Serbia has reallocated more than 20 billion dinars from critical infrastructure projects to the state budget reserve to secure fuel supplies amid ongoing uncertainties at the Oil Industry of Serbia (NIS). The move, revealed through government budget documents, comes as the country faces sanctions that threaten the consistent delivery of gasoline and diesel.
President Aleksandar Vučić, during an extraordinary government session on November 16 focused on the NIS, requested urgent transfers from Finance Minister Siniša Mali to cover the purchase of fuel. According to government calculations, roughly 100 million euros would be required 65 million for gasoline and 40 million for diesel.
However, records from the Official Gazette, published two days prior to the session, indicate that these transfers had already begun. Funds were withdrawn from eight major infrastructure projects, including the Hungarian-Serbian railway (10 billion dinars), Niš-Dimitrovgrad railway reconstruction (2.5 billion), Belgrade-Sarajevo highway (2.4 billion), and the Central Sewage System of Belgrade (2 billion). Other affected projects included railway construction in Zemun Polje, the Požarevac-Golubac expressway interchange, and several border-crossing bridge reconstructions.
Experts caution that such transfers, while legal under the budget reserve mechanism, raise questions about transparency and planning. Marko Milanović of the Fiscal Council notes that the reserve is designed for unforeseen emergencies, not as a tool to cover short-term policy gaps, and that its use bypasses strict parliamentary oversight. With a ceiling of up to four percent of total state revenues, Milanović says the reserve offers significant discretionary power that must be carefully monitored.
Economic analyst Bogdan Petrović emphasizes that unspent budget allocations are intended for annual use within specific ministries and cannot simply be carried over. The transfer of funds away from key infrastructure projects many of which are already delayed reflects poor planning and reduces transparency, limiting parliamentary oversight of public spending.
While the government frames the transfers as necessary to ensure fuel availability, analysts highlight the broader implications. Essential infrastructure projects, including railways, highways, and sewage systems, risk delays or underfunding, while citizens remain vulnerable to disruptions in public services.
Milanović and Petrović agree that, although these funds may support immediate energy needs, the approach reflects systemic issues in budgetary planning and governance. The government’s heavy reliance on discretionary budget reserves underscores the need for greater transparency and strategic oversight in managing Serbia’s public resources.
