Urgent request without the required reasoning

The government's request for advice was dated 21 July 2026 and asked for advice 'as soon as possible (please within fourteen days)'. Under Sint Maarten's manual for drafting legislation (Draaiboek, p.14), such an urgent request must be motivated by the Minister-President. The Council found no motivation in the file, said it had received several requests without one over the past year and had repeatedly pointed this out to the government, and asked that future urgent requests be properly motivated. It still handled the draft as quickly as possible 'with due care'.

Praise for an early, complete fileWelcomed

The Council was positive that the 2027 draft, with a complete file, reached it on time, and that efforts are being made to bring the budget cycle in line with the legal deadlines. It listed those deadlines: submission to Parliament before 1 September (Constitution, Art. 100(3)) and a Parliament-approved budget sent to the Cft before 15 December (Kingdom Act on Financial Supervision, Rft, Art. 14(1)).

Not ready for legal review

Presenting a draft early 'adds no value' if it is not yet ready for review. The Council agreed with the government's Legal Affairs & Legislation department (JZ&W) that it could not carry out its legislative-technical check because the 2026 budget ordinance had not yet been adopted. The Council said crucial preparation steps were skipped, at the expense of quality and care, noted that (part of) the remarks JZ&W did make had not been processed, and advised processing them.

Built on a 2026 budget that was not yet law

The Getallenboek (book of figures) starts from 2026 budget spending, while Parliament had not yet adopted the 2026 budget. The Council said structurally late adoption is incompatible with an orderly, predictable budget cycle and undermines Parliament's budget right. Any 2026 amendments flow straight into 2027, and if far-reaching changes are made the draft must be sent back to the Council.

'Never yet adopted on time'

The Council said it understood the complex circumstances, including that a budget has never yet been adopted on time and that the 2026 budget was still before Parliament, and it endorsed timely submission of the 2027 budget. It nevertheless considered the choice to present this draft before the 2026 budget was adopted 'not opportune' (not well-timed).

Four years of annual accounts not adopted

The annual accounts (jaarrekeningen) for 2022, 2023, 2024 and 2025 have not been adopted, although the National Accounting Ordinance (Comptabiliteitslandsverordening, Art. 52(1)) requires each to reach Parliament by 1 September of the following year. (The Council had advised on the 2022 accounts ordinance on 21 January 2025.) Quoting the government's further report of 10 June 2026 on the 2026 budget (2022 accounts by the end of 2026; 2023 and 2024 early in 2027), the Council noted the efforts to clear the backlog but said that while it lasts, the quality of budget preparation is under pressure and legal deadlines are not met.

Backs the Cft's concerns

The Council endorsed the attention points of the Board of Financial Supervision (Cft), naming among others the structural finances of SZV (the social and health insurance agency), risks from government-owned companies, the cash (liquidity) position, the multi-year investment agenda and determining the 'collective sector'. It accepted these issues are complex, but noted that several have been raised for some time by both the Council and the Cft, and asked for concrete progress.

Legality of moving money between social funds

The Council noted the Cft's doubts about whether cross-financing between the (social) funds is lawful under the current health-care and social-security ordinances, and the Cft's request for an independent legal opinion. It observed that the government's reply to the Cft did not address this point, and advised doing so and, if not yet done, having the legality check carried out.

When will a real multi-year budget come?

Under the Country Package (Landspakket, the reform arrangement Sint Maarten and the Netherlands signed on 22 December 2020; EN 167), the 2027 budget was to take steps toward policy-driven budgeting, including multi-year budgeting. The Council found that the budget documents do not say when a realistic multi-year budget will be introduced, and asked the government to state in the explanatory notes within what period it will be.

Publish a citizens' version

To make the budget more accessible and build public support for budget policy, the Council recommended publishing a 'public version' (publieksversie) alongside the formal budget. After the Council's advice, it could be published at the same time as the budget is submitted to Parliament. The Council said this would help people understand the policy and financial choices, and could prevent different, mutually inconsistent versions or summaries of the budget from circulating.

