European finance ministers fell short of achieving any breakthroughs at their meeting in Luxembourg on Friday (12 April) as divisions persisted on whether to prolong the bloc’s multibillion pandemic recovery fund and how the European Investment Bank’s (EIB) lending criteria could be widened to include defence-related assets.
Belgian finance minister Vincent Van Peteghem told reporters following the meeting that there were “different views” among ministers about whether the EU’s €723.8 billion Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) should be extended, adding that “some member states… emphasised the one-off nature of the facility.”
Commission executive vice-president Valdis Dombrovskis, however, defended the “ground-breaking” nature of the fund, whose “design and flexibility have helped us to tackle new challenges, such as high inflation [and] energy security issues.”
“The RRF re-assured financial markets on the EU’s resolve to tackle the Covid-19 challenges, ensured a rapid flow of funds to member states in a time of great difficulty, played a key rule in preserving public investments and sustained a solid recovery, returning the EU economy to pre-pandemic levels sooner than expected,” Dombrovskis said.
Meanwhile, Van Peteghem noted that “on specific issues, further discussion is needed” on how the EIB could potentially step up support for Europe’s security and defence industry.
Advertisement
However, he said there was still “large support amongst ministers to move forward” with an “action plan” — the outline of which was presented to ministers on Friday by EIB president Nadia Calviño.
Before the meeting, Calviño informed reporters that her plan would include the results of a two-month investigation into the “definition” of so-called dual-use technologies, as called for by EU finance ministers in February.
The EIB’s current mandate limits the range of permissible defence-related investments to dual-use items that should be used mostly for civilian and military purposes.
Most of the technology’s expected future revenue must also derive from its civilian use.
The bank is explicitly prohibited from investing directly in weapons, ammunition, and “core” military infrastructure.
Advertisement
Panaceas for Europe’s investment and security needs?
The RRF and the EIB have been objects of growing attention by European policymakers in recent months.
The RRF is viewed by many as a source of much-needed financing for member states still reeling from the twin shocks of the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent energy crisis.
However, several of the so-called ‘frugal’ EU countries — including Germany, the bloc’s largest economy — are resistant to extending the facility beyond its scheduled expiry in 2026.
Meanwhile, the EIB — the world’s largest multilateral lender by assets — is seen by many member states as a potential tool to boost European defence expenditure, as Russia’s war in Ukraine continues to rage into its third year and member states assess ways to step up their defence capacity.
Last month, the European Council “invited” the EIB “to adapt its policy for lending to the defence industry and its current definition of dual-use goods, while safeguarding its financing capacity.”
Advertisement
In February the European Parliament called on the bank to “enhance its support… to the European defence industry,” urging it to overhaul its investment eligibility criteria “so that ammunition and military equipment that go beyond dual-use application are no longer excluded from EIB financing.”
However, several stakeholders have expressed deep concern about the EIB’s possible move into defence-related spending, citing the possibility of the bank losing its high ESG and triple-A credit ratings.
‘No discussion of scandal’
Van Peteghem, whose country currently holds the rotating presidency of the Council of the EU, told reporters that there had been “no discussion” among ministers about the recent scandals involving RRF financing.
Last week, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) announced that 22 individuals had been arrested in Italy, Austria, Romania and Slovakia for embezzling €600 million in RRF funds.
In an interview with Euractiv on Tuesday (9 April), European Court of Auditors president Tony Murphy said that the facility’s scheduled expiry by the end of 2026 is “contributing to the risk” of the funds’ misappropriation by amplifying “pressure on member states to spend this money quickly.”
Advertisement
“That in itself inherently raises the risk of people being opportunistic and taking advantage of shortcuts or whatever might be there,” he said.
Murphy stressed that a lack of central oversight was “amplifying” the likelihood of the funds’ misuse.
His comments came on the same day that European Commissioner for Economy Paolo Gentiloni called for the RRF to be used as a “blueprint” for future EU funding programmes — arguing that the bloc would “benefit hugely from a permanent, safe asset commensurate with the size of its economy, and this will be a big issue to discuss for the next Commission.”
Agreed at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic in December 2020, the RRF comprises €385.8 billion worth of loans and €338 billion in grants, financed through debt jointly underwritten by EU member states.
The funds, the flagship component of the bloc’s NextGenerationEU (NextGenEU) initiative, are intended to boost Europe’s post-pandemic recovery by financing green, digital, and other critical investments in exchange for targeted reforms.
Advertisement
[Edited by Anna Brunetti/Rajnish Singh]
Read more with Euractiv
Is Europe at a crossroad?
