Europe
German economic recovery delayed until 2026, new forecasts show
Germany’s leading institutes expect a slight recovery in the German economy in 2026 at the earliest, but even this will come at a heavy price.
Signs of hope for the German economy from a few months ago have already vanished. Leading economic research institutes lowered their economic forecasts for 2025 on Thursday.
According to an analysis in Handelsblatt, the Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW) now predicts that gross domestic product (GDP) will grow by only 0.1%.
The Essen-based Leibniz Institute for Economic Research (RWI) forecasts 0.2% growth, while the Ifo Institute also predicts 0.2% growth. The Halle Institute for Economic Research’s (IWH) growth forecast is also 0.2%.
At the beginning of the summer, they were forecasting average growth of around 0.3% for 2025.
The main reason for the downward revision is that the government’s stimulus measures have been less effective than previously predicted, and the electricity tax was reduced only for industry.
The institutes do not expect another recession—a contraction of economic output for two consecutive quarters—within this year.
Following a 0.3% fall in GDP in the second quarter, minimal growth is expected from the third quarter onwards.
However, according to the forecasts, there will be no stronger momentum after that.
This is not good news for the federal government. Chancellor Friedrich Merz had promised an “economic turning point” and made a return to growth his most important goal.
Germany’s GDP is currently at a level similar to that of 2019, before the coronavirus pandemic and the war in Ukraine.
“The driving forces for a self-sustaining recovery are still weak,” says IfW chief economist Stefan Kooths.
The low probability of this situation changing this year is likely to intensify debates within the federal government about economic policy reforms.
Although the institutes expect more growth in the years after 2025, a closer look at five points in the forecasts shows that this is no reason for enthusiasm.
1. The hope for growth: Revival will only come in 2026
Germany may experience a revival again starting next year.
The IfW expects growth of 1.3% in 2026. The institute’s initial forecast for 2027 is 1.2%.
The RWI forecasts 1.1% growth in 2026 and 1.4% in 2027.
The Ifo Institute expects 1.3% growth next year and 1.6% the year after.
The IWH, however, offers a much more pessimistic forecast, predicting 0.8% growth for 2026 and 0.6% for 2027.
The labor market will be the biggest beneficiary of this. Although the unemployment rate is still at 6.3% this year, it is projected to fall to 5.8% by 2027.
Compared to the forecasts made at the beginning of the summer, this still represents a setback. At that time, the institutes were expecting average growth of around 1.5% for next year.
2. Growth is financed by the state
In addition, next year’s revival will not only be smaller but will also come at a high price.
The federal government is artificially stimulating growth by significantly increasing debt in infrastructure and defense, and through energy price subsidies, super-depreciation for companies, and tax cuts for the restaurant sector and senior citizens.
The IfW estimates that the government will pump an additional 42 billion euros into the economy in this way by 2026. The forecast for 2027 is 22 billion euros.
According to the IfW’s calculations, the government’s expansionary fiscal policy alone accounts for 0.6 percentage points of the expected growth next year. In 2027, this figure will be 0.3 percentage points.
The RWI’s figures are similar: the institute estimates that government stimulus will boost growth by about 0.5 percentage points in both years.
The problem is that increased government spending does not automatically increase the economy’s growth potential. The numerous contracts the government will award may not lead to an expansion of production capacity but could instead cause prices to rise.
Germany is particularly exposed to this situation because the supply of additional labor is shrinking due to demographic change, and bureaucratic burdens and insufficient digitalization make capacity expansion unattractive.
“In the long run, state investments cannot replace private sector activity,” says RWI Chief Economist Torsten Schmidt.
This also overshadows the joy over the falling unemployment rate: new jobs are mostly being created in the government-related service sector, which is significantly less productive than German industry, where job losses continue.
At the same time, government spending is leading to significantly higher borrowing: according to the RWI, the general public deficit ratio—the ratio of the public sector’s annual new debt to economic output—will rise from 2% this year to 3.6% by 2027.
There is another special effect: in 2026, the number of working days will increase significantly, for example, because public holidays will more frequently fall on weekends. This effect accounts for another 0.3 percentage points of the projected growth in 2026.
“Without these effects, the remaining recovery would be extremely weak, so one cannot speak of a self-sustaining upswing,” write the IfW experts.
