Have the Greek bailouts been included in state budgets Eurozone members? A lot of people (mainly journalists and politicians) say that Eurozone taxpayers pay for the Greek bailouts. On the other hand, a lot of economists say that those money have not been added in the yearly state budgets of the Eurozone members because they are not physical money coming from the tax payers. 

Contrary, most of the Greek bailout funds are given in the form of intergovernmental guarantees for which Greece pays actual real interests. Additionally, the bailouts not being bond-like give the creditors as the Eurozone countries the right to ask back the value of these guarantees whenever they like.

Can someone objectively clarify the situation? Specifically, can you give some details on the form of these intergovernmental guarantees?
I don't know of a full accounting in the Eurozone but Measuring the True Cost of Government Bailout (Block (2010)) provides a look at the on- and off-budget costs of the bailouts in the United States and finds they were substantially off-budget. 


  Government intervention to assist individual businesses and industries
  during the 2008–2009 economic crisis was extraordinary in variety and
  scope. Despite official protestations of "no more bailout" in the
  Dodd- Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010,
  future government interventions are inevitable, should economic
  circumstances become sufficiently dire. Moreover, even if Congress
  eliminates overt bailout-type interventions, indirect forms of public
  bailout are likely to continue. Understandably, taxpayers have been
  concerned about the cost. A simple tally of dollars authorized or
  disbursed is wholly inadequate to accurately assess the costs of
  various interventions. This Article addresses the challenges of
  providing reasonable budgetary information with respect to different
  types of bailout expenditures. In addition to looking at costs for the
  more obvious bailout programs, the analysis explores the special cost
  estimation challenges for other more covert actions, such as special
  tax breaks or relief from burdensome regulation, that serve a
  "bailout" function. The Article also takes issue with the
  fragmentation of intervention efforts among different "on-budget" and
  "off-budget" entities and with some of the methodologies used by the
  government to value assets obtained in its bailout efforts, arguing
  that decision making about the appropriate allocation of aggregate
  resources is hampered when some expenditures are "off-budget"
  altogether and when even "on-budget" agencies use different accounting
  methods. Finally, the Article calls for transparency and budget
  accounting for public bailouts accomplished more indirectly through
  the tax system and other regulatory regimes. Adequate and transparent
  budget accounting for bailout costs requires greater consistency in
  valuation and accounting methods, and a more unified presentation of
  aggregate information in the budget with respect to all government
  bailout-type activities.


Pages 23-25 explain what she means by off-budget and it takes her 3 pages to say exactly what she means, but approximately "on-budget" means upfront costs that appear on the government's budget while "off-budget" is everything else, including the value of contingent liabilities and expenditures by entities in the control of the US government but for whatever reason do not have accounts fully consolidated into the budget.