Flawed data, customer service issues, and outdated IT systems have drawn criticism from Austria’s Court of Audit regarding the ORF, the ORF Contribution Service, as well as the Ministries of Interior and Finance.
Instead of reducing costs, they increased by €1.45 million: The Court of Audit (RH) examined the impact of the 2024 transition from a device-based GIS fee to the ORF contribution system and its effects on the ORF Contribution Service GmbH (OBS). The auditors found that, contrary to expectations from the Ministry of Finance and the OBS (formerly GIS GmbH), the change did not lower expenses for the ORF subsidiary. In fact, costs rose from 2023 to 2024 by €1.45 million.
The increase was largely due to rising material and consulting costs at the OBS. Incomplete data in the Central Register (ZMR) – specifically address information such as door numbers in larger cities – made it difficult to identify eligible contributors, leading to numerous problems that, in turn, increased inquiries, complaints, and staffing needs. In 2024, door numbers were missing for 590,000 of the 10.62 million personal addresses listed in the ZMR. The OBS only became aware of the poor data quality at the end of 2023, when the first ZMR data was transmitted to them. This data deficiency resulted in households receiving multiple payment requests due to inconsistent address entries in the ZMR.
The ORF was compelled to establish a special task force, dubbed a “Soko,” to investigate unclear cases.
In a statement released Friday regarding the RH report, the ORF pointed to unfavorable circumstances surrounding the transition, noting that, unlike similar changes in Germany or Switzerland, it had only four months to implement the modern system. This “presented significant challenges for both the OBS and the ORF,” the statement read. The limited timeframe meant that IT systems and infrastructure could not be adequately adapted to the new requirements, or had to be adjusted during operation. The poor quality of the ZMR data also “led to significantly more interactions with contributors than expected and, to backlogs in processing.”
The Court of Audit recommends that the Ministry of Finance, when initiating legislation that anticipates automated processes, consider feasibility during the legislative process and consult with the Ministry of the Interior to establish uniform regulations for the ZMR. Municipalities should also be involved to ensure better data quality.
The highest material cost for the OBS in 2024, at €8.3 million, was postage. However, not all letters were opened. Market research indicated that the OBS brand was so unknown that some contributors discarded the mail without reading it.
Many complaints to the OBS concerned long wait times, payment reminders despite fee exemptions, unjustified collection notices, or a lack of response after uploading death certificates. The RH found that the OBS had been aware of these customer service deficiencies for years. The complaint management system could have been adapted and professionally established for the system change, the auditors noted.
Customer service was expanded to handle the increased number of inquiries, with temporary staff and an external call center being utilized. However, no support was provided by the ORF’s own customer service department, a missed opportunity for cost savings. The RH also criticized the outsourcing of core activities, such as identifying contributors and informing the public about contribution obligations, arguing that it created dependencies on third parties and neglected the development of in-house expertise. The OBS did not obtain comparative bids for numerous services.
Alexander Hirschbeck, the former OBS managing director, was replaced by Bettina Parschalk in mid-2025, following the RH audit. The ORF Foundation Council had previously pressured for greater customer focus at the OBS. The Court of Audit is currently conducting a comprehensive review of the ORF.
Regarding the current report, both the ORF and OBS state that they “agree with the findings of the Court of Audit in most cases.” They have already implemented various measures, such as replacing the OBS management, reviewing and terminating consulting contracts, and leveraging synergies between the ORF and OBS. “The measures taken ensure that the expenses of the OBS will decrease in the coming years,” the ORF stated. (APA)