When these two effects are not taken into account, only 0.4% GDP growth remains as the “real recovery” in 2026.
The adjusted growth for 2027 is 0.8%. According to the RWI’s assumptions, the adjusted GDP change is only 0.3%. In 2027, this rate will be 0.8%.
The state-led recovery is also confirmed by private sector figures. According to the RWI, private sector investment in equipment will decrease by 2.3% in 2025 and will show only a moderate recovery of 2% and 1.7%, respectively, in the following years, despite improved depreciation conditions.
In contrast, government investment in equipment will increase by about 11% to 22% during the same period. Private consumption will not increase by even 1% next year and the year after, partly due to a slowdown in wage growth.
3. Brakes on growth: Underutilization of capacity
Apart from the record level of state orders, the economic environment remains complex.
There are several developments that hinder a “real revival” and cause German companies to produce far less than they currently could. According to Handelsblatt, the underutilization of capacity is among them.
One reason for this is the tariff agreement for exports to the US. The uncertainty surrounding this and the 15% tariffs are negatively affecting Germany’s exports, one of its most important activities.
According to IfW calculations, US tariffs will reduce economic output by 0.3% in 2025 and 2026, which is equivalent to 13 billion euros.
Another risk is the tension in international financial markets. Risk premiums on government bonds have increased significantly in recent days.
4. Industrial capacity is shrinking
On the other hand, an improvement in external conditions alone will not be enough for Germany to experience a real revival again.
The reason for this is that, parallel to the underutilization of the German economy’s capacity, the structure of the economy is also changing.
Production capacities are not only being underutilized but are apparently being permanently reduced. This means that even if the German economy returns to normal capacity utilization, higher growth rates may no longer be possible.
This is particularly true for industry. The value added of industry is currently more than 4% below the 2019 level. The IfW writes, “In this context, the extremely low capacity utilization may indicate that there is less room for economic recovery and instead points to a further reduction in production capacity.”
According to the RWI, another piece of evidence for this is that although companies’ business expectations for the next six months have recovered slightly, they still assess their situation as poor.
According to the economists, companies are pinning their hopes more on government programs than on an improvement in local conditions.
5. Reforms to slow down structural change
According to the institutes, “structural reforms” that allow for capacity development are necessary to stop this trend.
If this happens, the numerous government contracts resulting from new debt could also ensure that this leads to sustainable growth.
The economists primarily recommend reforms for the social security systems and energy policy. RWI expert Schmidt says, “The government’s spending programs can stabilize the economy in the short term, but they do not solve the fundamental competitiveness problems of the German economy.”
In social policy, it is argued that systems should be designed to encourage more citizens to work in order to slow the decline of the working population for demographic reasons.
According to the institutes, the priority in the energy sector should be to lower energy prices in Germany and increase the security of supply to stop the migration of companies to countries with better energy resources.
Experts believe that structural regulations in the energy market are more important than energy price subsidies.
Europe
China’s critical mineral restrictions challenge EU defence expansion plans
The European Union’s plans to expand its defence capabilities are being hindered by China’s export controls and sales restrictions on critical raw materials.
In response, EU leaders are urging member states to accelerate efforts to diversify supply chains.
According to Nikkei Asia, the European Commission announced last week that it would propose new legislation requiring companies across the bloc to broaden their supplier base in an effort to address economic imbalances, although it did not explicitly name China.
The war in Ukraine and growing uncertainty over Washington’s security guarantees have pushed European governments to increase military spending and defence production.
At the same time, according to a report published in May by Joris Teer, a policy analyst at the European Union Institute for Security Studies (EUISS), China accounts for at least 70% of global mining or refining activity in 17 of the 34 materials classified as critical by the EU. Eight of those 34 materials are currently subject to Chinese export controls.
“China is undermining Europe’s rearmament efforts,” Teer wrote. “Simply by activating this tool, China has already increased its leverage and demonstrated both the capability and willingness to restrict supply whenever it chooses.”
The Aerospace, Security and Defence Industries Association of Europe also warned that geopolitical developments and intensifying global competition for critical raw materials are further underscoring the need to strengthen European supply chains.
The organisation represents more than 4,000 companies, including Britain’s BAE Systems, France’s Thales and Germany’s Rheinmetall.
European defence manufacturers are pursuing a range of strategies, including vertical integration, recycling, diversification and stockpiling.