Justice chapter still described 2026

The Council saw improvements in the explanatory memorandum (Toelichtingenboek), but not in the Ministry of Justice chapter (5.3), which explained the 2026 budget instead of the 2027 draft. The Getallenboek also showed only minimal changes for Justice, unlike the other ministries. The Council found it 'not plausible' that Justice needs no or only limited changes, and strongly advised (adviseert met klem) revising this before the draft went to Parliament.

Education uses a different comparison method

The Ministry of Education, Culture, Youth and Sport (ECYS; Dutch OCJS) showed the differences between the 2026 and 2027 budgets with a different method from the other ministries. The Council advised bringing it into line.

Road Fund: the legal set-up

The memorandum expected motor-vehicle-tax revenue to go to the Road Fund (Wegenfonds) from 2028. The Council advised aligning the text with the Road Fund Ordinance. Citing the JZ&W remark and a legal memorandum of 12 April 2026, it said the Road Fund already exists by law and is managed by the Minister of VROMI (Public Housing, Spatial Planning, Environment and Infrastructure). A foundation (stichting) can only support day-to-day operations; financial management and decisions stay with the minister, so there is no question of a subsidy transfer.

16 drafting and technical errors

An annex lists 16 examples, described as non-exhaustive, of editorial and legislative-technical errors, which the Council says form an integral part of its advice (NL 308). Three are in the draft ordinance (including '2026' where '2027' was meant, and an entry-into-force clause with retroactive effect), two in the explanatory note to the ordinance, nine in the Getallenboek (mostly missing or wrong difference amounts) and two in the Toelichtingenboek (NL 309).

Adopted on 18 August 2026, with one abstention

The advice was adopted at the Council's meeting of 18 August 2026 and signed by the Secretary, J.I. Salomon, and the Vice-Chair, N.R. Joubert-Guishard. A note states that Council member C. Joseph took no part in the deliberation because of a conflict of interest; no further detail is given. The Governor's Cabinet stamped the advice as received on 21 August 2026.

Advice on an earlier draft, welcomed as earlyWelcomed

The Minister of Finance asked for this advice on 25 June 2026 (request DIV 5952-A), and the Cft answered on 9 July 2026. It therefore reviewed an earlier version of the budget than the one Parliament registered on 8 September 2026 (NL 1), and some of its figures differ from the final budget. The Cft said it 'appreciates this much earlier submission compared with previous years'.

Not yet in line with the balance rule

The draft showed a surplus of Cg 8 million (the Cft writes XCG, the currency code of the Caribbean guilder) on the ordinary service, the day-to-day budget, in 2027, and small surpluses or balance after that. But major risks, including the health-care funds' deficits and financial problems at some government-owned companies, were not included, so the budget 'does not yet' meet the Rft balance norm (Art. 15(1)(a)). Not all revenue and spending was explained and verifiable enough to judge the result (Art. 15(2)). In the draft the Cft saw, the result was Cg 8, 0, 16 and 14 million for 2027-2030 (NL 330); the final memorandum shows Cg 8, 8, 24 and 20 million (EN 13).

2026 budget 'much too late'; 2027 to be on time

The Cft called the 2026 budget 'much too late': it was still before Parliament, although under the Rft it should have been adopted by 15 December of the previous year. The Kingdom Council of Ministers (RMR) therefore asked Sint Maarten, through an improvement plan, to adopt the 2027 budget on time. The Cft welcomed the Minister's determination to send an improved budget to Parliament on 8 September, the deadline reported to the RMR, leaving room to adopt it by 15 December 2026. It saw that the Minister acknowledges the risks and is working on them, and said it hopes to avoid having to advise the RMR to issue a new instruction (aanwijzing). The previous instruction, of September 2015, concerned clearing payment arrears, compensating 2010-2014 deficits, budgeting health and pension costs in full and making the pension and social-security system sustainable (NL 334).

