Walloon Budget Reignites ‘War of the Two Rights’ in Belgium
The Walloon government presented its 2027 budget on Monday, a three-year plan aiming to return the region to balance by 2029. But the fiscal exercise has quickly become a political flashpoint, reigniting a fierce rivalry between MR leader Georges-Louis Bouchez and N-VA leader Bart De Wever — a contest one veteran analyst now calls Belgium’s “war of the two rights.”
The budget was unveiled by Walloon Minister-President Adrien Dolimont, whose MR–Les Engagés coalition framed it as a turning point. It drew unusually intense attention in Flanders and within the federal “Arizona” coalition, where a separate budget negotiation remains deadlocked.
A Budget Framed Around Purchasing Power
According to RTBF, the Walloon executive laid out a three-year trajectory targeting budget balance by 2029. The budget projects deficits on the books of 1.351 billion euros in 2027 and 855 million euros in 2028, before a small surplus of 15 million euros in 2029.
Among the flagship measures is a “job bonus” of up to 500 euros a year for low earners (those up to 5,000 euros gross per month), backed by 205 million euros and starting in 2028. The government also plans an inheritance-tax reform granting a 75,000-euro allowance on direct-line inheritances from January 2028 — which officials say would exempt 62 percent of such estates, compared with fewer than 25 percent today — while cutting the maximum inheritance rate from 80 percent to 50 percent.
Other measures include 3.5 billion euros over seven years for infrastructure such as roads, bridges and waterways; a cut to the annual circulation tax from April 2027 paired with a road vignette from May 2027 (90 euros for electric vehicles, 100 euros for Euro 4 and above, 125 euros for Euro 0–3), expected to raise 327 million euros; and 750 million euros for housing renovation, climate adaptation and flood prevention. Family allowances are preserved and indexed.
To offset the spending, the government is cutting the indexation of several schemes by 2 percent and applying index jumps to areas such as nursing homes and employment aid, trimming funding for Wallonie Entreprendre and Wallonie Santé, and reducing airport subsidies by 20 million euros from 2028.
Dolimont struck a triumphant note, saying he was “proud of the result obtained by the government,” which he said offered “a new breath, a new dynamic, a clear vision of society.”
A Flemish Reality Check
In Flanders, where the budget led by N-VA’s Matthias Diependaele is set to reach balance as early as 2027 through savings that will hit households, the Walloon plan drew a skeptical reception. Flemish Arizona parties, the W16 newsletter’s Wouter Verschelden told RTBF, denounce the Walloon budget as insufficiently serious, likening it to the Brussels exercise.
“They say it’s similar to the Brussels exercise — not so bad, but still fairly serious,” Verschelden said. “And we’re in such a hard period in terms of pressure from financial markets, and once again they’re doing the same exercise. It’s not serious.”
That critique was echoed in a pointed RTBF column by Bertrand Henne, who argued the presentation was a masterclass in communication — one designed to “make people forget that this is about making savings and that someone will pay the bill.” Henne noted that the Plan Bureau reportedly sees a “high risk of an unsustainable debt” for Wallonia by the end of the decade, and that the budget deepens the deficit in the short term while pushing its toughest measures to 2029 — an election year.
The Political Subtext: Bouchez vs. De Wever
For analyst Alain Gerlache, the intense Flemish scrutiny of the Walloon budget is also a proxy for a deeper political battle. He argued the budget sits squarely within what Bouchez advocates for the federal level: the defense of purchasing power and savings across the public apparatus.
“There was the War of the Roses in England,” Gerlache said. “You could say that in Belgium, there is now the war of the two rights. Let’s hope it doesn’t last 30 years.”
The framing captures an unusual dynamic. Both the MR and N-VA occupy the political right, yet they are locked in a competition for dominance. The MR positions itself as the defender of purchasing power and a champion of “reform, not taxes,” while the N-VA pushes for a VAT increase and accuses the MR of obstruction. In a social-media statement reported by RTBF, Bouchez insisted the VAT in the budget was being used to fill the deficit rather than to lower labor costs — and argued the Walloon and Brussels budgets contain more structural reform than the Flemish one, which he said had “just decided to tax the middle class again.”
A Federal Deadlock That Mirrors 2025
The regional fight lands against the backdrop of a federal impasse. Prime Minister De Wever postponed the deadline for the federal budget to late October or early November, and for a second consecutive year did not deliver his traditional State of the Union speech at the parliamentary re-opening.
The central sticking point is a proposed VAT increase — capable of raising roughly 2 billion euros of the approximately 10 billion euros the government must find. The MR categorically opposes it, while Vooruit is also cool on the idea; CD&V and Les Engagés lean toward De Wever. The pressure is acute: interest charges on Belgian debt now total 16.7 billion euros a year, more than the defense budget.
As RTBF reported, CD&V president Sammy Mahdi accused the MR of trying to pre-emptively veto subjects before negotiations even begin. “The MR is trying to obtain in advance a joker on what it wants to discuss or not at the negotiating table. That’s not serious — no party has one,” Mahdi said.
Yet RTBF political editor Rachel Crivellaro suggested the MR is also a convenient scapegoat, noting that De Wever’s proposals contain many other revenue options unpalatable to his partners — and that Vooruit itself is blocking on health and social security, a budget of 120 to 140 billion euros.
Analysts are blunt about the incentives. As RTBF chronicler Bertrand Henne wrote, Bouchez has “everything to gain politically” from opposing the VAT rise — standing alone against everyone, appearing anti-tax, more right-wing than De Wever, and as a defender of purchasing power. Henne sketched two scenarios: De Wever is either deliberately raising the stakes to extract concessions, or he has underestimated Bouchez’s radicalism. “Between Waterloo and the Berezina, the path to compromise is becoming seriously narrow,” he wrote.
What to Watch
The immediate question is whether De Wever can break the federal deadlock before his new deadline. But the deeper one is whether the “war of the two rights” reshapes Belgium’s political landscape for years to come. Both leaders know a center-right government of this makeup may not reappear if new elections were held — a reality that, for now, keeps the rivals at the table even as they sharpen their blades.