Economy February 26, 2026

Majority of Europeans See New Defense and Infrastructure Spending as a Personal Financial Risk, ING Survey Finds

Across six countries, households more often expect inflation, tax rises or cuts to services than personal benefit from government spending

By Maya Rios
Majority of Europeans See New Defense and Infrastructure Spending as a Personal Financial Risk, ING Survey Finds

An ING Consumer Research survey of households in Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, Poland, Romania and Spain finds that nearly three quarters of respondents believe higher government expenditure on defense and infrastructure will harm their personal finances, mainly via inflation, higher taxes or cuts to existing programmes. Fewer than a third see any direct benefit, and greater financial literacy correlates with increased skepticism about economic stimulus effects.

Key Points

  • Nearly three quarters of respondents across Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, Poland, Romania and Spain expect increased defense and infrastructure spending to harm their personal finances via inflation, higher taxes or cuts elsewhere.
  • Fewer than a third of respondents saw potential personal benefits; the average share agreeing with at least one benefit statement was 32%, while under 25% expected gains from broader economic recovery.
  • Higher financial literacy correlated with greater skepticism that government spending would benefit households through economy-wide stimulus.

Most consumers in six European countries perceive increased government spending on defense and infrastructure as a threat to their personal finances rather than a help, according to an ING Consumer Research survey published Thursday.

The survey, carried out among residents of Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, Poland, Romania and Spain, found that almost three quarters of respondents expect higher public expenditure to damage their household finances. The channels cited by respondents include inflation, higher taxes and reductions in other government spending.

Dominant concerns

ING Consumer Research reported that 50% of respondents said they feared inflation driven by the new spending measures would leave them worse off. More than 60% voiced concern that taxes would be raised to finance the expenditures, even though some of the programmes referenced - such as Germany's restructured constitutional debt brake - are intended to be debt-funded and would not require immediate tax increases. A further 38% worried that increased defense and infrastructure outlays would lead to cuts in programmes they currently rely on. That 38% figure is 15 percentage points higher than the highest level of agreement recorded for any statement suggesting a potential positive financial effect from the spending.

Country-level patterns

Romania recorded the largest share of respondents expecting personal financial harm, at 78%, with Poland at 64%. Belgium and the Netherlands registered negative-expectation shares of 74% and 67% respectively. Spain and Germany reported 74% and 72% of respondents, in each country, anticipating adverse effects on their finances.

Limited expectations of benefit

Fewer households expect to gain from the spending. Less than a quarter of respondents across the six countries said they thought their finances would improve as a result of a broader economic recovery driven by the outlays. When considering any one of three potential benefit channels - working in defense or infrastructure, holding investments in those sectors, or seeing the wider economy stimulated - the average share agreeing with at least one benefit statement was 32%.

Among those channels, the argument that the spending would stimulate the wider economy - the mechanism most economists view as broadly relevant - drew the lowest level of optimism.

On the country breakdown for positive expectations, Romania again showed the highest share of respondents anticipating personal financial gain at 42%. Spain followed at 34%, Poland at 35%, Germany at 31%, Belgium at 27% and the Netherlands at 24%.

Financial knowledge and skepticism

The survey also included five basic financial literacy questions, with respondents categorised as low (zero to one correct answer), medium (two to three) or high (four to five). ING found that respondents with higher scores on these questions were less likely to agree that government spending would benefit them through economic stimulation. As ING Consumer Economist Sebastian Franke observed, "The better the results from the questions on financial knowledge, the lower the agreement and the higher the disagreement." Franke added that "at least one of these two correlations can be observed in all surveyed countries."

Policy context

The survey took place against a backdrop of concrete fiscal policy moves in Europe. European NATO countries have agreed to raise defense spending to 5% of GDP, with up to a third of that increase allocable to related infrastructure. Germany restructured its constitutional debt brake in early 2025 to permit substantially higher borrowing for defense and infrastructure. Separately, the approaching 2026 deadline for the EU's Recovery and Resilience Facility is expected to accelerate disbursements across member states.

Interpretation and policy note

ING said the survey highlights what it described as a disconnect between expert economic optimism and public sentiment. The research house recommended that policymakers address the fears consumers expressed in order to preserve public trust in fiscal measures. The responses recorded in the survey suggest that perceived risks - inflation, taxation and cuts to existing services - dominate household thinking about fiscal expansion in defense and infrastructure.

Bottom line

The ING Consumer Research findings point to substantial public skepticism about the personal benefits of higher defense and infrastructure spending across six European countries. While a minority of respondents expect to gain through employment, investment exposure or economy-wide stimulus, most surveyed households anticipate negative effects on their finances and express concerns that policymakers will need to manage publicly to maintain confidence in fiscal policy decisions.

Risks

  • Inflation risk - 50% of respondents feared inflation from the spending would reduce household purchasing power, affecting consumer-facing sectors and real incomes.
  • Tax risk - Over 60% worried taxes would be raised to finance the expenditures, which could influence disposable income and demand across consumer and services sectors.
  • Public services cuts - 38% feared budget reallocations would cut programmes they rely on, posing risks for households dependent on public services and for sectors delivering those services.

More from Economy

China’s legislature strips nine military officers of parliamentary seats Feb 26, 2026 Cuba Vows Firm Response After Deadly Maritime Incursion Feb 26, 2026 Fed Governor Miran Says Policy Rates Should Be Cut About One Percentage Point in 2026 Feb 26, 2026 Gilt rally persists despite Westminster turbulence as yields slide Feb 26, 2026 Goldman Sachs Prime Brokerage Predicts Continued Rebound in U.S. Software Stocks Despite Heavy Shorting Feb 26, 2026