Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Business

Man Who Sold Anti-Ukrainian Posters to Orbán Now Offers to Transfer Company to the State — and Has Had Accounts Frozen

Gyula Balashi transformed zero state contracts into 150 per year over 13 years and earned nearly a billion dollars. After Orban's electoral defeat, he was the first to offer to surrender his business — but police are already taking action.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

May 6, 2026 · 2 min read

Man Who Sold Anti-Ukrainian Posters to Orbán Now Offers to Transfer Company to the State — and Has Had Accounts Frozen
Дьюла Балаші (фото - hvg.hu)

Hungarian police have launched an investigation against companies owned by Gyula Balash — a media magnate whose business effectively served the state propaganda apparatus of Viktor Orban's government for more than a decade. Accounts were frozen on April 27, with an official police statement appearing the following day after Balash himself publicly offered to hand over his companies to the new authorities.

From zero to 150 contracts per year

The scale of the scheme is evident in the numbers: according to Hungary's Corruption Research Center (CRCB), the number of government contracts awarded to Balash's companies grew from zero to 150 per year during Orban's rule from 2012 to 2025. By Transparency International's calculations, in 2019-2021 alone, three key companies of the magnate — Lounge Design, New Land Media, and Media Dynamics — received contracts from the National Communication Office worth 295 billion forints, equivalent to approximately 960 million dollars.

These same companies developed Orban's anti-Ukrainian election campaign in 2025 — with the message about "a choice between war and peace" — as well as his long-standing anti-immigration campaigns.

The logic of "voluntary" transfer

Balash announced his willingness to hand over his business to the state before police publicly disclosed the investigation. He explained his decision as follows:

"Not because there is something to hide, or because we did something illegal or improper."

Gyula Balash, owner of Lounge Group

However, the timeline undermines this narrative: accounts were frozen on April 27, Prime Minister Peter Madar publicly stated on April 28 that tax authorities had blocked attempts by people close to Orban to move funds abroad — and only after that did the "voluntary" offer emerge.

Investigation without a suspect

The police's wording is telling: the investigation was launched "against an unidentified person" on suspicion of misappropriation of funds and money laundering. Separately, "contracts with inflated prices" are being examined. This is a standard procedural construct that allows evidence to be gathered without publicly naming a suspect — and which can easily transform into specific charges.

The Balash case unfolds against the backdrop of a broader process: following his party's electoral defeat, Orban's associates began urgently moving assets abroad, forcing the new authorities to respond swiftly.

Lounge Group did not respond to Reuters' inquiry.

The key question for the coming weeks: whether the investigation "against an unidentified person" will transform into a case with a named defendant — and whether subpoenas will follow for the National Communication Office itself, which distributed the contracts.

Related

Latest

Business

EU Against Google: Why the Latest Fine Could Change More Than Previous Ones

# European Regulators Target Google Again — This Time Over Digital Markets Act Violations. What's Behind the Accusations and Why It Matters Beyond the Corporation European regulators have renewed their scrutiny of Google, this time focusing on alleged violations of the Digital Markets Act. The charges underscore Brussels' increasingly aggressive stance on big tech monopolies and what officials say are anticompetitive practices. The accusations center on how Google leverages its dominance across multiple digital services — from search to advertising to mobile platforms — to disadvantage competitors. Regulators claim the company is using its market power in ways that stifle innovation and limit consumer choice. The case carries significance far beyond Google itself. It signals how the EU is attempting to enforce its landmark Digital Markets Act, legislation designed to curb the gatekeeping power of tech giants. A potential penalty could set precedent for how other large technology companies face similar scrutiny. For consumers and smaller tech firms, the outcome could reshape the digital landscape by creating more room for competition. For Google, fines and operational restrictions could fundamentally alter its business model in Europe, the world's most stringent regulatory market. The case also reflects a broader geopolitical divide, with the EU pursuing a regulatory approach that contrasts sharply with the lighter-touch oversight favored in the United States.

May 26, 2026