A new legislative provision in Greece is drawing attention for potentially allowing retired military personnel to receive both their full pension and a salary at the same time. The measure is included in a broader tax administration bill submitted to Parliament by the Ministry of National Economy and Finance, but its implications extend well beyond fiscal cooperation.
Under existing Greek law, most retirees who take up employment in the public sector—referred to as the “General Government”—face a suspension of their pension benefits if they work before reaching a specified age threshold. The proposed change would create a notable exception to this rule. Retired officers and members of the Armed Forces would be permitted to continue receiving their full pension while also earning a salary through employment at the Hellenic Aerospace Industry (EAB), a state-controlled company that plays a key role in maintaining and supporting military equipment.
The provision has been reviewed by Greece’s supreme fiscal court, the Hellenic Court of Audit, which issued a formal opinion on the draft. The Court acknowledged that the measure represents a clear departure from the existing pension framework established under Law 4387/2016, as it allows a specific category of retirees to combine pension income with public-sector earnings.
Despite describing the provision as highly exceptional—both in its limited scope and its targeted application—the Court recognized that it serves defined public interest goals. In particular, the Greek government argues that the measure would strengthen national defense capabilities and support the domestic defense industry at a time of heightened geopolitical tensions in the region.
The Court noted that the Hellenic Aerospace Industry faces a shortage of specialized personnel and that retired military staff are especially well-suited to fill these roles. Their prior experience and technical expertise would allow them to contribute immediately, reducing the need for lengthy training and enhancing the company’s productivity.
At the same time, the Court raised concerns about the financial justification of the proposal. It found the accompanying impact assessment to be incomplete, as it does not clearly estimate the cost of continuing pension payments nor explain how these costs would be financed. The lack of clarity also raises questions about whether the measure complies with Greece’s medium-term fiscal planning obligations and broader constitutional requirements for transparency in public spending.
Another issue highlighted in the opinion is the principle of equal treatment. While the exception may be defensible under certain circumstances, the Court warned that similar staffing needs may exist in other parts of the public sector, including organizations with comparable roles in defense and industry. Granting preferential treatment to one group of pensioners could therefore create legal and ethical concerns about fairness.
In its final assessment, the Court cautioned against introducing pension reforms in a piecemeal manner, arguing that such an approach risks undermining long-term fiscal sustainability and consistency in the legal framework. Nonetheless, it ultimately issued a positive opinion on the pension-related aspects of the provision, while noting that other elements of the bill fall outside its jurisdiction.
