There were protests in Bulgaria cuz of the budget. Why did people.not like it?

1. Why people marched: the headline grievances

Protesters objected to sharp tax hikes and austerity-like measures built into the draft: an increase in social-security contributions and a doubling of the dividend tax were singled out as central pain points because they directly affect business owners, employees and savers — critics warned these moves would restrain investment, hit the middle class and push more activity into the informal economy ^{[1] [2] [6]}.

2. Who organised and who joined: politics and social groups in the streets

The main organisers were opposition forces — the coalition We Continue the Change – Democratic Bulgaria — but attendance included a mix of business groups, culture-sector workers concerned about missing grants, unions and ordinary citizens; cultural managers and artists specifically complained the draft left their sector underfunded ^{[2] [7]}. Organisers estimated turnout in the tens of thousands and linked the rallies to broader political grievances ^{[8] [7]}.

3. The government’s justification and the international alarm

The government framed parts of the package as necessary ahead of Bulgaria’s planned eurozone accession on January 1 — including increases in pensions and wages for healthcare staff — while the European Commission warned the draft risked breaching EU guidance on expenditure growth and the IMF urged tighter fiscal policy, creating external pressure and mixed signals about the budget’s appropriateness ^{[4] [6]}.

4. Economic arguments on both sides

Opponents argued higher taxes and bigger public spending financed by business levies and social-contribution hikes would spur inflation, reduce investment and swell the shadow economy ^{[6] [5]}. Supporters — including parts of the ruling coalition cited in reporting — defended wage rises in the public sector and pension increases as needed social measures and argued spending was part of managing the euro transition ^{[4] [9]}. Available sources do not provide detailed government cost-benefit models or independent quantitative estimates beyond those broad concerns and warnings (not found in current reporting).

5. Political overtones and accusations of motive

Reporting highlights that political calculations were suspected: opposition parties called the budget a “war on the middle class” and accused the ruling coalition of using pay rises to buy loyalty in the large public sector; commentators noted the coalition’s composition and accused parts of the governing bloc of downplaying protests ^{[2] [10]}. The government’s swift withdrawal after protests suggests political, not just fiscal, calculations influenced the outcome ^{[4] [3]}.

6. The demonstrations’ course and immediate effects

Tensions flared at times — objects were thrown, police intervened and a police vehicle was vandalised — but the protest concluded without a sustained escalation; after the street pressure and international warnings, the government announced it would withdraw the draft to reopen dialogue with employers and unions ^{[7] [3] [4]}. Organisers claimed large turnouts (around 20,000 in some reports) and tried to physically block MPs from leaving the legislature ^{[8] [5]}.

7. What critics fear next and what supporters want to see

Critics want the government to scrap the parts of the package that raise business and personal tax burdens and to produce a plan that protects investment and the middle class; they also demand transparency on how wage rises will be funded ^{[2] [6]}. Supporters and some in government argue for balancing social needs (pension and healthcare wage increases) with fiscal discipline required for euro accession and for avoiding policies that breach EU budgetary guidance ^{[4] [6]}.

8. Reporting limits and remaining unknowns

Available sources consistently report the same main facts — protests over steep tax hikes, the doubling of dividend tax, social-security increases, large turnout and the government’s withdrawal ^{[1] [11] [3]}. They do not publish a full line‑by‑line economic analysis of projected macro impacts, nor do they provide the government’s detailed counterfactual fiscal models in the reporting supplied here; therefore, independent verification of long-term economic effects is not found in current reporting (not found in current reporting).

Summary judgement: reporting shows a coalition of political opposition, businesses and social groups mobilised against a budget they said would raise taxes, burden the middle class and undermine investment; international bodies warned of fiscal risks; the combined domestic protests and external warnings prompted the government to retreat and seek renewed consultations ^{[4] [3] [6]}.