Hungary

Last update: November, 2021

The two-thirds majority in the Parliament, which is required to effect changes in the text of the constitution, and which Fidesz (officially in coalition with the Christian-Democratic KDNP party) gained at the 2010 elections, was used to fully re-write and adopt the basic law by spring 2011. The preamble of this new Fundamental Law of Hungary, the National Avowal of Faith, contains references to culture:

We commit to promoting and safeguarding our heritage, our unique language, Hungarian culture, the languages and cultures of national minorities living in Hungary, along with all man-made and natural assets of the Carpathian Basin… We believe that our national culture is a rich contribution to the diversity of European unity…We respect the freedom and culture of other nations…

Specific references to culture:

Article P

All … cultural assets shall form part of the nation's common heritage, and the State and every person shall be obliged to protect, sustain, and preserve them for future generations.

Article X.

(1) Hungary shall ensure the freedom of scientific research and artistic creation…

(3) Hungary shall defend the scientific and artistic freedom of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences and the Hungarian Academy of Arts.

It is deplorable, however, that the most often cited part of the old Constitution with regard to culture has kept its ambiguous original wording:

XI. cikk

(1) Minden magyar állampolgárnak joga van a művelődéshez.

(2) Magyarország ezt a jogot a közművelődés kiterjesztésével és általánossá tételével … biztosítja

The word művelődés is commonly understood to be broader than education proper (for which there are also more specific terms), and includes the activities of participating in or "consuming" culture. Unfortunately the term is usually translated into foreign languages as education, including the official translation on the website of the government. Luckily, the next line better conveys the true meaning of the concept by using “community culture”.

Article XI

(1) Every Hungarian citizen shall have the right to education.

(2) Hungary shall ensure this right by extending and generalising community culture… 

This state of affairs creates the false understanding that the Hungarian constitution does not specify cultural rights as stipulated in Article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of the United Nations. Nevertheless, these passages have little direct impact on actual cultural phenomena in the country.

The hundreds of resolutions of the Constitutional Court have almost never touched upon this part of the constitution, and never in relation to culture.

Similarly, the records of the activities of the parliamentary Ombudsman for civil rights contain negligible instances that only relate to cultural rights.           

Last update: November, 2021

The cultural budget of the government, however, traditionally lacks transparency, which renders international comparisons impossible without additional research. In fact, due to the dispersed nature of competences for culture, one cannot talk about one "cultural budget". The budget section under the responsibility of the State Secretary for Culture contains aggregations like "public collections" (i.e. libraries, museums, archives directly supervised by the Ministry of Human Resources) to which considerable amounts are earmarked without specification or listing.

As another area of opacity, a quarter of the budget of the National Cultural Fund is at the discretion of the minister: the grants from this source are subsequently listed on the website of the Fund. The amount allocated via public calls of the Fund has stagnated at 7-8 billion HUF a year. The Fund, where the boards at least partly are still composed as “coalitions”, has lost its hegemonic role in cultural finances, with the emergence of several competitive financial sources: Petőfi Cultural Agency, MMA, and directly from the Ministry for Human Resources.

One more aspect that makes a full and clear overview difficult is the high proportion of finances outside the frame of the annual budget. In 2019, as much as a third of the cultural expenditure of the government took the form of ad hoc decrees.

A traditional feature of the Hungarian system of cultural finances is the contribution from the central budget to the "cultural tasks" of the local governments. This does not appear in the chapter on the Ministry for Human Capacities in the national budget but in a separate chapter named Assistance to Local Governments. In 2021, it was 35.0 billion HUF, and for 2022, 35.3 billion has been earmarked. Beyond subsidising targets like specific kinds of cultural instituitons, each local government receives general cultural normative assistance; the majority of municipalities nevertheless spend several times more on culture than the "per capita" central redistribution, which has a symbolic role only.

Last update: November, 2021

Hungary has moved away from the communist era when nearly all cultural actors were either civil employees or members of the monolithic artistic associations who enjoyed benefits comparable to salaried persons. Many people found themselves on the margins of the social security frameworks because they had been coerced into the position of quasi entrepreneurs instead of the more secure employee status, so that the employer (often a public institution like a theatre or a museum) could save on the social insurance fees. It is estimated that today over 75% of actors, dancers, musicians, arts organisers, technicians, designers, and other cultural operators working for a variety of clients are self-employed.

This issue was behind the introduction of EKHO in 2005, a regime tailored to taxpayers in the creative sector, allowing for simplified contributions to common charges (called literally "public burden"). The scheme has so far survived the many changes in the taxation system. In 2021, the condition of this status is that the annual income of the person remains below HUF 60 million (about EUR 170 000). The EKHO Law (Act CXX/2005) states that the minimum mandatory tax base for social security contribution payments is the minimum wage, while the rest of the citizen's income should be taxed at a 15% rate, which includes social security duties. EKHO is open to employees and self-employed people, including pensioners.

