Hungary has no state sports court. Depending on their nature, sports-related disputes are heard by the civil courts, by the regional courts (törvényszék) in labour and administrative matters. The specialised forum is the Sport Permanent Court of Arbitration (Sport Állandó Választottbíróság), established by Act I of 2004 on Sport (the Sports Act) and operating within the Hungarian Olympic Committee (MOB). Act LX of 2017 on Arbitration (the Arbitration Act) recognises it as a permanent arbitral institution, and it applies that Act subject to the special rules of the Sports Act. Under the Sports Act, no arbitral tribunal other than this tribunal or the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) may hear disputes involving sports organisations.

Its jurisdiction is generally consensual. It rests either on an arbitration agreement or on an arbitration clause in a national federation’s statutes and regulations, to which clubs and athletes submit through membership and registration. In certain matters, the athlete, sports professional, club or federation concerned may also bring the case before the arbitral court unilaterally, where the Sports Act otherwise allows court proceedings. These are the issue and withdrawal of competition licences, registration and transfers, disciplinary matters and the right to take part in competitions. The court also hosts the Doping Appeals Committee, the second-instance body for national-level anti-doping cases (see question 5). Awards can be challenged before the state courts only on the limited grounds set out in the Arbitration Act.

Not every sports dispute is arbitrable. Public-law matters (administrative decisions, public funding, licensing by state bodies) and criminal matters belong to the state courts. The Arbitration Act also excludes disputes arising from consumer contracts and those falling under the special procedures of the Code of Civil Procedure, which include labour proceedings. Individual employment disputes are therefore decided by the state courts. Arbitration may, however, be agreed where an athlete works not under an employment contract but under a civil-law relationship permitted by the Sports Act.

This matters in professional football, where Clause 49 of the standard Hungarian player employment contract refers disputes exclusively to the Hungarian state courts competent in labour matters.

There is no sports ombudsperson. Mediation is available under Act LV of 2002 on Mediation, and several federations operate internal conciliation or dispute-resolution bodies.

Hungary has a dedicated framework statute, Act I of 2004 on Sport (the Sports Act). The Sports Act provides a comprehensive legal framework for Hungarian sport, regulating a wide range of matters that cut across several areas of law, including civil, corporate, employment, administrative and regulatory law. It governs the legal status and relationships of athletes, sports organisations and federations, as well as public funding, sports events, safety and security, player agents and the national sports information system.

The most recent amending act made three main changes. First, it created the sports branch (sportfióktelep), a new company-registered form through which international sports organisations recognised by the IOC can operate in Hungary and receive state support directly. Second, it introduced electronic grant management for state sports grants awarded after 1 July 2026, other than support granted by individual Government decision. Third, it extended reporting obligations in the national sports information system, with federations’ first filing due by 31 December 2026.

Hungary has also developed a favourable legal and regulatory framework for international sports federations, further strengthened by the introduction of the sportfióktelep, a dedicated legal structure facilitating their establishment and operation in the country. This special regime has helped position Hungary as an increasingly competitive jurisdiction for international sports organisations, attracting a growing number of international federations to establish or relocate their headquarters and operations to Budapest.

Sport is also governed by general legislation: the Civil Code, the Labour Code, the Corporate Tax Act (which contains the sport-tao sponsorship scheme), the Act on the Simplified Public Contribution (EKHO), the Gambling Act, advertising and media law, and government decrees on matters such as anti-doping, stadium security and state rewards for sporting results. Alongside this statutory framework sit the statutes and regulations of international and national federations, and soft-law instruments such as codes of ethics and child-protection policies.

Oversight. Since May 2026, sport has been the responsibility of the Minister of Interior, acting through the State Secretariat for Sport. Under the Sports Act, certain public functions are entrusted to six statutory public-law bodies: the Hungarian Olympic Committee (MOB), the Hungarian Paralympic Committee (MPB), the National Competitive Sports Federation (NVESZ), the National Student, University and Recreational Sports Federation (NDHSZ), the Hungarian Coaches Association (MET) and the National Association of Sports Clubs (SOSZ). These bodies perform statutory public functions in their respective areas while retaining their organisational autonomy.

Each national federation has exclusive competence to organise competitions and set the rules of its sport.

