Hungary’s proposed advertising tax revival draws regulator objections

The Council’s opinion addresses sections 48–54 of the bill, submitted on 27 October, and challenges the proposed tax’s likely effects on media businesses and advertisers. The bill has not been enacted, and the rates and commencement remain proposals.^[1][2]

Proposed progressive rates

The Government’s summary describes a progressive tax on annual advertising revenue: 0% on the first HUF 500 million, 2.5% on the portion from HUF 500 million to HUF 10 billion, 4.5% on the portion from HUF 10 billion to HUF 40 billion, and 7.5% above HUF 40 billion. The Media Council says the proposal also includes a 2.5% purchaser-side charge where a publisher does not comply, so the measure could affect both media publishers and businesses buying advertising.^[1][2]

Regulator’s assessment

The Council argues that a revenue-based levy would apply regardless of profitability and could weigh heavily on publishers with thin margins. It says its estimates indicate that the tax could push the largest independent national television service into an operating loss and substantially reduce TV2’s profit. It also warns that publisher charges, platform surcharges and the proposed purchaser-side charge could raise advertising costs for Hungarian businesses. These are the Council’s assessments, not enacted findings or confirmed outcomes.^[2]

Potential multinational impact

The proposal warrants attention where a multinational group earns advertising revenue from Hungary, operates a media or advertising business there, or buys advertising from publishers potentially within the rules. The Council says the tax would apply regardless of a publisher’s seat and raises the possibility of platforms passing costs to advertisers. Exact exposure depends on the final text and the group’s role in the advertising supply chain.^[2]

Next stage

The Government says the aim is to bring large foreign technology platforms earning substantial Hungarian advertising revenue into the tax base. The Media Council asks lawmakers to delete sections 48–54 or minimise the burden if the tax proceeds. The reviewed materials do not establish an operative filing or payment requirement. Groups should monitor amendments and enactment before changing compliance processes or pricing assumptions.^[1][2]