State Comptroller Matanyahu Englman released an audit on Thursday as part of his annual report, examining the financial accounts of factions in the 25th Knesset from January 12, 2022, to December 31, 2023.
The report analyzed the finances of 16 organizations that received state funding for operational costs. Of these, 12 were given a positive assessment. At the same time, four—Agudat Yisrael, Jewish National Front, HaYeladim Shelanu, and Ta’al—were found in violation of funding rules and will have a total of NIS 120,000 deducted from future state allocations.
According to the report, factions reported total revenues of approximately NIS 170.9 million, including NIS 153.5 million in state funding and NIS 9.2 million from membership fees. Their total expenditures were estimated at NIS 129 million.
However, the report highlights a recurring issue: factions consistently utilize state funding intended for daily operations to cover deficits from prior election campaigns. Additionally, some have secured loans from the Knesset to address these financial gaps.
Engelman reiterated concerns from previous audits, noting that when factions misuse state funding to settle election debts, it undermines their ability to maintain an ideological and organizational connection with the public between election cycles.
Legal guidelines must be followed
He emphasized that factions must follow legal guidelines and strive to reduce their financial deficits.
“There is a serious concern that Knesset factions will not be able to repay the loans they took from the state treasury on time,” Engelman warned.
“In less than a decade, party debts have surged by 317%—from NIS 35 million, which factions previously borrowed from banks, to NIS 146 million now owed to the Knesset. Given the slow repayment rate, the risk of defaulting on these loans has grown—particularly for factions that may not enter the next Knesset and will not receive further state funding to settle outstanding debts.”
He concluded that factions “repeatedly exploit ongoing state funding to cover deficits from election campaigns—rather than using it for its intended purpose: maintaining public engagement between elections.”