Independents are not able to claim unemployment benefit. Sickness benefit may be covered by paying into a private insurance policy. Self-employed people in the cultural sector can pay into a private pension fund to top up the state pension; nevertheless, many of them tend to pay social insurance only after the mandatory minimum monthly wage upon their own choice, risking their old-age care. The several hundreds of holders of all state awards listed under chapter 7.2.3, however, enjoy a lavish complementary pension after the age of 65.

This arrangement is crowned by the life-time allowances of the members of MMA. In 2021, full MMA members get 410 000 HUF a month, about 1 150EUR, close to the average income in the country, on top of their regular pension or salary. Corresponding members’ monthly allowance is 340 000 HUF. The Artists of the Nation (see chapter 7.2.3) receive 23 times the official minimum retirement pension of 28 500 HUF beyond the age of 65. Widows, widowers, and orphans are also entitled to certain allowances.

All these systems historically trace back to the establishment of high life-time allowances to members of the Academy of Sciences, imitating the Soviet model in the 1940s, spreading over to culture. Beyond the acknowledgment and stimulation of cultural achievement, these allowances develop surreptitious loyalty to the state.

Last update: November, 2021

There is a single 15% income tax rate for individuals. Family taxation was introduced to provide extra incentives to families having at least one child. Families with three children are exempt from personal income tax. From 2022, income of youths below 25 years of age is also non-taxable. State prizes, awards and fellowships are tax exempt. Corporate tax is one of the lowest in Europe at 9%. Social security payments are usually calculated at 27 % above the gross salary and the 15% personal income tax is due on the “super-gross” salary which includes social security costs.

Artists and cultural operators can choose between a variety of statuses for their work and thus taxation:

• Private individuals with a tax number for activities without special permit.
• Self-employed: in some fields like actors, painters, translators etc. this is the dominant form.
• Member of a limited or limited liability company.
• Employee.
• Public servant: until 2020, people employed at public cultural institutions (museums, theatres etc.) used to be in this category.

The self-employed, including members of limited companies, have simplified tax regimes to choose from:

• EKHO, the method of simplified contributions to common charges was discussed in chapter 4.1.3.
• Flat-rate of tax
• Item-based tax on small tax enterprises (kata)
• Small business tax (kiva)
• Regular business/corporate tax (tao)

Each regime has its specific conditions (which are occasionally modified) and advantages.

Conversely to corporation tax, VAT is the highest in Europe at 27%. Books, journals and free live music (at restaurants and free community events) benefit from a 5% reduced rate. The intermediate 18% rate applies to paid open-air concerts – achieved by the festival lobby in 2018. The high VAT rate makes entry tickets as well as all expenses linked to cultural activities more expensive.

Associations, foundations as well as non-profit enterprises can—by adhering to specific conditions—qualify as public benefit organisations. These organisations are exempt from corporate tax if their business income is less than 15% of the total turnover. Other organisations – without a public benefit status – are exempt only if the total annual turnover is less than 10 million HUF, with less than 10% business income.

Businesses – companies and individual entrepreneurs – can deduct 20% of the value of donations given to public benefit organisations from their tax base, and in the case of multi-annual pledges, this rate is 40%.

Philanthropic support to cultural organisations is not particularly widespread. Most of these tax benefits affect other sectors (social and health care, education etc.), and the bureaucratic regulations attached render donations complicated both for the donor and receiver. Donating to culture is also negatively affected by the priority that the government gives to tax benefits that support sports, football teams in particular. A similar tax credit arrangement was introduced for theatres and orchestras between 2012 and 2018, which with time became an important income for the performing arts sector. Due to blatant frauds and abuse the government abruptly stopped that scheme.  

Regarding sponsorship proper, tax exemption is difficult to conceive: the entire amount can be deduced from the tax base as marketing expenses anyway. The number of adverts displayed at most projects (exhibitions, theatre performances, festivals, and especially films) indicates that businesses support culture in many ways, including direct financial sponsorship.

Tax legislation has greater significance for investments. In this respect, the Film Law (2004) stands out, offering a 20% tax break on film making. The tax credit attracts the shooting of international productions and provides incentives to some local projects. It has also created a favourable environment for investment in studios, the largest of which is the Alexander Korda Studios at Etyek. These schemes have been brought in line with the requirements of EU regulations.