Other bodies with sport-specific roles are the Hungarian Anti-Doping Agency (HUNADO), the police (stadium security and the sports policing register), the State Audit Office and the National Tax and Customs Administration (use of public and tax-based funds), and the Supervisory Authority for Regulatory Affairs (SZTFH), which regulates gambling. General regulators act within their own fields, in particular the Competition Authority (GVH), the consumer protection authorities, the National Media and Infocommunications Authority (NMHH) and the National Authority for Data Protection and Freedom of Information (NAIH).

New rules on hosting international sports events, announced in September 2026 and applying from 2027, make federations responsible for bidding for and running events. budget support of up to HUF 500 million is decided by the minister responsible for sport and larger amounts by the Government, while the National Event Organising Agency’s role is reduced to operational support. Sports funding and governance are also being reformed more broadly, so considerable legal changes are contemplated by the Hungarian National Assembly (see questions 8 and 14).

Advertising and sponsorship in sport are governed by the Sports Act, general advertising legislation, product-specific restrictions and the regulations of sports federations.

General restriction on sponsorship. Sports Act establishes an overarching restriction on sports sponsorship. It prohibits the presentation of sporting activities in connection with lifestyles, services or other activities harmful to health, as well as conduct that endangers or damages the environment. This restriction applies in addition to the specific advertising rules governing alcohol, tobacco, gambling and other regulated products and services.

General rules. Act XLVIII of 2008 on the Basic Conditions and Certain Restrictions of Commercial Advertising (the Advertising Act) sets out the general requirements and the product-specific restrictions. It is complemented by Act XLVII of 2008 on unfair commercial practices and, for broadcast and on-demand media, by Act CLXXXV of 2010 on media services, which also regulates programme sponsorship. Liability rests primarily with the advertiser, so compliance is a direct concern for sponsors and for clubs that commission advertising. The rules are enforced by the Competition Authority (GVH) and the consumer protection authorities. Both pay growing attention to influencer marketing, which can matter for athletes’ personal sponsorship deals.

Alcohol. Alcohol advertising is permitted subject to the restrictions under Section 18 of the Advertising Act. Advertisements must not target or depict minors, encourage excessive consumption or associate alcohol consumption with improved physical performance. Additional restrictions apply to advertising near educational and healthcare institutions and in media directed at minors. Alcohol companies are not expressly prohibited from sponsoring sports organisations or events. However, such arrangements must also comply with the Sports Act, which prohibits presenting sporting activities in association with lifestyles or activities harmful to health. The nature and presentation of the sponsorship, including branding at sports venues and on official clothing, must therefore be assessed separately.

Tobacco. Tobacco advertising, direct or indirect, is prohibited (§ 19), and the prohibition extends to electronic cigarettes and related products (§ 19(5)). Tobacco sponsorship of sports events is expressly banned (§ 20). Tobacco branding on kit, at venues and in broadcasts is therefore ruled out.

Gambling and betting. The Advertising Act prohibits gambling advertising that encourages minors to gamble, as well as any promotion of gambling not licensed by the Supervisory Authority for Regulatory Affairs (SZTFH). Under the Gambling Act (Act XXXIV of 1991), the advertiser, the agency, the publisher and any person appearing in an unlawful gambling advertisement, such as an athlete, may be fined jointly and severally at ten times the financial gain obtained through the unlawful advertising, subject to a minimum of HUF 10 million. Where the others cannot be identified, the fine is imposed on the publisher. The regulator may also act against intermediaries, including payment service and electronic communications providers. Licensed sports betting operators are major sponsors of Hungarian sport, both the state operator and, since 2023, licensed online operators.

Criminal law. The Criminal Code (Act C of 2012) has contained a specific offence of unlawful influencing of sporting results (sporteredmény tiltott befolyásolása, § 349/A). It covers any agreement that causes the result of a competition or match within a federation’s competition system to be decided other than in accordance with the competition rules and the principle of fair play. The offence is punishable by up to three years’ imprisonment, rising to one to five years where it is committed in criminal conspiracy or on a commercial basis. Where betting is involved, the general offences of fraud and bribery may also apply (see question 6). Recent prosecutions have also targeted fraud against betting operators themselves, which is distinct from manipulating the result.

Sporting rules. National federations can apply their own integrity and disciplinary rules. These typically prohibit participants from betting on their own competitions, misusing inside information or failing to report approaches, with sanctions up to a lifetime ban. The MLSZ takes part in UEFA’s Betting Fraud Detection System.