Rheinmetall told Nikkei Asia that it has “no dependencies” and is “well prepared” regarding critical minerals.
A company spokesperson said: “Rheinmetall has stockpiled key raw materials sufficient for several years. We have also implemented IT systems that allow us to centrally monitor and precisely manage raw material consumption across the entire group.”
Analysts, however, caution that stockpiling alone will not be sufficient. Maria Shagina, a researcher at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, said: “Stockpiling serves as an important buffer against sudden disruptions, but on its own it is unlikely to mitigate structural damage over the long term.”
Shagina added that replacing the volume and diversity of critical minerals controlled by Beijing with alternative sources would take years.
In 2024, the EU enacted the European Critical Raw Materials Act, aimed at rebuilding domestic supply chains for such minerals.
The legislation sets 2030 targets for domestic extraction, processing and recycling while limiting dependence on any single third-country supplier to 65%.
A €3 billion ($3.5 billion) fund was established last year to accelerate strategic projects.
Nevertheless, the European Court of Auditors has noted that the 2030 targets are not legally binding and that the EU remains far from achieving them.
Industry groups argue that policy inconsistencies could further slow progress.
The Cobalt Institute, which represents a sector vital to jet engines, advanced batteries and defence alloys, warned that proposed EU chemicals regulations risk undermining the industry.
“Europe has one foot in and one foot out,” said Michael Blakeney, head of government and public affairs at the London-based institute. “It says the right things, but its actions are inconsistent.”
Europe’s efforts are unfolding alongside a more aggressive US strategy to secure critical mineral supply chains.
Shagina said:
“The US is investing more capital to secure and expand capacity, taking greater financial risks and, in some cases, acquiring equity stakes. Europe, by contrast, is generally more cautious, which places it at a relative disadvantage in the competition for critical minerals.”
In April, the EU signed an agreement with the United States to coordinate supplies of critical minerals. Although some member states initially resisted over concerns that the deal could weaken the bloc’s strategic autonomy, they authorised the Commission in early June to join the US-led “Pax Silica” initiative, which coordinates investment and export-control policies.
Teer urged Europe to use ongoing US-EU-Japan negotiations as the nucleus of a broader coalition aimed at making critical mineral production outside China financially viable through state support, minimum-price mechanisms and supply rules.
“Particularly important are countries that either produce raw materials or possess significant mineral deposits, such as Malaysia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Brazil and Indonesia, as well as countries like India with large pools of skilled labour,” he said.
Teer also argued that the EU should activate its Anti-Coercion Instrument, which allows the bloc to impose tariffs and restrictions in response to economic pressure on countries outside the union, in order to deter China from introducing further restrictions.
A European Commission spokesperson said the bloc had “long been aware of the risks associated with the EU’s dependence on critical raw materials.”
“The objective is clear: to anticipate disruptions early and reduce the EU’s vulnerabilities while strengthening our industrial and defence capacities,” the spokesperson said.
Europe
Four European countries move to make citizenship harder to obtain
European countries are increasingly tightening their citizenship rules. Most recently, the Norwegian government has drafted legislation that would raise the minimum residency requirement for citizenship from three years to seven.
The proposed amendments to the citizenship law were presented by the Ministry of Labour and Social Inclusion.
Under the draft legislation, stateless individuals born in Norway, as well as those who arrived in the country as children, would be required to reside in Norway for at least five years before becoming eligible for citizenship.
The government also plans to increase residency requirements for foreign nationals who are married to or cohabiting with Norwegian citizens.
Language requirements are set to become more demanding as well. The proposal would raise the required level of spoken Norwegian proficiency from A2 to B1. The new rules would apply to applicants aged between 18 and 67.
Commenting on the changes, Minister of Labour and Social Inclusion Kjersti Stenseng said: “Obtaining and holding Norwegian citizenship should be a privilege.”
The government argues that simplifying administrative procedures while simultaneously tightening eligibility criteria will help reduce the country’s large backlog of pending applications and shorten processing times.
Norway is the latest European country to announce revisions to its citizenship rules.
In Finland, the minimum residency requirement for citizenship was increased from five years to eight years on October 1, 2024.
The country also plans to introduce a mandatory citizenship test for applicants aged between 18 and 64 from the beginning of 2027.