One year on from French president Emmanuel Macron’s infamous warning, is the EU still overly — and perhaps dangerously — subservient to the US?
Subscribe now to our newsletter EU Elections Decoded
AgSouth Farm Credit and AgGeorgia Farm Credit are set to host a series of AGAware® Farm Finance Training workshops across Georgia in 2026, offering farmers comprehensive education in business and financial management, allowing them to better navigate the modern agricultural economy.
AgSouth Farm Credit and AgGeorgia Farm Credit announces upcoming 2026 AGAware® Farm Finance Training workshops in Georgia designed to equip farmers with essential business and financial management skills needed to succeed in today’s agricultural economy.
The training is open to anyone who wishes to develop a better understanding of how to run a successful farming operation of any type or size.
The AGAware® Workshops introduce farmers to a variety of financial related topics critical to running an operation. These topics include: balance sheets, income statements, family finance & family budgeting, risk management, accrual income, applying for financing, preparing a business plan, technology & record keeping, FSA/SBA and other Programs. AGAware® is also certified for FSA Direct Borrower Training Credits in Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina.
Workshops will be held at the following Georgia locations:
Advertisement
Friday, June 12 ǀ Swainsboro, GA
Southeastern Technical College
REGISTER: AgSouthFC.com/AGAware
Thursday, June 25 ǀ Athens, GA
Athens Clarke County Extension Office
REGISTER: AgGeorgia.com/AGAware
All classes are held from 9:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m., and a free lunch will be provided.
Advertisement
AgSouth Farm Credit created the national award-winning AGAware® program in 2011 to help ensure that future farmers will be prepared and strong financially so they may continue doing what it is they love. It’s been Farm Credit’s mission for more than one hundred years to serve farmers and rural America. Since the AGAware® program was established in 2011, more than 1,000 farmers in Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina have taken the classes and graduated from the program.
To see other 2026 AGAware workshop opportunities in Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina go to AgGeorgia.com and AgSouthFC.com.
For more information about AGAware, contact Heather Brannen at [email protected] or Jessica Bassett at [email protected]
When uncertainty peaks, activity drops. But that means opportunity. (Source: Supplied/Getty)
With rising interest rates, a war in the Middle East and high fuel prices, a lot of property investors are likely feeling a little cautious about the current environment. For many buyers, the instinct to wait for certainty feels like the responsible thing to do.
Wait until interest rates stabilise, the news headlines improve or until the market feels safer. But in property, certainty often comes at a cost.
Some of the most significant buying opportunities emerge during periods of uncertainty, when headlines are negative, confidence is low, and most buyers are sitting on the sidelines. This pattern has a name. I call it the V effect.
RELATED
The V effect captures what typically happens during periods of disruption, whether economic shocks, natural disasters or geopolitical events. Markets experience a sharp drop in activity and sentiment, followed by a recovery that can be just as swift. At the bottom of that V is where opportunity tends to be the highest.
Advertisement
During this phase, competition thins out, vendors become more flexible, and some withdraw their listings entirely. Properties take longer to sell. The market slows, but it does not stop.
The length of any downturn depends on the nature of the disruption. Localised events such as flooding or cyclones may compress activity for two to four months while recovery takes place. Broader economic or geopolitical shocks can extend that window, but sentiment can also rebound quickly once confidence returns. What remains consistent is the pattern itself.
When uncertainty peaks, activity drops. When certainty returns, buyers flood back in. And this is where many buyers misread the cycle. By waiting for conditions to feel safer, they are effectively waiting until the market has already begun recovering, moving up the right-hand side of the V. Competition intensifies, prices firm up, and your ability to negotiate diminishes. The moment that feels the safest to buy is often the most expensive one.
Buyers who act during uncertainty position themselves differently. They face less competition, have far greater negotiating power and can secure properties on better terms. When the market recovers, as it has consistently done throughout history, those buyers benefit from the uplift that follows.
Advertisement
It is not uncommon to see a 10 to 20 per cent difference in values based on timing alone. Buyers who entered during the period of uncertainty often find themselves well ahead within a relatively short period. Those who wait for clarity frequently end up paying a premium for the privilege.
Buyers who wait for certainty tend to buy on the way up. (Source: Getty) ·Getty Images
Acting during uncertain conditions is not the same as buying without discipline. Uncertainty is largely sentiment-driven, based on how people feel about the market at a given moment. Risk relates to fundamentals like location quality, supply and demand, infrastructure investment and long-term population and employment drivers.
