What happened and why it matters: suspension of MCC Brussels from the EU Transparency Register

MCC BRUSSELS SETS THE RECORD STRAIGHT AFTER ATTACK FROM EU BUREAUCRACY

We are no strangers to controversy at MCC Brussels. But the news of our suspension from the EU Transparency Register has surprised even us. 

Late on Friday, we were notified that the Secretariat of the EU Transparency Register - an arm of the EU bureaucracy tasked with maintaining “openness” and “transparency” - had suspended our registration. This means that our ability to engage with the EU institutions is limited. 

The dispute centres on an almost kafkaesque interpretation of EU rules: despite our legal and editorial independence, they demand that we are not allowed to have an entry on the register, only our friends at MCC in Hungary. 

Given the clear double-standards at play, we believe this attack is politically-motivated. 

At the same time, many media outlets have reported we were suspended for not being transparent about our finances - which is totally false. 

To set the record straight, and expose the double-standards at play, we have put together an outline of the dispute, how we are treated differently, and what this means for both MCC Brussels and the Transparency Register. 

As always, we are defiant against this attempt to limit our right to a voice, and will avail ourselves of all avenues to appeal. 

Please read the below to understand more, and you can spread the word and show support by reposting:
https://x.com/MCC_Brussels/status/2066457021348556904?s=20 
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7472226372552314881 

What happened and why it matters: answering questions about the suspension of MCC Brussels from the EU Transparency Register

What is the Transparency Register?
The European Transparency Register (TR), was launched on 23 June 2011 as a joint instrument for the European Parliament and European Commission. Subsequently, a mandatory transparency register, governed by the Interinstitutional Agreement (IIA) between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission, entered into force on 1 July 2021. The ‘IIA on the Transparency Register’, sets out the rules and principles governing the Transparency Register. The register is a public database set up for the registration of interest representatives and their activities carried out with the objective of influencing the formulation or implementation of policy or legislation, or the decision-making processes of the EU institutions. 
 
What was the complaint that led to the Transparency Register investigating MCC Brussels?
In February 2025, the NGO Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO)  alleged that MCC Brussels is in breach of point (f) in the Transparency Register Code of Conduct: ‘ensure that the information they provide when registering is complete, up to date, accurate and not misleading, and agree to it being made public’.
 
In addition to a host of political slurs (“far right”) they complain that MCC Brussels ‘is publishing reports and hosting debates on EU policy issues’ and that it ‘has been very active around the farmers’ protests’ and ‘brought together climate deniers for a debate in Brussels just weeks before the European Parliament elections’.
 
The specific complaint alleged misuse of the ‘Newly formed entity, no financial year disclosed’ tick box option in the Transparency Register entry. You can read this complaint on the Corporate Europe Observatory website here: https://www.corporateeurope.org/en/2025/02/ceo-submits-official-complaint-against-orban-thinktanks-lobbying-secrecy
 
What is the Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO)?
Corporate Europe Observatory is a part Soros-funded activist NGO group. It describes itself as a ‘working to expose and challenge the privileged access and influence enjoyed by corporations and their lobby groups in EU policy making’. In reality, they obsessively focus on the activities of conservative organisations, and challenge any attempt to criticise the EU’s climate agenda.
 
Did the Transparency Register agree with the complaint that MCC Brussels had hidden its funding?
No.
 
MCC Brussels was not in breach of the code of conduct on the point alleged because it was not yet 24 months since the date of our registration, or indeed formation, and no financial accounts for our first year of operation had yet been audited and closed.  
 
In a second letter to MCC Brussels dated 18/6/25, in response to our reply to the investigation, the TRS acknowledge that MCC Brussels was not in breach of the code of conduct with regards to the original complaint about its use of the ‘Newly formed entity, no financial year disclosed’ tick box. Subsequently the TRS welcomed the filing of MCC Brussels’ financial information which occurred within the required time frame once its first set of full-year accounts were closed.
 