Finnish Interior Minister Mari Rantanen said: “The introduction of a citizenship test is the final component of a comprehensive reform aimed at making citizenship requirements more stringent.”
Sweden has also approved a similar reform. Beginning in June 2026, the standard residency requirement for citizenship will increase from five years to eight years. Authorities are also introducing a financial self-sufficiency requirement for applicants and expanding the scope of security screenings.
Explaining the rationale behind the changes, Migration Minister Johan Forssell said: “It was possible to become a citizen after living in the country for five years without knowing a single word of Swedish, learning anything about Swedish society, or even having one’s own source of income.”
The most far-reaching changes have been implemented in Portugal. Portuguese President Antonio Jose Seguro has signed legislation raising the minimum residency requirement for citizenship from five years to 10 years.
For citizens of the European Union and the Community of Portuguese Language Countries, the requirement has been set at seven years.
The residency period will now be calculated from the date a residence permit is granted rather than from the date a citizenship application is submitted. The new rules will also affect the children of immigrants.
Previously, children could obtain citizenship one year after birth if their parents held residence permits. Under the new rules, at least one parent must have legally resided in the country for a minimum of five years.
The law also introduces a mandatory examination covering Portuguese history, culture, values and social structures.
Migration policies are tightening across the European Union as well. On June 17, the European Parliament approved legislation allowing irregular migrants whose asylum applications have been rejected but who cannot be returned to their countries of origin to be deported to third countries.
The new EU rules permit the establishment of migrant detention centres outside the bloc’s borders. African countries are reportedly among the options being discussed for such facilities.
Europe
SpaceX warns EU satellite spectrum plan could disrupt connectivity in Ukraine
SpaceX has sharply criticised a European Union plan to restrict access to satellite spectrum, arguing that the proposal risks degrading connectivity in Ukraine and disrupting emergency communications services.
In a document shared with European officials and reviewed by the Financial Times, SpaceX warned:
“This proposal significantly increases the likelihood that Europeans will be deprived of direct-to-device satellite services, or that new European operations will create global interference issues, including for emergency services such as those operating in Ukraine.”
In a proposal unveiled in May, the EU recommended reserving part of the spectrum band used for direct satellite-to-smartphone connectivity for European operators, thereby limiting the frequencies available to US and Chinese providers.
The 2 GHz frequency band in question is currently used by two US companies, Viasat and EchoStar.
SpaceX argued that the EU plan prioritises “an operator’s country of establishment over economic, technical and regulatory realities.”
When the proposal was announced, EU technology chief Henna Virkkunen defended the move, saying the bloc wanted to “increase European capacity in this sector.” She added that other parts of the frequency band would remain open to international operators, arguing that prioritising European providers was justified.
Other participants involved in discussions over the proposal said some EU officials were specifically seeking to limit Elon Musk’s Starlink satellite network.
Europe’s initiative follows a warning from Washington. In March, the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) cautioned that it could take retaliatory measures if the EU chose to favour European satellite operators over alternatives such as Starlink.
At the time, FCC Chairman Brendan Carr told the Financial Times: “Some of the discussions in Europe regarding satellite sovereignty concern us. If Europe decides to move down that path, then, as you know, we will have to consider reciprocal measures.”
The European Commission’s proposal has not yet entered formal negotiations with EU member states or the European Parliament.
A source close to SpaceX said the company remained hopeful of influencing the outcome of the process, given concerns raised by both businesses and several European governments.
-
Europe2 weeks agoAfD says Ukraine should compensate Germany over Nord Stream sabotage
-
Asia2 weeks agoPentagon adds Alibaba, Baidu and BYD to list of firms with alleged Chinese military ties
-
Opinion1 week agoA voice rising from New Delhi: BRICS’s manifesto for a new world order
-
Europe2 weeks agoToyota and JLR warn EU ‘Made in Europe’ rules could threaten jobs and investment
-
America2 weeks agoWorld Cup referee from Somalia denied entry to US as immigration scrutiny intensifies
-
Middle East1 week agoMine clearing in Strait of Hormuz could delay shipping traffic for up to 50 days
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoTürkiye calls for Azerbaijan-Armenia peace treaty, highlights normalization steps with Yerevan
-
America7 days agoData leak exposes Peter Thiel’s secret ‘Dialog’ network of politicians, regulators, and tech elites