Macolin Convention. Hungary signed the Council of Europe Convention on the Manipulation of Sports Competitions on 29 November 2016 but has not ratified it. Domestic law nevertheless meets many of its requirements through the criminal offence, the regulation of betting operators and federation integrity rules. Since 1 January 2019 Hungary has also had a national platform against the manipulation of sports competitions (Government Resolution 1609/2018 (XI.27.)). This advisory body is chaired by a representative of the minister responsible for sport.

Betting. Gambling is regulated by the Gambling Act (Act XXXIV of 1991) and supervised by the Supervisory Authority for Regulatory Affairs (SZTFH). The wholly state-owned Szerencsejáték Zrt. remains the exclusive operator of the games that have not been liberalised. Hungary opened online sports betting to companies established in the European Economic Area from 1 January 2023. These operators act through a registered Hungarian representative, pay the licence fee for the full licence term and submit a player-protection plan. Online casino games remain reserved to holders of a land-based casino concession. Amendments in 2025 introduced technical-system audits and a register of licensees. At the end of August 2026, the government initiated a review of the SZTFH’s future role and institutional framework, which may lead to a reallocation of some of its supervisory responsibilities.

Anti-doping. The cross-sport integrity body in Hungary is the Hungarian Anti-Doping Agency (HUNADO), the national anti-doping organisation. It is a public-benefit non-profit company operating under an agreement with the minister responsible for sport. It is operationally independent and cannot be instructed in individual cases. HUNADO applies the World Anti-Doping Code and the International Standards, as implemented by Government Decree 363/2021 (VI.28.) on anti-doping activity and by its own anti-doping rules. It is responsible for testing, investigations, results management and education.

Appeals by national-level athletes are heard by the Doping Appeals Committee, which operates within the Sport Permanent Court of Arbitration under § 47 of the Sports Act and is organisationally independent of HUNADO. International-level athletes appeal to the CAS. The 2027 World Anti-Doping Code, adopted in December 2025, enters into force on 1 January 2027. The domestic decree and HUNADO’s rules are expected to be updated accordingly, and HUNADO is already informing athletes of the changes.

Ethics and abuse. Hungary has no independent cross-sport body for ethics violations or abuse cases comparable to the safeguarding agencies set up in some other countries. These matters are dealt with by the disciplinary and ethics bodies of the national federations and of the Hungarian Olympic Committee, by employers under labour law and, where a criminal offence may have been committed, by the police and the prosecution service.

The protection of minors relies on duties imposed on sports professionals rather than on a central body. Under the Sports Act, those who coach athletes under 18 must have a clean criminal record, which they prove with an official certificate. They must also complete training on working and communicating with children and their parents. Many federations have adopted ethics and child-protection codes and appointed integrity or child-protection officers, often to meet the requirements of their international federations and the IOC.

Corruption in sport is addressed through general criminal law, public-funding rules and the regulations of sports bodies. Apart from the match-fixing offence (see question 4), there is no sport-specific anti-corruption legislation.

Criminal liability. The Criminal Code penalises bribery in the private sector as well as the public sector. Active bribery (vesztegetés, § 290) and passive bribery (vesztegetés elfogadása, § 291) cover persons acting for business entities and other organisations, including sports clubs and federations, as well as foreign business entities. The basic offence carries up to three years’ imprisonment. This rises to one to five years where the person bribed has independent decision-making authority or breaches their duty, and to two to eight years in aggravated cases. Given the scale of public and tax-based funding in sport, influence peddling (§ 299), embezzlement (§ 372) and fraud (§ 373) are also frequently relevant, as are breach of trust (§ 376) and budget fraud (§ 396). Legal persons may be sanctioned under Act CIV of 2001 on criminal measures applicable to legal persons.

Civil and administrative consequences. Corrupt conduct may lead to damages claims under the Civil Code, to liability of executive officers towards the organisation and to termination of contracts. Misused public support must be repaid. In October 2026 the State Secretariat for Sport reported that more than HUF 21 billion of ‘sport-tao’ support had been subject to repayment procedure from sports organisations, and the tax authority has declared support forfeited in a number of cases. In September 2026 the State Audit Office published an analysis treating ‘sport-tao’ support as public money. It identified significant risks of misuse and recommended that the current allocation system be dismantled. Where sports organisations spend public money, public procurement and public finance rules also apply.

