If the traffic light coalition has its way, the debt brake anchored in the Basic Law will not apply during this legislative period.

At the same time, Red-Green-Yellow asserts that all requirements will be complied with from 2023 onwards.

That hardly fits together.

But the ruling parties hope that most citizens do not understand what they are doing with the supplementary budget approved by the cabinet on Monday - because the matter is so complex.

The debt rule itself is simple. The first sentence is: "Income and expenditure are to be balanced without income from loans." That is the guiding principle of the Basic Law. However, this sentence should not be interpreted strictly. It is sufficient if the borrowing does not exceed 0.35 percent of the gross domestic product. That would currently be around twelve billion euros. This is followed by an automatism, according to which it may be a little more in bad times and a little less in good times. Finally, in the event of natural disasters or exceptional emergencies, it is determined that one can take out more loans.

The pandemic is undoubtedly one such emergency.

But that doesn't mean the government can go into debt as it sees fit.

It has to be related to the occasion.

This follows from the structure of the constitutional norm.

Nevertheless, the coalition wants to rebook pandemic funds of 60 billion euros for their purposes.

Pandemic Loans For Climate Spending

Now you have to know that the money is not in an account with the Bundesbank.

Rather, it is about loan authorizations.

If these are not used by New Year's Eve, they will expire.

That is why they should move quickly to a secondary household.

This will run in future under the name “Fund for Climate and Transformation”.

This actually includes everything that the traffic light has set out to do.

The Union and the SPD did something similar last year. At that time, the FDP castigated these sleight of hand in the Bundestag as unconstitutional. "Only" corona funds were transferred to other years of emergency. But now the government wants to create a reserve for the time afterwards with pandemic loans. Therefore, it should no longer be decisive when the money is spent, but when the subsidiary budget receives the authorization. This is presented as a technical process, but it is crucial for the operation to work. Specifically, this means that the government can one day incur a total of 90 billion euros in debt through the fund, which would then be constitutionally irrelevant.

The current debt brake is strict because the previous one has failed.

The government and parliament wanted to achieve several goals with their reform in 2009: Firstly, the state should not enter into too many obligations so as not to overwhelm future generations - they must bear the burden of the aging society and the consequences of climate change.

Second, the government should be forced to be honest about its priorities.

Third, citizens should see what government services cost.

Hence the budgetary principles such as unity, annuality, completeness, truth and clarity.

Against the wording and the spirit of the debt brake

Finance Minister Christian Lindner (FDP) and his people in the ministry are well aware that their approach does not match the wording or the spirit of the debt rule. As rhetorical as they are otherwise, they quickly go into a tailspin when they explain what they are doing. None of the reasons are convincing. Corona prevented investments - but then the funds are still there. The pandemic delayed the planning of the projects - but they did not exist before the traffic lights. You shouldn't slow down your new debt too abruptly - first you plan with too much debt, then this fairy tale number should justify everything. It is based on the fragile economic situation - unlike in the past, the debt rule does not provide for active economic management.Tax revenues are still well below the forecasts before the pandemic - you could increase them, but you don't want that. The Federal Constitutional Court itself has pushed for more climate protection - the cabinet is no longer bothering to relate to Corona.

Now it becomes clear why the coalition has not presented a financial table.

She does not want to reveal that she needs the Corona emergency loans for her projects.

Lindner promised that the FDP would represent the bourgeois camp.

This promise did not last long.

One can assume that at least one opposition party will sue in Karlsruhe.

Will there be tax increases if the judges overturn the project?