More than a dozen EU member states are pushing back against European Commission proposals to make electricity cheaper than natural gas through preferential taxation, arguing that Brussels is overstepping its authority. At a meeting of EU energy ministers in Luxembourg on Thursday, Germany, Italy, Malta, the Czech Republic, Bulgaria, Slovakia, Finland, Romania, Croatia, Poland, Latvia, Estonia, and Hungary were among those calling for the controversial provision to be dropped.
The proposal is part of the Commission's broader strategy to encourage households and businesses to shift from fossil fuels to electricity, as demand from industry, data centres, heat pumps, and electric vehicles continues to rise. But the growing cost of expanding and operating Europe's electricity grids is increasingly being passed on to consumers through higher bills.
The debate comes amid an energy crisis exacerbated by the US-Israeli war against Iran, which has sent prices soaring and intensified pressure on Brussels to ease the burden on households and industry. Even before the Middle East conflict, European electricity prices were roughly twice those in the US and China, prompting European manufacturers to demand urgent action.
During an informal summit in February, EU leaders vowed to lower energy prices by making electricity taxation more favourable than natural gas. However, several countries argue that tax policy should be handled through the ongoing revision of the Energy Taxation Directive, which requires unanimity, rather than being decided by qualified majority vote as the Commission proposes.
National flexibility vs. one-size-fits-all
Sweden's energy minister, Ebba Busch, called for better regulation instead of more bureaucracy. “Given the very significant differences in grids and the grid characteristics across the Union, there is no one-size-fits-all solution for tariff design,” Busch said.
Spain, Denmark, and Luxembourg have backed the Commission, though they asked for some flexibility. “The proposals should include flexibility for member states to set clear political priorities for ambitious electrification policies to ensure pace and scale of grid expansion,” said Søren Jacobsen, Denmark's permanent representative.
France sought a middle path, calling for a secure legal basis and suggesting the measure be tied to specific circumstances such as a gas crisis. Luxembourg floated replacing the provision with a general obligation to promote electrification.
Brussels vs. national control
The strongest opposition centred on the Commission's plan to set common rules for how electricity grid charges are calculated across the EU, without needing fresh approval from member states and the European Parliament each time. Italy, France, Germany, Slovakia, Poland, Spain, Finland, and others argued that this would undermine the independence of national regulators and give Brussels too much power over decisions that should be made at national level.
Finland noted that its parliament had formally concluded the proposal violates the principle of subsidiarity. “Member states must retain sufficient flexibility to reflect their national circumstances, investment needs and electricity systems. We are also concerned by the lack of comprehensive impact assessment,” said Mika Nykänen, Finland's state representative.
Energy Commissioner Dan Jørgensen held his ground in his closing remarks, saying the EU executive's proposal “makes a lot of sense”. He noted that the legal services of both the Commission and the Council judged the proposal legally sound. “It could have both an immediate and a structural impact on reducing our electricity bills. We should not deprive our consumers and industries of the benefits of this proposal,” Jørgensen told ministers.
The standoff highlights a broader tension between Brussels and national capitals over energy policy, a theme that has also surfaced in debates over Nord Stream's future and EU border management. As the Commission pushes for a more integrated energy market, many member states remain wary of ceding control over key decisions that affect their citizens' bills and their industrial competitiveness.