Institutional developments. Since 2 August 2026 Hungary has participated in the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, which may investigate offences affecting the EU’s financial interests, including in sports projects co-financed by EU funds. Under Act XXV of 2023, employers with 50 or more employees, including larger clubs, must operate internal whistleblowing channels. National federations also apply their own integrity and disciplinary rules, which in football follow the FIFA and UEFA codes and require participants to report corrupt approaches and cooperate with investigations.

Fan behaviour is regulated by criminal law, by the Sports Act and its implementing decree on the safety of sports events (Government Decree 54/2004 (III.31.)) and, since 2025, by the Council of Europe Saint-Denis Convention.

Criminal law. Violent and disorderly conduct at sports events is prosecuted under the general offences of the Criminal Code (Act C of 2012), in particular hooliganism (§ 339) and disorderly conduct (§ 340). Both carry heavier penalties when committed at a sports event. The courts may also impose a ban from sports events as a stand-alone criminal penalty (§ 33(1)(h) and § 58) for one to five years. The ban covers all events within the federation system and is distinct from the general penalty of territorial exclusion.

Organiser measures. Under the Sports Act, organisers may exclude spectators who breach the ground regulations or endanger safety: for between six months and two years from all of the organiser’s events, or for up to four years from a specific venue. Since the 2023 amendment of the Sports Act (Act CVI of 2023), a club may also exclude its own supporters, including from its away and international matches, and exclusion decisions may be delivered on site or by e-mail. Organisers must notify the excluded person and the police of an exclusion in writing (Government Decree 54/2004, § 17(1)) and, within three days, forward its details to the sports policing register (sportrendészeti nyilvántartás) and to the visiting club (§ 73(5) of the Sports Act). They must also check ticket buyers against the register, so that bans are enforced nationwide.

Stadium security. The Sports Act and the decree require risk assessments, stewarding and personalised ticketing. At high-risk football matches and at all priority-risk events, organisers must operate camera systems that record individually identifiable images, including images suitable for biometric identification, and stewards may wear body cameras. Recordings and ticketing data are generally kept for 60 days. Club cards may store biometric templates, such as facial or fingerprint data, for holders aged 14 and over.

International framework. Hungary ratified the Saint-Denis Convention on an integrated safety, security and service approach at sports events in July 2025, and it entered into force for Hungary on 1 September 2025. Hungary also denounced the 1985 European Convention on Spectator Violence with effect from 1 February 2026. A Council of Europe monitoring report published in May 2026 found the framework largely in line with the Convention. It noted the widespread use of biometric entry gates and a rise in pyrotechnics incidents in the first division, from 797 in 2018/19 to 1,457 in 2024/25. It also made recommendations, particularly on the service and dialogue pillars.

Hungarian clubs operate either as sports associations (sportegyesület), which are membership-based non-profit entities governed by the Civil Code and the Sports Act, or as sports enterprises in company form, usually a limited liability company (Kft.) or a company limited by shares (Zrt.). Professional teams are typically run by a company owned wholly or partly by a parent association, a municipality or private investors. Outside Budapest, many clubs are majority-owned by municipalities. Under § 57/E of the Sports Act, municipalities must keep sports facilities built with at least 50 per cent state or ‘tao funding’ in sports use for 15 or 30 years, depending on the amount of public funding.

Foreign ownership. There is no sport-specific restriction on foreign ownership, but acquisitions may be subject to foreign direct investment screening. The permanent regime (Act LVII of 2018) covers strategic sectors and rarely applies to clubs unless the relevant activity (NACE codes) trigger FDI screening. The broader transitional regime, moved into Act L of 2025 with effect from 19 August 2025 and applicable until 31 December 2026, covers a much wider range of activities. It provides for a 30-working-day review period and has abolished the state’s pre-emption right except in one narrow sector. Transaction timetables should therefore allow for a screening analysis.

Licensing. Clubs need a licence from the national federation to take part in professional leagues. In football, the MLSZ Club Licensing Regulations (2025/26 edition) follow the UEFA Club Licensing and Financial Sustainability Regulations. They cover sporting, infrastructure, personnel, legal and financial criteria, including disclosure of ultimate controlling parties.

Fan ownership. There is no 50+1-type rule. Supporters exercise influence mainly as members of the associations that own or control club companies.