There is one more speciality in the Hungarian tax system – Act CXXVI/1996 on "1%" – has evoked great attention outside the country as well. When taxpayers submit their annual tax returns, they can allocate 1% of their income tax to a non-governmental organisation of their choice by indicating its tax identification number (also another 1% to a registered church, if they so wish). According to the data disclosed by the tax authorities, about a third of tax- payers channelled 9.6 billion HUF from the tax on their 2019 income to 27 854 organisations – in recent years both numbers have slowly descended. The full list of recipients is available on the website of the tax authority. It is next to impossible, however, to identify the share of culture from the spreadsheet of over 27 thousand lines as the names of the organisations do not always provide clues about their profile. The share for culture is nevertheless around 1% only in this scheme.

Last update: November, 2021

Artists and other cultural actors can work in the following forms: as employees, individual entrepreneurs (sole traders), corporate entrepreneurs, as well as freelance workers.

Those employed in public cultural institutions were civil employees until the end of 2020. Their labour conditions were regulated by the acts on the civil service and on public finances. These contained the detailed schedules and criteria of salaries and wages – with many direct references to cultural and artistic jobs – updated each year.

Since January 2021, cultural workers of public cultural institutions are employed on the same footing as elsewhere. Everyone had to receive the same initial salary as in 2020, but the amount is less determined by law than before.  The minimum monthly wage in 2021 is HUF 167 400 (about EUR 470), and 219 000 (about EUR 620) for qualified positions, with full secondary education. Gross average earning in the country is about twice this latter amount.

Social partnership functions relatively effectively on the national level but it is less so, or even non-existent, in respective cultural sub-sectors.

The provisions in the pensions system permit performers to retire early, e.g., dancers and some other performing artists under certain circumstances.

There are no specific provisions concerning the involvement of volunteers that are relevant to culture. Act LXXXVIII/2005 provides the necessary legal environment and protection for public voluntary work.

Last update: November, 2021

Hungary follows the continental, droit d'auteur tradition. The Act on Authors' Rights LXXVI/1999 closely observes requirements of the acquis of the European Union. This Law, among others, specifies the rights attached to transmitting and downloading via the Internet.

The Law stipulates levies on all kinds of equipment used for recording, storing and playing audio-visual content, such as blank cassettes, mobile phones, personal computers and so on. They are determined by the Minister for Justice each year and collected by Artisjus, the Hungarian collecting society. Importers and manufacturers of copy machines and related equipment pay levies to the Hungarian Alliance of Reprographic Rights. Schools and public libraries are exempt from paying this fee.

In 2020, the net copyright income of Artisjus, the Hungarian collecting society, was 14.8 billion HUF, which due to the pandemic is much less than the 18.3 billion HUF in the previous year. From the 14.8 billion, the society paid 15.9 billion to rights’ holders and 2.0 billion to the National Cultural Fund. This latter transfer is regulated by law to finance a programme for young pop-rock talents: the sum corresponds to 25% of the “blank cassette” revenue. 

The associations addressing cultural rights management are contained in this table. Focusing on their specific target groups, they address copyright and cultural rights’ protection as legal bodies.

Table 5:               Associations addressing cultural rights management

Last update: November, 2021

Hungarian data protection laws and their implementation are rather strict. Until 2011 there was a special Ombudsman for data protection, whose functions have been taken over by the National Authority for Data Protection and Freedom of Information.

Last update: November, 2021

No piece of legislation has any effect on cultural or general life in Hungary. (The restriction of mother tongue use of the Hungarian minority in Ukraine, by the April 2019 language law, has stirred general resentment in Hungary.)

Last update: November, 2021

Regional division of jurisdiction has been an open issue ever since the regime change. The county system was established by the founding king St Stephen in the 11^thcentury – which makes it hard to exert major changes. In 2012, most of the cultural functions, especially maintaining institutions like county museums and libraries, were transferred to cities.

The 19 historical counties (megye) have elected local governments, differently from the seven NUTS (nomenclature of territorial units for statistics) regions that are the basic units regarding EU regional development programmes.

The 174 districts (járás) do not have local governments or chief administrators. The district offices fulfil roles in specific areas of public administration but have no competence in culture.  

Besides the central government, the only level that really matters is that of the 3 178 local (municipal) governments. This number includes 346 towns as well as 23 districts of Budapest.

Last update: November, 2021

In Hungary, there is no comprehensive law on culture or art. Act CXL/1997 is often referred to as the Law on Culture, but in fact it regulates three sub-sectors only: libraries, museums and local socio-cultural activities. The other fundamental piece of cultural legislation is Act LXIV/2001 on the Protection of Cultural Heritage. After 2010, when Fidesz, the governing party gained constitutional power, the only constituting cultural policy Act of the NER was the Act on the Hungarian Arts Academy – MMA. Otherwise, a series of parliamentary acts kept modifying the earlier basic cultural laws, including ones on the archives and films. Between 2010 and 2019, no fewer than eight acts made wide ranging changes to the Cultural Heritage Act of 2001, in connection with the several stages of the fundamental overhaul of this sector.

