However, economic growth must be inclusive. That’s why I’ve called for increased access to social housing units, alongside affordable housing options, to curb speculative pressure, and to offer a better future for the younger generation, the vulnerable, single individuals, and those in need. Personal taxation remains the cornerstone of this budget. But it must be complemented by structural measures, such as accelerating the completion of social housing projects and expanding affordability schemes. Otherwise, we risk addressing income without providing options. A fairer housing strategy would not only support household resilience, but it could also reinforce the social contract between government and citizen.
Q: What were you surprised to see missing?
A: Well, I had genuinely hoped to see a national strategy on flexible and remote working arrangements (50/50 hybrid approach), aligned with the personal tax stimulus. This isn’t just about income support, but also about enabling people to adapt, grow, and participate more fully in the labour market. A well-designed framework would enhance productivity, support human capital development through greater time autonomy, and help families better balance work, education, and wellbeing. Such a strategy could have delivered long-term socio-economic benefits, by allowing households to plan their routines, reduce stress, and perhaps upskill before we even begin discussing a 32-hour work week. At its core, this is about time management and labour market resilience. Certainly, flexible work arrangements could help ease peak-hour traffic congestion and reduce transport-related emissions, which is still a major contributor to Malta’s carbon footprint. Teleworking and adaptive scheduling must complement personal tax reform. Indeed, next year the public debate may shift from income to flexibility. These two measures are mutually reinforcing, and essential to improving quality of life. The electorate is increasingly calling for more control over their time and not just money.
Q: If you were finance minister, what would have been your top priority?
A: Personal taxation remains my top priority. However, I would have gone a step further, opting for a balanced, integrated approach that addresses deeper structural challenges. This includes a dedicated budget, or at minimum earmarked funding, for an expedited national plan to tackle non-communicable diseases and the mental health nexus. Many of these are fuelled by stress from inflexible working hours, dietary habits shaped by instant deliveries, and the widespread availability of ultra-processed meals. Post-pandemic stress, excessive screen time, and reduced physical activity are compounding both mental and physical health decline. We’ve normalised a culture of instant gratification. Families are increasingly time-poor, losing interest in cooking, staying active, and connecting, often due to rigid work schedules. Initiatives like Fish Fridays and gym subsidies are welcome, but insufficient on their own. We should consider regulating the food promoted on delivery platforms, using behavioural and nudge economics. Ultra-processed meals could be taxed, with revenue ringfenced for preventive health. This must tie into a broader ESG strategy to reshape our daily habits and public health. It may sound draconian, but so did the smoking ban in restaurants. And it worked. Budget 2026 takes important steps with lower personal taxes for families with children, but without an integrated approach on affordable housing stock, healthier lifestyles, and labour flexibility, we might risk treating the symptoms and not the root causes. Still, I am up for it!