Governance. A government bill published in 2026, but not yet adopted at the time of writing, would bar senior political office-holders and heads of state-owned companies from leading federations and clubs with more than 500 registered athletes, with a four-year cooling-off period. The planned end of sport-tao funding (see question 14) is also likely to change club finances and ownership structures significantly.

Multi-sport ownership in the traditional sense is long established in Hungary. Several historic clubs, particularly in Budapest, run sections in many sports under a single association, with the professional teams usually operated by companies owned by the parent association. The model reflects history and the funding system rather than recent investment.

The newer development is cross-border multi-club ownership in football, which was rare in Hungary until recently. Over 2025 and 2026 several top-flight clubs attracted foreign or internationally connected investors. In June 2025 a Latin American ownership group acquired the club in Zalaegerszeg. In January 2026 an investment group that also owns an English club took a controlling stake in a top-flight club in Debrecen. In Székesfehérvár, the city’s 2026 tenders to sell its club drew bidders from the United States, Portugal and the United Kingdom, including a multi-club group. Neither round led to a completed sale, and a new tender is expected. As sport-tao is phased out and the funding model changes, new investor structures are emerging, and a number of transactions are now in preparation, mainly in the first and second divisions of football (NB I and NB II).

Hungarian law has no specific rules on multi-club ownership in any sport. Such structures are governed by general company and competition law, by foreign direct investment screening where it applies (see question 8) and by the licensing rules of the national federations. Clubs playing in European competitions are also bound by the integrity rules of their European federations. In football, UEFA restricts clubs under common control or decisive influence from taking part in the same UEFA competition. The end of sport-tao funding (see question 14) is likely to increase clubs’ need for private capital and, with it, the interest of domestic and international investors.

Yes. The Sports Act contains specific provisions on player agents, supplemented by Government Decree 4/2022 (I. 7.). In the six spectator team sports (football, handball, basketball, water polo, volleyball and ice hockey), agents and agencies must notify the relevant national federation before commencing their activities and comply with the applicable registration requirements. Federations maintain the relevant registers and supervise compliance. Breaches may result in administrative fines of up to HUF 500,000 for individual agents and HUF 5 million for agencies, or a prohibition on agent activities for up to twelve months.

The Sports Act also allows national federations to establish their own nonprofit player agencies, unless prohibited by the relevant international federation’s rules. Where such an agency exists, the federation may claim cost reimbursement from other agencies involved in transfers of qualifying professional athletes under the age of 28, subject to statutory conditions. The legislation also provides for an athlete development contribution (nevelési hozzájárulás), calculated as 70 per cent of the commission received by a federation-established agency or 50 per cent of the applicable cost reimbursement. These amounts are payable to the athlete’s legal guardian or, in the case of an adult athlete, a designated parent or equivalent parental figure.

Hungarian law also protects minors specifically. Under the Sports Act, a contract concluded through a commercial intermediary for an amateur athlete under 18 is void, and under the Civil Code contracts with minors require the involvement of their statutory representative. Otherwise, dual representation is governed by the general civil-law rules on agency and conflicts of interest. The Sports Act sets no statutory cap on commissions.

No Hungarian statute specifically regulates the participation of transgender athletes in competitive sport, and no domestic court case on the issue is known. Eligibility for national and international competition is governed by the rules of the international federations, as adopted by the national federations.

The general legal background is nonetheless relevant. Since its Fifteenth Amendment (adopted on 14 April 2025), the Fundamental Law has stated that a human being is male or female, and it refers to a child’s right to an identity corresponding to their sex at birth. Under Act on Civil Registration, sex at birth is recorded in the civil registry and cannot later be changed. The Constitutional Court upheld that rule.

In sport, the debate has followed international developments. In March 2026 the International Olympic Committee adopted a policy under which, from Los Angeles 2028, eligibility for the female category at the Olympic Games will be determined by a one-time genetic screening test. The President of the Hungarian Olympic Committee publicly welcomed this approach. Any eligibility verification by a federation involves processing special-category health and genetic data, and must therefore comply with the GDPR and the Hungarian equal treatment rules.

The Sports Act does not mention e-sport, and there is no dedicated statute or pending legislative proposal. The question is best approached on two levels, and the answer differs between them.