Is MCC Brussels open about the source of its funds?
Yes.
 
MCC Brussels clearly states in its entry in the Transparency Register the source of its income. Its registration page states: ‘MCC Brussels is an autonomous think-tank registered in Belgium as an AISBL. It receives a grant from Mathias Corvinus Collegium Alapítvány https://mcc.hu/’.
MCC Brussels states its total budget for the most recent closed year (2024) was €6,367,461 and that it received a grant of €6,361,791 with a further €5,670 euros received as a benefit in kind from Mathias Corvinus Collegium Alapítvány in the form of donated computers and equipment.
 
You can access the registration here: https://transparency-register.europa.eu/search-register-or-update/organisation-detail_en?id=681044352479-62

So why was MCC Brussels suspended?
The Transparency Register Secretariat (TRS) has suspended MCC Brussels’ register entry due to a dispute over its single registration principle. The TRS argue that MCC Brussels and Mathias Corvinus Collegium Alapítvány (MCC Hungary) should have a single and joint entry. We argue not only that the two organisations are distinct legal entities, but that our ‘interest representation activities’ are entirely different. Currently, MCC Hungary does not have a TR registration.
 
What is the single registration principle?
A bureaucratic rule the Transparency Register introduced to avoid multiple entries and speed up the administrative handling of an application or registration. The Transparency Register guidelines state: ‘To avoid multiple entries and speed up the administrative handling of an application or registration, interest representatives operating in more than one country (e.g. multinationals, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) with chapters or branches in various countries or regions) should register their activities in the register only once and, in doing so, cover the various other entities of a network, corporate group or similar (including their activities and resources, where relevant).’ 
https://transparency-register.europa.eu/guidance/guidelines_en#ref-2-single-registration-principle 
 
Why does MCC Brussels dispute the application of the single registration principle?
MCC Brussels is a separate legal identity – registered in Belgium as an AISBL – from the MCC Foundation registered in Hungary.
 
While, as declared in MCC Brussels’ Transparency Registry entry, the organisation is fully funded by a grant from MCC Hungary, MCC Brussels is fully editorially independent of MCC Hungary, under the direction of its Executive Director Professor Frank Furedi, and it is not involved in joint lobbying of EU institutions. 
 
MCC Brussels’ remit as a think tank is very distinct from that of the MCC Hungary. 
MCC Brussels engages with a wide range of cultural, policy and political issues from a pan European and national conservative perspective. It has especially focused on making a case for strong nations, strong borders, and strong ideals in defence of European civilisation.
By contrast, the Hungarian based MCC Hungary is Central Europe's leading educational institution and research centre. Focused on developing the skills and talents of young Hungarians, MCC Hungary provides supplemental education, without charge, to students throughout the Carpathian Basin. In addition to its educational programs, MCC Hungary is home to several research centres such as the Youth Research Institute, Climate Policy Institute, Migration Research Institute, Learning Institute, German-Hungarian Institute, Institute for Hungarian Unity, the Center for Asian-Hungarian Relations and the European Center of Political Philosophy. 
 
Does the Transparency Register allow related organisations to register separately?
Yes - despite their fixation on the single registration principle in their correspondence with us. The Transparency Register website issues guidance on whether related organisations can have their own registration or should be registered singly. It states, “if you are a member, subsidiary or affiliate of a registered interest representative and you carry out your own interest representation activities independently from the registered ‘umbrella’ organisation, then you should register individually”.
https://transparency-register.europa.eu/faqs-and-contact_en
 
Did MCC Brussels cooperate with the Transparency Register?
Extensively.
 
MCC Brussels has responded to all requests for further information and clarification about this issue from the TRS within the specified 20 working days. The TRS has responded to our replies normally after several months have elapsed. We remain in correspondence with the TRS about this issue, yet at 16:50 on Friday 12 June 2026 they notified MCC Brussels of its suspension from the register. 
 
