The topic of “taxation of prosumers” is mostly a minor issue compared to others, but it affects a more active part of the population. I would like to consider this in a wider context, in the context of the explanations and reactions of the various “leaders” of the party(s) or “profile” ministers.

Their comments and justifications tragically reflect either their very limited understanding of EU renewable energy policy or a toxic convergence with various cross-party interest groups. What the Minister of Energy declares on TV seems to be no longer relevant.

Let’s analyze the official statements, ask ourselves questions and draw strict conclusions:

1 We hear through the media, as if in a great tragi-comedy, that ministers and party leaders are now in unison declaring that the GEO provisions will only apply after 2026 (so what is the urgency from OuH?…wasn’t it better to issue the OfUg, that is Order without urgency and will it go through public consultation and parliament? …and a Romanian innovation would also be to enrich the Management Regulation 1999-/2018 in the field of energy and climate change, for which, by the way, the Government of Romania received a notification about the transfer of this Regulation into our legislation)

2 This is explained to us with the word “justified and excusable”, so as you can see, the OAG transposes a European directive (I have not seen or heard any official clearly and frankly tell us what the Directive is about when it was issued by the EU when it was transposed in Romania, as far as its goalsand especially how it responds to Romania’s energy strategyor the Government’s energy strategy, especially in the current energy environment) The last person we would expect to explain to us what this is all about is the Minister of Energy.

Let’s find out more specifically:

• It is about EU Directive 2001/od December 11, 2018 (this week we “honor” it after 4 years of waiting for its transposition into Romanian law), which refers to promoting the use of energy from renewable sourcesand started with the joyfully mentioned (hopefully, not forever) OUG
• In the same contextit also refers to EU Regulation 1999 /also from 11.12.2018 (and we “remember” him this week, also 4 years after his “appearance among the worldly” and refers to the Office of Energy and Climate Change

Actually the correct order of reading/interpretation/application is the 1999 Regulation, the 2001 Directive and others which I will not mention now as they are part of a wider package.

So from the 77 pages of Reg 1999 + 59 pages of Performance Guidelines, to which are added 128 pages of the Renewable Sources Directive, so a total of over 250 pages management, policies, strategiesobjectives and results to be followed for the next 20-30 years, a small coalition from Bucharest decides to apply (and the bad ones!), exactly 2 paragraphs (68) and (69), with a total of 18 lines, from the 2001 Directive, considering that taxation of self-consumption of self-generated electricity) is important and of strategic importance, applicable but after 2026 (!?), according to the famous saying “Dorel strikes again!”

For good measure, let’s make available to readers websites where they can find the texts of the 1999 Regulation and the 2001 Directive, both in English and in Romanian. Useful to browse, even without being an expert, to see how governance and energy policy issues are framed at the macroeconomic levelfor the benefit of the consumer and the citizento understand the smallness of the coalition that apparently governs.

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/RO/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32018R1999&from=EN

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/RO/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32018L2001&from=es

Let’s reproduce just a few ideas from the above, about governance, policies and goals from the above, for the benefit of the citizen who is probably now (just) upset about being taxed for their own consumption (as I said, just a minor issue) but , he does not yet realize, unfortunately, what he should be indignant about, or rather, angry about:

At the center of management are (or should be) citizens, energy costs and climate (example taken from Reg.1999):

(26) When drawing up integrated national energy and climate plans, Member States should estimate the number of households affected by energy poverty, taking into account domestic energy services necessary to guarantee a minimum standard of living in the relevant national context, existing social and other relevant policies, and the Commission’s indicative guidance on relevant indicators, including geographical dispersal, based on a common approach to energy poverty. If a Member State finds that it has a significant number of households affected by energy poverty, it should include a national indicative energy poverty reduction target in its plan.

Use of resources, especially renewable ones: sun, wind, biomass (forest and agricultural), land, hydropower, waste, geothermal energy,

(NA: to all these resources, but, to absolutely all renewable resources of Romania, it has been discussed and created for a long time, contradicts the DirectivesEU, all kinds of barriers ministries, starting with biomass – the Ministry of the Environment, continuing with the Ministry of Agriculture – land for solar/wind installations, with Romanian Waters, which taxes hydropower at the cost of MWh, with waste, an area in which, “thanks to” the Ministry of Ecology, we violate – the same Ministry does not instruct within three years to prepare an environmental impact study to allow sustainable use of the forest fund, etc. )

I am not talking about this extract from the CE Recommendations ref. Regulations on management, where it is very clearly stated who is responsible for the integrated use of resources (sorry for the English language, I couldn’t find the text in Romanian, but I hope that the little leaders of the small coalition are fluent in the English language of these terms). The state is responsible, so… Read the rest of the article on Contributors.ro