Sporting activity. The Sports Act defines sporting activity rather than sport, and its concept is broader than physical exercise: under § 1(2), sporting activity includes activity pursued in a mind sport, as the case of chess shows. On this basis, organised e-sport can fall within the statutory concept of sporting activity. It is a contest of human cognitive and fine motor skill, and the (digital) interface through which it is played should not in itself be decisive. This holds where the competitive character of the activity and the evaluation of performance can be shown; recreational gaming is a different category. The reference in § 1(2) to activity pursued under set rules arguably presupposes uniform rules laid down by a federation, which is where e-sport faces its main difficulty (see below). The human-centred approach of the Sports Act is also reflected in Article XX of the Fundamental Law, which links the support of sport to the right to physical and mental health. Leading Hungarian legal literature is divided on the classification. Some authors consider the statutory conditions met, others deny that e-sport is an official sport, and others accept that it largely fits the definition but question whether it serves the maintenance of physical fitness to which § 1(2) also refers.

Recognition as a sport. Recognition is a separate question, and here e-sport falls short. A national sports federation may be established only in a sport recognised by the International Olympic Committee, or in one with an international federation covering at least fifteen member countries on three continents and a world or European championship system in operation for at least five years, provided that the national federation is a member of that international federation. Domestic thresholds for member clubs, a national competition system and licensed athletes also apply (§ 20(4)–(5) of the Sports Act), and only one federation may operate in each sport (§ 20(3)). Two structural features stand in the way. The rules of each game are set, and frequently changed, by the publisher that owns it, so they cannot be held as common rules by a federation in the way that the rules of chess are. And the largest international competitions are organised by publishers and commercial operators rather than by an international federation. E-sport can therefore qualify as sporting activity under Hungarian law without being a recognised sport, and it remains outside the permanent institutional and funding framework tied to recognised sports.

EU law offers no general definition either: in Case C-90/16 The English Bridge Union, the Court of Justice applied a narrower notion of sport for VAT purposes only. Hungarian legal scholarship has called for a technology-neutral concept of sport that would settle the status of e-sport and give a clear framework for hybrid and robotic forms of competition, while keeping athlete status reserved to natural persons (§ 1(1) of the Sports Act). A further option, modelled on the way technical and artistic sports entered the sporting canon, would be a separate category for technology-based or software sports with its own conditions for recognition.

E-sport organisations therefore operate under general rules: clubs and teams as associations or companies under the Civil Code, players under employment or civil-law contracts, and tournaments under consumer protection, advertising, data protection and intellectual property law. E-sport itself is not gambling, since results depend on skill rather than chance, but gambling law becomes relevant where in-game monetisation, loot boxes or betting on e-sport events are involved. Public support has been project-based.

The national umbrella body is the Hungarian E-sport Federation (HUNESZ), which absorbed the other national e-sport association in 2023 and has been a member of the International Esports Federation since 2020. In March 2026 it became Hungary’s national team partner for the Esports Nations Cup. At Olympic level, the IOC and Saudi Arabia ended their agreement on the Olympic Esports Games in October 2025, and the IOC is now pursuing a new approach. Until the international position is settled, a change in the domestic legal status of e-sport seems unlikely.

A significant domestic sports law decision of the past year was the judgment of the Kúria (Hungarian Supreme Court) of 11 November 2025 concerning state performance rewards (Pfv.I.20.531/2025). The claimants included members of Hungary’s national lifesaving team, their coaches, development coaches and other sports professionals. They sought payment of state performance rewards from the ministry then responsible for sport under Government Decree 200/2013 (VI. 13.), following the athletes’ results at the 2022 World Games. The ministry refused payment, relying on a determination by the competent national sports body that the relevant events had not met the minimum participation requirements prescribed by the decree.

The first-instance court dismissed the claim. In March 2025 the Budapest Court of Appeal reversed that decision and awarded approximately HUF 119.5 million plus default interest. On the ministry’s petition for review, the Kúria set aside the appeal judgment and restored the dismissal. The Kúria held that awarding a state reward is an exercise of public authority. An obligation arises directly from legislation only where the legislation expressly so provides, and the decree, adopted under the authority of the Sports Act, creates no civil-law obligation between the athletes and the ministry. Without the decisions required by the decree’s multi-stage procedure, no claim for the reward can be enforced in civil proceedings.

