The Energy Transition Fund (where money is collected from the re-taxation of energy companies) is tormenting the Ministry of Finance. I just don’t understand why there is not enough money.

This was confirmed by the State Secretary of the Ministry of Finance, Daniela Pescaru.

“I don’t understand one thing: why isn’t compensation collected in the Transitional Fund if energy is bought at a high price? In theory, 80% of the surcharge should be paid into the Transition Fund to offset the price cap,” she said.

Therefore, Pescaru believes that a much broader discussion should be held with the President of ANRE and the Minister of Energy.

“Something is happening there. Something is happening with the tax that the producers pay,” Pescaru said.

Under the GEO project, the government will be able to settle bills from energy and gas suppliers on a delayed basis, with payments made according to money available in the Energy Transition Fund.

Since there is not enough money, he will not be able to fulfill his obligations.

“I presented the problem of the leadership of the ministry. Yesterday evening, the minister expressed his desire to meet today or tomorrow with the Minister of Energy and the President of ANRE. The final decision will be made at the Government meeting if this article remains,” she said.

The Ministry of Energy recommended removing the article that provides for payment from the Transitional Fund

A representative of Concordia, Alina Verega, said that the Ministry of Energy, in a message sent to the KES, asks to remove the article on payment from the Transitional Fund, as it sees risks in the system.

“This money, which goes from the state budget for limited prices, is not for suppliers, but for consumers. “Delayed payments affect the customer, all consumers, and put them at risk during the winter,” she said.

Verega also stated that suppliers to the energy market are fully regulated.

“We have administratively established costs. We are just the tool chosen by the Romanian state to implement this opportunity for customers,” explained the representative of Concordia.

Explanation of the small amount of funds in the Transitional Fund:

Alina Verega explained the smaller amounts from the Transitional Fund:

“We sell at the marginal price. We buy part of the energy at the market price. These purchases are confirmed and verified by ANRE. There, de facto, less money is collected, because prices have also fallen. The tax base is much smaller.”

What is written in the positive conclusion of the KES regarding the resolution that postpones some expenses for 2024

KES requests to cancel the changes made to Art. 9 GEO 27/2022 regarding the payment of sums to suppliers for the pre-financing of support schemes, which is carried out within the sums available in the Transitional Fund for the following reasons:

• Supply to consumers ahead of winter is at risk because suppliers do not have the necessary financial resources to purchase energy, further pre-fund support schemes and ensure chain payments to operators that enable consumers to be supplied.

• Calculations record payment delays of 4-5 months. Suppliers borrowed to be able to pre-fund the support scheme and make timely payments to the supply chain. The influence of banks on the energy sector is at an unprecedented level, reaching the upper limit and forcing companies to look for additional sources, which has significantly increased the cost of financing.

• Amounts allocated from the state budget to support price caps are intended for consumers, not suppliers. The market is fully regulated and the cost of supply is also set administratively.

• There is a significant risk of provoking a blockage of the entire energy system.

• The measure is unconstitutional: it violates Art. 44 of the Constitution, which guarantees private property and prohibits any expropriation that does not comply with the rules of fair and prior compensation. In practice, the gradual accumulation of legislative measures leads to the effect of indirect expropriation, bearing the additional costs of suppliers caused by the intervention of the state and which cannot be compensated, since the state limits this possibility through a regulatory act.