Revenue: acceptable method, optimistic outcome

Revenue of Cg 670 million in 2027 is 19% above the Cg 565 million provisionally collected in 2025, mainly from higher taxes (+Cg 40 million) and project money from the Netherlands for, among others, the Temporary Work Organisation (TWO) and the World Bank Trust Fund (+59 million); several delayed projects are being budgeted again before the programmes end. Tax growth of about 4% a year roughly matches nominal economic growth. Most revenue is estimated as a share of GDP based on 2025 results (a 14.4% tax ratio), multiplied by expected GDP from IMF figures of September 2025. The Cft 'can accept' this method but called the estimates optimistic because they assume continued growth, and noted the 2026 budget had been more conservative (+2% a year against nominal growth of about 4-5%). It flagged licence revenue as high against recent results (Cg 20 million assumed for 2025 versus Cg 15 million in the fourth 2025 execution report, unexplained) and a yearly Central Bank (CBCS) dividend whose certainty was not shown.

Room to raise more revenue

The Cft said the country needs extra income to absorb shocks and make policy, called recent budgets mostly 'policy-poor' (beleidsarm), 'a missed opportunity', and noted Sint Maarten's relatively low tax burden compared with similar countries in the region. It pointed to about Cg 30 million more tax in the first quarter of 2026 than a year earlier, possibly helped by compliance efforts, which could be made structural; a planned tourist tax that could raise up to Cg 18 million a year from 2027 if legislation is completed in time; and plans for a dividend tax, a gaming tax and reform of turnover and profit tax.

Spending up 22%, after years of underspending

Spending of Cg 662 million in 2027 is about 22% above the Cg 544 million provisionally spent in 2025, mainly personnel (+Cg 65 million) and goods and services (+Cg 54 million). These budgets have repeatedly been underspent because vacancies were not filled and projects were postponed; the government assumes the plans will still be carried out. It plans to fill vacancies and update job-classification books dating from 2010, and assumes price rises of about 1.7-2% a year and no new policy, which in principle leaves little room for setbacks.

Project money and unexplained changes

It is hard to tell whether projects paid for by the Netherlands (Cg 69 million in 2026, Cg 63 million in 2027) are budgeted cash-neutrally, with spending matching the money received, or whether all of it sits under goods and services; from 2028 the draft assumes the TWO and trust-fund projects end. The Cft asked for a table of project funds showing revenue and spending by economic category and by year. Other revenue outside project funds (Cg 22 million in 2025, Cg 24 million in 2027, rising to Cg 27 million in 2030) is also uncertain. It found no clear explanation for social provisions budgeted at Cg 36 million in 2026 and 2027 against Cg 41 million realised in 2025 (the letter also calls this a Cg 4 million drop, and its own table shows 42 for 2025), or for subsidies rising by Cg 14 million to Cg 120 million in 2028, which the budget linked to setting up a road fund.

New loan while past investments sit unspent

The draft included a new loan request of Cg 57 million for investments without showing clearly which investments it covers, or how it relates to the 2026 investment plans, whose budget had not been approved either. About Cg 200 million for investments planned in earlier years is still on the books but not carried out, while the country already pays about Cg 5.5 million in interest on the related loans; the new loan would add about Cg 2 million. The Cft said this can be justified if the money is well spent, but for a large part that is not yet the case. It has repeatedly asked for a multi-year investment agenda, which was again missing, and found the per-ministry investment overview unclear and not adding up. The final ordinance authorises borrowing of up to Cg 52,986,502 (NL 3).

Capital budget and loan repayments

In the draft, the 2027 capital budget totalled Cg 249 million, including Cg 222 million of investments, a large part of them plans from earlier years that were postponed. Because earlier years' investment plans were left out of the 2026 budget, 2026 and 2027 cannot be compared properly. Repayments on the capital market stay relatively limited until 2029 and 2030, when liquidity-support loans from the Netherlands fall due; the budget assumes these will be refinanced (the final memorandum books refinancing of Cg 59 million in 2029 and Cg 79 million in 2030; EN 22).