RELATED: Buyers snap up homes for $200,000 under asking price as ‘fear and mystery’ hang over property market
Experienced buyers focus on fundamentals and use uncertainty as a tool rather than a deterrent. They do not attempt to call the exact bottom of the market. Instead, they recognise when conditions have shifted in their favour and move decisively when the numbers support the decision.
Market psychology plays a significant role in how the V effect unfolds. When uncertainty is at its peak, fear tends to dominate. Buyers hesitate, delay decisions and second-guess their position. Once confidence returns, that hesitation quickly converts into urgency, and in some cases, FOMO.
Advertisement
It is this emotional shift that drives the speed of the recovery phase. By the time the average buyer feels comfortable re-entering the market, the opportunity has often already passed. Timing based on sentiment is consistently unreliable. The moments that feel the most uncomfortable are frequently the ones that offer the best value.
For first-home buyers in particular, this dynamic is even more important. Rather than waiting for ideal conditions, the more effective approach is preparation. Understanding your borrowing capacity, having finance in order and being clear on your criteria allows you to act when conditions move in your favour. In uncertain markets, vendors are more open to price adjustments. Contracts become more negotiable. Days on market extend. These are conditions that simply do not exist when competition is intense and confidence is high. Those windows do not stay open indefinitely.
Property is a long-term asset class. Short-term uncertainty is a feature of the cycle, not a reason to stay away from it. The V effect is a reminder that markets move quickly in both directions.
Buyers who wait for certainty tend to buy on the way up. Those who act during uncertainty give themselves the chance to enter at a better price, and in property, getting ahead early is what allows you to grow equity and expand your portfolio a lot faster.
Abdullah Nouh is the founder of Mecca Property Group and a Melbourne-based buyers’ advocate specialising in long-term, fundamentals-driven property strategy. He works with families and investors to build sustainable wealth through strategic residential and commercial acquisitions. He holds a Master’s in Property from the University of Technology Sydney.
LEXINGTON, Ky. — As the school district works to rectify potentially decades of inaccurate accounting, two finance employees with Fayette County Public Schools are on paid leave. At the same time, two external reviews continue for Kentucky’s second-largest school district.
What You Need To Know
Two Fayette County Public Schools finance employees are on paid administrative leave
District leaders say accounting inaccuracies and improper practices may date back to 2008
Two outside reviews are underway, including one by the auditor of public accounts
The district may seek a short-term loan to cover expenses until property tax revenue is collected
FCPS Superintendent Demetrus Liggins said he’s been made aware of troubling and deeply concerning information.
“I’ve spoken with several of our district’s financial advisor and our external audit firm and have conducted our that’s conducted our routine audit. and those conversations have also revealed issues that I was unaware of,” Liggins said.
One review is from accounting firm Weaver and Tidwell, hired by the district, and another, which Liggins said he requested, is being conducted by the auditor of public accounts.
While those reviews are ongoing, and based on preliminary reporting, Liggins said he’s been informed of both inaccuracies and improper accounting practices that date back to 2008.
Advertisement
Last month, the district hired Kyna Koch, a former associate commissioner of finance for the Kentucky Department of Education, as the interim chief financial officer.
Since taking on the task, she said she doesn’t have confidence in the numbers she’s been asked to review.
“Federal and state requirements may not have been followed, and our accounting procedures may not have been aligned with acceptable practices,” Koch said.
Koch said inaccuracies were found in revenue collection, record-keeping, invoicing, and that spending guidelines may not have been followed.
Now she’s helping set new measures, like additional reviews, to dig deeper and provide a clearer financial picture.
Advertisement
“It’s clear that these practices are sometimes nuanced and not easily identified through routine financial reports that are provided to the superintendent and the board. Some of these things would not have been readily apparent based on the information typically generated,” Koch said.
Koch is also recommending that the district get a short-term loan to cover expenditures until next fall’s property taxes are collected.
Though the district is not releasing names at this time, Liggins did comment on the status of some finance administrators.
“We currently have three administrators in our financial and accounting office. Two are on paid administrative leave, and one is on medical leave,” Koch said.
Those on paid administrative leave are pending an investigation.
Advertisement
Liggins said while they are still awaiting finalized reports from those outside audits, they’re aiming for accuracy and transparency in their next moves.
“As we continue this work, I’m committed to following the facts wherever they may lead, and whatever they may uncover, we’re only after the truth,” Liggins said.
Liggins was asked on Thursday whether property taxes would increase for the 2026-27 school year. He said they are not currently planning to ask the board to raise property taxes any more than they typically have in years past.
On Monday, Koch will present her latest findings to the board at its regularly scheduled finance meeting.
Koch also said the district plans to have a loan proposal ready as soon as next month.