Why does MCC Brussels allege that the suspension is political?
Given our registry entry declares the grant MCC Brussels receives from MCC Hungary as its sole source of funding, and provides a link to its website, it is hard to understand why MCC Brussels’ suspension is justified when the disagreement about the appropriateness and feasibility of the registration being transformed into a joint registration is ongoing.
 
As we show below, the single registration principle is not applied consistently at all – and it is MCC Brussels, not the well-known NGOs highlighted below, that has been suspended. Arbitrary application of procedures only to MCC Brussels is discriminatory.
 
It is this that leads us to believe that the suspension of our TR registration has more to do with the challenging questions MCC Brussels regularly raises – take for example our high-profile work uncovering the EU’s funding of NGOs to promote its own agenda – than it does to do with any technical question about the single registration principle.
 
Furthermore, confusion over the single registration principle, its inconsistent application and the TRS’ approach to MCC Brussels could call into question hundreds, perhaps thousands, of existing registrations.
 
Is MCC Brussels treated differently to other organisations?
If the TRS is correct to insist MCC Brussels and MCC Hungary should have a joint registration —which we dispute—it would mean that not only MCC Brussels is in breach of the TR's Code of Conduct, but also many others. After a brief survey of the TR we have identified and detailed many other organisations that may not be observing the single registration principle. A more comprehensive review of the TR's more than 17,000 entries could reveal a vast number of multiple registrations by organisations of very different kinds.
 
First, we wish to point out that some of the most prominent NGOs in the Brussels political ecosystem are umbrella organisations whose member organisations maintain close organisational and financial ties with one another. These include the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), ILGA, BirdLife, Caritas and Friends of the Earth.
 
Notably, we raised the fact of WWF's multiple entries with the TRS and they informed us they are engaged in discussion with WWF. Yet WWF have not been suspended. Indeed, in terms of differential treatment, it is striking that the latest WWF registration was at the end of June 2025 some months after the TRS chose to investigate MCC Brussels in relation to the single registration principle. In their application WWF Mediterranean (217676599422-40, 30/06/2025 14:58:47)make the following special request for a separate registration:
‘Although there are other organizations in the Transparency Register under the banner of WWF, WWF Med requests a separate registration from them due the fact that its legal establishment as Italian Foundation is independent from the other registered WWF organizations.’
 
Second, a number of organisations, primarily business corporations, maintain separate legal entities dedicated to lobbying activities in Brussels. In these cases, the subsidiary is registered while the parent organisation is not. Examples include the Schwarz Group (Lidl, Kaufland, etc.) and Velux. One rule for them, another for MCC Brussels?
 
Third, some organisations choose to register both the parent entity and the subsidiary. Examples include Mozilla and Casinos Austria.
 
Examples of multiple registrations
 
NGOs with a multitude of entries, yet pursuing common political approaches
 
WWF (World Wide Fund for Nature) Network
The different branches of the WWF are all created or adopted by the WWF’s International Board (https://wwf.panda.org/discover/about_wwf/how_were_run/statutes) Twelve WWF branches are separately registered in the Transparency Register, with entries ranging from 2008 to 2025.

 
ILGA Network
“ILGA-Europe is composed of Full Members and Associate Members (hereinafter together referred to as “Members”)[1] https://www.ilga-europe.org/files/uploads/2022/04/Constitution-October-2021-EN.pdf
Fifteen different ILGA members are separately registered in the Transparency Register, with entries ranging from 2011 to 2026:

 
BirdLife Network
Parent umbrella and its 15 national registered partners.
 

Caritas Network
6 registered regional and national entities.

Friends of the Earth Network
6 registered regional and national entities. 

 
Organisations which registered only their subsidiary and not their parent 
 
Greenpeace Network (Civic Structure)
 

 
Open Society Foundations 

Schwarz Group (Lidl, Kaufland etc.)

VELUX & VKR Holding 

Organisations which registered both their subsidiary and their parent 
 
Mozilla

Allwyn Group & Casinos Austria AG