Listen to the audio version of this article (generated by AI).
Listen to the audio version of this article (generated by AI).
Nearly three-quarters considered corruption widespread, but only 26.8% said they would take action if they encountered suspected wrongdoing.
The findings come from the authority’s “Tiszta úton” research program, which examines corruption perceptions, personal experiences, institutional trust, willingness to report misconduct and attitudes toward the use of EU funds.
The survey covered 1,254 adults through online and in-person questionnaires between July and September 2025. Its findings therefore reflect attitudes before Hungary’s April 2026 parliamentary election.
Some 41.6% of respondents placed corruption among the country’s three most serious social problems, while 73.7% considered it significantly or extremely widespread.
Nearly half, 45.7%, believed corruption had increased significantly between 2020 and 2025, while another 20.9% perceived a smaller increase. Only 5.7% reported seeing any decline.
“There is a tangible set of anti-corruption values in Hungarian society: Rejecting corruption is clearly the majority position,” said Petra Burai, the Integrity Authority’s head of education and the study’s expert reviewer.
“The data also show that people consider those around them more corrupt than themselves: They tend to portray themselves more favorably while judging others more negatively.”
Only 7% of respondents said they had personally encountered corruption-related abuses. Burai interpreted this as suggesting that corruption primarily occurs at higher decision-making levels removed from everyday experience, with most people encountering its effects instead.
Some 73.6% of respondents said they considered corruption unacceptable. However, 26.4% regarded it as entirely or somewhat acceptable in public institutions if it allowed them to gain an advantage.
Budapest had the highest share of respondents describing such behavior as entirely acceptable.
Attitudes also varied depending on the form of the exchange. More than 90% rejected giving money in return for an advantage, but only 30% considered gift-giving unacceptable, and 34% rejected doing favors.
A lack of knowledge about reporting channels emerged as a significant barrier. Some 69.2% could not identify a single institution they could approach with suspicions of corruption, compared with an EU average of 52.6% cited by the authority.
Respondents familiar with a reporting channel were nearly four times as likely to say they would report misconduct as those who knew of none. Among respondents who could name an anti-corruption institution, the Integrity Authority was one of the three most frequently mentioned organizations.
The study identified four main reasons for reluctance to act: fear of retaliation, difficulty proving wrongdoing, uncertainty about reporting procedures and the belief that taking action would achieve nothing.
Some 73.6% said state institutions were either entirely or largely unable to protect the public from corruption’s harmful effects. Respondents who trusted institutions were significantly more willing to report abuses.
Some 65.4% believed corruption was widespread in the use of EU funds in Hungary, while 43.8% considered it widespread within EU institutions.
Respondents viewed the use of EU funding more positively at the local level than nationally. Nearly two-thirds, 64%, assessed local use favorably, compared with 44% for the country as a whole.
The authority suggested that the difference could reflect people’s more direct experience of locally funded projects and their benefits, as well as greater trust in local institutions.
The research also found a statistically significant association between media consumption and perceptions of corruption. Respondents who relied primarily on public television were less likely to consider corruption widespread than those using other information sources.
During the survey period, public perceptions of public media and pro-government outlets were closely aligned. Respondents placed the greatest trust in reporting on corruption from outlets critical of the government at the time, although trust in the media overall was low.
The Integrity Authority intends to repeat the survey regularly to track changes in attitudes toward corruption and integrity and support evidence-based anti-corruption policymaking.
Producing journalism that is worthy of the name is a costly business. For over 30 years, the publishers, editors and reporters of the Budapest Business Journal have striven to bring you business news that works, information that you can trust, that is factual, accurate and presented without fear or favor.Newspaper organizations across the globe have struggled to find a business model that allows them to continue to excel, without compromising their ability to perform. Most recently, some have experimented with the idea of involving their most important stakeholders, their readers.
We would like to offer that same opportunity to our readers. We would like to invite you to help us deliver the quality business journalism you require. Hit our Support the BBJ button and you can choose the how much and how often you send us your contributions.