A new era began in 2019, when the Prime Minister announced a focus on the cultural transformation of the country, in the ideological and political sense of the term. The Acts on the National Council for Culture and the Institutions of Cultural Strategy, as well as on the Foundation for Hungarian Culture, brought about a totally new hierarchy of decision-making and of institutions. The accelerated reorganisation of the cultural arena went hand in hand with that of the institutional structures of higher education, research, and media. A large number of government decrees accompanied and specified these two parliamantery acts.

List of the existing cultural legislation

List of laws with relevance to culture

Hungary has ratified all the relevant international conventions and is party to all treaties, but they have never exerted significant effect on processes inside the country. The monitoring of those conventions, and the ensuing reporting activities are in most case formal and superficial, which was also the case regarding the obligations of the country within the Soviet Bloc.

Last update: November, 2021

The Act on Archives was passed in 1995, and an Act was passed in 2001 on the Protection of Cultural Heritage, covering the areas of archaeology, built heritage, and protection of movable objects. These Acts define the specific ownership requirements of state, local government and private (including Church) enterprises, and stipulate the rules for the protection and utilisation of heritage. After 2010, the legal environment of archaeological explorations was modified several times; the area is now overseen by the Prime Minister’s Office. Archaeologists complain about the increase in economic considerations over science in policies and legislation. 

The 2011 Act on Hungarian World Heritage aims to give a solid legal and institutional basis to the efficient implementation of the World Heritage Convention in Hungary and to ensure the efficient management of the eight Hungarian sites on the World Heritage list.

The modification of the 2001 Cultural Heritage Law in 2011 established the new concepts of National Memory Sites and Historic Memory Sites, with 17 items belonging to the first, and 52 to the second list. 

Due to the towering insurance costs connected with the blockbuster exhibitions of the Szépművészeti Múzeum, in 2012 a law was passed with urgency, which stipulates a state guarantee for borrowings of such a scale: the Act on the Special Protection of Borrowed Cultural Goods.

Last update: November, 2021

The Act on Performing Arts in 2008 – prepared in close co-operation with professional organisations – was considered a major achievement in cultural policy by the previous government. It regulated the conditions of access to state subsidies. Theatres and orchestras were registered in categories, the number of performances being the main criterion. A special aspect was the guarantee of at least 10% of public grants for independent, alternative, or experimental theatre groups.

In 2011 substantial amendments were made: the theatre part was practically fully re-written. The categories were reduced to three: National, Preferential, and Other performing arts organisations. Several of the automatic decisions in the former Act were removed, thereby giving more room for quality judgements. A 24-strong National Performing Arts Council for Reconciliation of Interests was established. Upon their recommendation – with minor adjustments – the Minister appoints the National and Preferential performing arts organisations. The list is updated each year: in 2021 there were 25 National organisations (10 theatres, 4 dance groups, and 11 orchestras), as well as 58 Preferential organisations (42 theatres, 5 dance groups, and 11 orchestras).

The guaranteed share of the subsidies for the third group – the independent scene – was not kept. These organisations apply for subsidies in the frame of annual public calls, targeting the respective categories.

Last update: November, 2021

There is no specific legislation in the field of visual art. The Act on Authors' rights stipulates fees after the first sale of art works, and levies after the sales of works in the public domain. The rate is 4% in the first case, going down to 0.25% on a regressive scale. 

Last update: November, 2021

Hungary has no separate law to support literature and writers.

Libraries are regulated in detail by the 1997 Act on Culture and the 2011 Act on Local Governments, the latter stipulating that local governments are “particularly” obliged to assure library supply. In settlements with a few hundred inhabitants only, the local governments fulfil this obligation by reaching joint agreements with neighbouring towns or villages. The 1999 Copyright Act regulates public lending right payments, administered by the Hungarian Literary Copyright Protection and Management Association (MISZJE).

Last update: November, 2021

The 2010 Media Law contains detailed prescriptions to broadcasters about social and cultural diversity. Special emphasis is placed on the Hungarian minorities living abroad.

The mandatory thresholds of programme quotas are in line with European Union regulations.

Table 6:               Minimum percentage of annual broadcasting time:

There are no special press quotas in Hungary.

Attracting international productions to shoot films in Hungary is a government priority. This is facilitated with frequent modifications to the 2004 Film Law and related governmet decrees. These improvements benefit Hungarian filmmakers as well.

Last update: November, 2021

There are no laws for design or creative services.