6 Trillion Won in Cash-Like Support Programs Included in Future Response Fund: “Boosting Growth” vs. “Building Toward Basic Income”

[Financial News] It has been confirmed that the 162 trillion-won Future Response Fund being pursued by the Lee Jae-myung government includes approximately 6 trillion won in cash-like support programs.
An analysis of the Future Response Fund Management Plan submitted by the government to the National Assembly on the 9th found that approximately 5.982787 trillion won will be allocated to cash-like support programs. The plan specifies programs including the Rural Basic Income Pilot Project, which will provide residents of 35 counties in population-decline areas with 150,000 won per month in Local Love Gift Certificates, with approximately 1.1657 trillion won allocated; Basic Income for Children, which will provide up to 300,000 won per month to families raising children aged 0 to 12, with approximately 2.9282 trillion won allocated; and the Youth Culture and Arts Pass, which will support cultural and sports activities for young people aged 19 to 34, with approximately 792.5 billion won allocated. Other programs include youth rent support of approximately 231.8 billion won, childbirth support payments of approximately 698.1 billion won, and marriage support payments of 166.2 billion won.
The government and the ruling party plan to use the Future Response Fund, financed by excess tax revenue, as seed money for growth. However, the analysis confirms that resources will also be allocated to welfare programs. In submitting the relevant legislation, the government defined “future response investment” as “support programs for youth, growth engines, regional development, and education and talent development aimed at raising the nation’s potential growth rate.” It explained that, on this basis, the fund can finance programs supporting youth, childcare and education, rural areas, and local governments.
The opposition criticized not only the creation of the Future Response Fund itself but also the inclusion of cash-like support programs. A People Power Party lawmaker on the National Assembly’s Finance and Economy Planning Committee said, “If we are acting for future generations, we should reduce the debt they will have to repay.” The lawmaker added, “The desire for basic income is embedded in the fund. Basic income is gradually making its way into the Future Response Fund, and I view the fund itself as money being set aside for basic income.”
The opposition does not oppose the purpose of childbirth and marriage support programs, as it had also proposed them as election pledges. However, it opposed both the method of providing payments every month and the use of the Future Response Fund rather than the general account to finance them. A People Power Party member of the Finance and Economy Planning Committee said, “A one-time payment is acceptable, but if payments are made every month, the burden will eventually grow to an unmanageable level.” The lawmaker criticized the use of the fund as “a workaround for making the payments.”
Another point of contention is the “slush-fund” controversy. Up to 30% of major expenditure items can be adjusted at the government’s discretion without National Assembly approval. Compared with the budget, this weakens the National Assembly’s control while expanding the government’s discretion. The opposition expressed concern, saying, “We will have no choice but to use it up piecemeal.”

[email protected] Lee Hae-ram Reporter