The decision matters beyond the case itself. It confirms that athletes’ entitlement to state performance rewards falls within public-law grant-making rather than private-law claims. This shapes how athletes, federations and their advisers approach disputes over public sports funding, and the ongoing reform of sports financing makes it all the more relevant (see question 14).

Potential hosting of the 2036 Olympic Games. Hungary is among the countries currently participating in the IOC’s preliminary dialogue concerning the hosting of the 2036 Olympic and Paralympic Games, with Budapest as the proposed host city. The process has brought Olympic hosting back onto the Hungarian sports agenda. From a legal perspective, the central questions concern the division of responsibilities between the Government, the municipality and the Hungarian Olympic Committee, the financial and legal guarantees required by the IOC, and the long-term public commitments associated with hosting the Games. These issues are expected to become increasingly important as the IOC’s selection process progresses.

Alongside Hungary’s renewed Olympic ambitions and the prospect of hosting the 2036 Olympic Games in Budapest, several major legal and regulatory developments are reshaping Hungarian sport. At the time of writing, Parliament is considering significant legislative reforms, the final scope and impact of which remain subject to change. Four areas in particular present important challenges and opportunities for the Hungarian sports sector.

The reform of sports funding. For more than a decade, the sport-tao scheme has allowed companies to fund sports organisations from their corporate tax liability. On 19 October 2026 the Prime Minister announced that it will be abolished and replaced by HUF 150 billion of direct budgetary support, with total state support for sport to be maintained. A bill tabled on 27 October 2026 would repeal the scheme from 1 January 2027. The tax credit would remain available only for support transferred before that date under programmes approved before it, and claimed in tax returns filed before 1 July 2029; taxpayers would have until 30 November 2026 to direct part of their tax to sports organisations, provided the tax concerned is paid by 2 December 2026. The bill would also expressly treat costs under advertising and sponsorship contracts with sports organisations, for sports events or for athletes’ sports scholarships as business expenses. Companies giving free support to amateur sports organisations, sports federations, sports events or amateur athletes could deduct a further 20 per cent of its value from their tax base, capped at their pre-tax profit for the year, provided the purpose is set out in a contract and they receive nothing in return. The allocation rules for the new direct support and the body that will distribute it have yet to be published. For clubs, federations and their sponsors, this is the central legal and financial question for 2027.

Governance and conflicts of interest. The proposed incompatibility and disqualification rules for sports officials (see question 8) have been contested by several stakeholders in Hungarian sport, raising questions about their constitutionality and compatibility with international sporting instruments, particularly the principles of autonomy and political neutrality enshrined in the Olympic Charter. Together with the revised framework for hosting international sporting events from 2027 and the ongoing review of sports academies, these developments have brought the relationship between state oversight and the autonomy of sports organisations into sharper focus.

Advertising tax. The Advertising Tax Act also covers certain forms of sports sponsorship, including the display of sponsor logos on team kits, sports equipment and advertising boards at sporting venues. Although the tax rate is currently 0%, legislative changes proposed in October 2026 would reintroduce advertising tax from 2027. The final rates and applicable conditions remain subject to parliamentary approval. The proposed changes could create additional financial and administrative burdens for sports organisations and their commercial partners, particularly those relying heavily on sponsorship revenue. Certain exemptions apply to national teams, youth development and amateur sport. Nevertheless, the potential reintroduction of advertising tax presents a further financial challenge for Hungarian sport, particularly at a time when its broader public funding framework is also undergoing significant reform.

Athlete taxation. Professional athletes and coaches have benefited from the simplified public contribution regime (EKHO), with high annual income caps. On 6 October 2026 the government announced that these caps would be cut, and a bill tabled on 27 October 2026 would abolish them from 1 January 2027: athletes and coaches, as well as employees of international sports federations and sports branches, could then use EKHO only up to the general annual cap of HUF 60 million. The same bill would introduce a simplified regime for foreign-resident athletes who are not covered by Hungarian social security and stay in Hungary for no more than 30 days in any twelve months, under which the Hungarian payer, such as a club or event organiser, settles the tax on their Hungarian income. The bill had not been adopted at the time of writing. Clubs and athletes should review remuneration structures and contracts that run beyond 2026.

Digital administration and data. The national sports information system, athletes’ data-reporting obligations (with the first federation deadline on 31 December 2026) and electronic grant management are putting the sector on a data-driven footing. Together with biometric stadium access, this makes data protection compliance an everyday matter for sports organisations.