Interest cap cannot be checked

The loan cannot be tested against the Rft's interest-burden norm (rentelastnorm, the legal limit on interest costs) because information on the 'collective sector' (the government plus related public bodies) is missing. Sint Maarten must set the size of the collective sector every two years before 1 April and report on it every year around 1 September (Rft Art. 23 and 24). Despite repeated requests, the Cft had received no reports for 2021 to 2024, the collective sector for 2026 and 2027 had not been determined, and it lacked the latest annual accounts of all relevant government(-related) entities. It welcomed the steps now being taken, with help from the government accountants' bureau SOAB, and said that for now it has no information showing the interest norm is being exceeded.

Almost no cash buffer

The Cft wrote that Sint Maarten has no liquidity (spare cash) to absorb unexpected setbacks or make new policy. In the draft, one forecast showed Cg 5 million of free cash at the end of 2027, against about Cg 145 million of payment arrears (unpaid bills). The forecasts also disagreed: Cg 5 million in one table, Cg 0 in another and minus Cg 8 million in the text. It advised a clear, workable plan of new revenue or cost control and said it would like to be involved. The final budget's tables show Cg 2 million at the end of 2027 (EN 22, EN 167), though the text on EN 167 still mentions minus Cg 8 million.

Health funds lose money every year

According to SZV's estimates, the health-care funds (ZV, OV and FZOG) run deficits of about 35 million a year over 2027-2030, and SZV itself has operating deficits of about 20 million a year (the letter gives no currency for these two figures; Cg is implied). They are partly covered from the surpluses and reserves of other social funds, including the AOV old-age pension fund, leaving SZV with a loss of about Cg 15-25 million a year, so its liquid reserves would run out within a few years. The Cft called the deficits 'a real threat' to public finances.

Doubts about legality; reforms urged

The Cft doubts that this cross-financing between funds is lawful under the current health-care and social-security ordinances and asked for an independent legal opinion. Without one, it assumes the cross-financing is unlawful and that Sint Maarten must take measures to cover future deficits lawfully from 2027. By Sint Maarten's estimates, general health insurance (GHI), a tourist tax and measures at SZV could partly close the deficits, and a buffer fund (schommelfonds) set up under the GHI law could cover deficits lawfully. The Cft said the GHI and tourist-tax bills 'must now really be implemented' by 1 January 2027. These steps would not remove all risks but would buy time.

Debts inside the social system

About Cg 500 million of debt has built up over the years from the health-care funds and SZV to the other social funds; the country guarantees it, so in principle the government would have to repay it. The Cft accepted that solving this needs more time than the 2027 budget allows. It understood the government is examining (partial) forgiveness of the debt using reserves of the buffer fund still to be set up, and advised obtaining legal advice on this too. Separately, the government owes SZV an estimated more than Cg 100 million, partly for the civil servants' health-cost scheme (OZR); a payment arrangement is needed soon, which also matters for the hospital (SMMC). The Cft called it positive that the Minister wants to solve this and has asked SOAB to map these arrears.

Struggling government companies; debt level

TELEM (telecom), GEBE (electricity and water) and PSS (post) face serious financial problems; for TELEM and PSS this is a direct risk to public finances because they cannot meet short-term payment obligations. The Cft advised mapping these risks better and including them in the 2027 budget, if needed with a provision (money set aside) or another suitable financial solution; a strategy for the three companies aimed at viability or market solutions, with any financial effects in the budget; and a properly staffed policy on government shareholdings. It estimated central government debt, including short-term debt, at Cg 1,424 million at the end of 2027, or 41% of GDP (NL 333). The final memorandum gives a different total for 2027, about Cg 1,127 million (Cg 982 million long-term plus Cg 145 million short-term debt), or 32.2% of GDP (EN 12); neither document reconciles the two figures.