What exact expenses were Nigel Farage accused of claiming improperly?
Executive summary
Nigel Farage has been accused in multiple reports of misusing his EU/MEP allowances chiefly related to staffing and office costs, with European Parliament auditors docking part of his salary to recoup disputed sums and reports citing an annual £15,500 (or similar) allowance used for office-running despite rent-free premises; Farage has repeatedly denied wrongdoing, saying MEP allowances are discretionary and he did not claim for an office [1] [2] [3]. Available sources document allegations about staffing payments, the EU general expenditure allowance used for office costs and transfers to third parties or offshore accounts, and a salary docking of roughly £35,500 tied to an investigation [2] [1] [4].
1. The headline allegation: misspent EU funds for staffing and office costs
Multiple outlets reporting on European Parliament inquiries say the core complaint against Farage concerned how he used the EU’s allowances intended to pay for staff and to run an MEP constituency office. The Guardian and BBC summarise that the parliament’s inquiry alleged misspending of funds "intended for staffing his office" and that his pre-tax MEP salary was docked while the parliament sought repayment of a "debt to the EU" [1] [4].
2. What exact expense lines are named in reporting
Reporting identifies three recurring categories: (a) the EU general expenditure allowance used to fund office running costs (utilities, phone, etc.), (b) staff salaries and contracts — specifically a suspended contract for an aide — and (c) transfers or payments from EU funds to outside accounts or third parties (alleged transfers to offshore accounts are reported as claims by ex-staff) [2] [1] [4].
3. Quantities and actions: figures cited by the press
Some accounts cite specific sums: the Times/others reported that Farage claimed roughly £15,500 annually for office costs from the EU general expenditure allowance, while BBC/Guardian coverage says his salary was docked by about £35,500 (or docking of half his monthly MEP salary until a debt was repaid), and other pieces reference long totals of expenses across years [2] [4] [1].
4. Farage’s response and procedural context
Farage has consistently denied improper conduct, arguing MEP allowances are discretionary, that he did not "claim for an office", and insisting running costs were modest — around £1,000 a month — while saying he would take legal advice and calling stories politically motivated [5] [3]. The EU system for MEP allowances did not always require detailed receipts for office running costs, which his supporters cite as context for his defence [3].
5. Investigative steps taken by the European Parliament
Press reports describe formal action: auditors suspended an aide’s contract and the Parliament docked Farage’s salary to recoup monies, signalling an administrative finding of a "debt to the EU" rather than a criminal conviction in the available coverage [4] [1]. PoliticsHome and other outlets later reported similar sanctions or deductions [6].
6. Secondary allegations still in reporting: offshore transfers and third-party arrangements
Some pieces repeat claims from former staff that EU funds may have been routed to offshore accounts (Cayman/Isle of Man) or that UKIP supporters provided rent-free premises while the EU allowance was still claimed toward office running; Farage has denied these allegations and maintained the arrangements complied with rules [2] [7].
7. What the sources do not settle
Available sources do not present a criminal conviction against Farage on these matters, nor do they provide a complete line-by-line forensic accounting published in the press documents provided here. They also do not include a definitive text of the auditors’ report or the full Parliamentary decision explaining the docking calculation in the material supplied (not found in current reporting).
8. Competing framings and implicit agendas in coverage
News outlets frame the story differently: watchdog-style outlets and opponents emphasise alleged misuse and specific sums to suggest misconduct [4] [2], while Farage’s statements and some broadcasters stress the permissive nature of MEP allowances and his legal defence to portray the reporting as politically driven [5] [3]. Readers should note the political stakes — Farage’s profile as a populist critic of political elites — which makes allegations against him inherently charged and likely to be used by both critics and defenders for partisan effect [5] [1].
If you want, I can pull together the individual articles that list dates and exact quoted sums side‑by‑side so you can compare language and chronology across reports [4] [2] [1] [3].