["JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, Volume 64, Issue 4, Page 1594-1615, July 2026. ", "\nAbstract\nThe article analyses governance of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) in three Baltic states as ‘extreme’ cases of RRF dissensus, where the Commission used RRF carrots and sticks to push tax‐financed social and tax reforms against national preferences. Bridging the literature on RRF governance and politicisation of Europe and drawing on document analysis, press and 26 interviews, the article argues that RRF dissensus is shaped by (1) the extent of EU conditionalities in plans' formulation and implementation; (2) divergence between the country‐specific recommendations and national policy preferences; and (3) involvement of broader social actors. Going beyond the literature's focus on the formulation phase of national plans and extending the focus to how the plans are implemented, the article sheds new light on the Commission's role as a social advocate in the EU's neoliberal periphery and its potentially adverse effects on democratic legitimacy and national ownership.\n"]