The entry into force of the ETS2 system has been postponed from 2027 to 2028. According to Bogdan Rzońca, a Member of the European Parliament from PiS and the ECR group, it should be blocked altogether. “Our group will push for that, because ETS2 significantly increases energy prices in all European Union countries,” he says. He adds that all European Commission tax proposals that would raise the cost of living should be opposed. In his view, a better solution for preserving the EU’s competitiveness is to look for savings instead.
As part of the 2023 revision of the ETS Directive, a new emissions trading system, ETS2, was created. It is separate from the existing EU scheme and will cover CO2 emissions generated by the combustion of fuels in buildings and road transport. The obligation to monitor and report emissions will fall on fuel suppliers rather than end consumers such as households or car users. These entities will be regulated under ETS2 and will therefore be required to surrender a sufficient number of emission allowances to cover the emissions they generate. They will purchase those allowances at auctions.
“The European Parliament’s decision to postpone ETS2 is a good one. We now have two years to block it entirely. Our group, the European Conservatives and Reformists, will push for that, because ETS2 greatly increases energy prices in all European Union countries. It is a bad solution,” Bogdan Rzońca said in an interview with Newseria. “At the same time, we are also strongly criticizing the idea of taking away from member states the money they currently receive from the sale of carbon emission allowances under ETS1.”
In the European Commission’s proposed new multiannual budget for 2028–2034, revenues from the EU emissions trading system were included among the Union’s new own resources. At present, 100 percent of the money generated by the existing ETS1 goes to member states, but under the new proposal, 30 percent would be transferred to the EU budget. The Commission expects this to generate an average of around €9.6 billion per year.
“We can see that the European Union’s budget is bursting at the seams. Parliament is showing the European Commission a better path than the one it has chosen by introducing burdens linked to the Green Deal and expensive energy. I hope Parliament will remain consistent, that we will block the reinstatement of ETS2 and the introduction of new taxes,” the MEP emphasizes.
The next multiannual financial framework also предусматриes budget revenues from the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, or CBAM. Its purpose is to ensure that the prices of products imported into the European Union also reflect the costs of carbon emissions generated during their production in countries outside the EU.
“CBAM is a very complicated tax. If someone in the European Union believes that imposing a tax on goods coming from China or the United States because of their carbon footprint will solve the problem, they must also reckon with the fact that those countries may introduce a new tax of their own or increase existing taxes on EU goods. I would rather move in the direction of seeking agreement and understanding between the European Union and the United States. This is where the greatest potential for conflict lies,” says Bogdan Rzońca. “We have many international organizations that could help, including the World Trade Organization. Good solutions for both sides need to be negotiated there. They will never be perfect, but that is always better than acting against one another.”
Discussions are also underway in the European Parliament about introducing other taxes that could strengthen the EU budget. One proposal is to introduce a harmonized EU approach to the online gambling sector, including the possibility of imposing a tax. According to European Parliament analyses, such a solution could allow the European Union to raise as much as €4 billion annually.
“Taxes such as the one on gambling or on large companies that use the territory of the European Union to generate revenue can be introduced, provided they are well prepared. We would be happy to support such solutions, because if someone benefits from the EU market, they should pay taxes on that basis,” the PiS MEP stresses. “However, all tax measures that would raise the cost of living should be blocked. I mean, for example, a tax on electronic waste. Anyone disposing of a refrigerator or washing machine would pay around €2 per kilogram of the recycled device. There is also an idea for a tobacco tax, and we will see what happens with that, but the tobacco industry is already protesting.”
According to European Commission calculations, own resources based on uncollected e-waste could bring the EU budget an average of around €15 billion per year. As for excise duties on tobacco products, the proposal concerns 15 percent of revenues based on the minimum rate specific to each member state for tobacco products and their substitutes. These are expected to generate an average of around €11.2 billion annually.
“The European Union has the capacity to prepare solutions that improve the budgetary situation. However, this must be thoroughly discussed among all 27 countries,” says Bogdan Rzońca. “The EU is an important economic player in the world. It must compete with China and the United States, so it needs a larger budget, but that can be achieved, for example, by cutting expenditures that are economically inefficient. As a conservative, I would focus on looking for savings. If the European Union becomes more frugal and allocates budget money to development, artificial intelligence, and economic competitiveness, and if it lowers energy prices, companies will stop leaving.”
He stresses that current policies are causing more and more industrial plants in the EU to shut down. In February this year, the European Parliament gave the green light for the payment of €7.5 million from the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund for Displaced Workers to support nearly 3,500 people who lost their jobs after the closure of Audi’s plant in Brussels. Another €1.6 million is to be paid to workers laid off following the closure of a Tupperware plant in Belgium.
“The queue for money from the Globalisation Fund is getting longer and longer. This shows how serious the problems faced by businesses in the European Union really are. That is why they are moving to the United States, China, or other tax havens outside the Union. We end up with fewer jobs, lower budget revenues, and an uncompetitive economy. This is where I see major room for action through cuts in inefficient spending,” says the Law and Justice MEP.
