[ad_1]
In the sights of the Energy and Climate Plan
The Energy and Climate Plan listed the subsidies that theoretically the Government would want to eliminate, in part different from those proposed by Minister Costa.
It had classified 30 “subsidies to analyze as priority because, in contrast to the objectives of the Plan”, 10 subsidies that “require additional technical analysis” (including excise duty on diesel) and 3 “subsidies that need to be reformed at the level of the EU or global ”(for example, the excise duty on jet fuel, regulated by international agreements).
Here are the ten with the greatest economic weight. Partial refund of excise duty on diesel paid by carriers (1,580 million), VAT subsidized forhousehold electricity (586.7 million), the lowest special tax for i agricultural fuels (913 million), tax aid to Energy plants (455.4 million), the least severe special tax for i heating fuels in the mountains, in Sardinia and in the smaller islands (152.8 million), the lowest excise tax on gas from large industrial consumers (60.9 million), a deduction from the income of fuel distributors (40.3 million), the lightest special tax for fuels and fuels purchased by armed forces (23.2 million), the special subsidized tax for Industrial LPG (12.6), the subsidized special tax on fuels used by Cab (10.8 million).
Other subsidies challenged by the Climate Plan, but considered less viable and less of a priority, were, for example, the difference in excise duties between gasoline and diesel, but also:
HE VAT discounted on business electricity and gas (1.4 billion);
HE exemption from special tax onhousehold electricity (634 million);
HE less fierce excise duties on fuels aviation (1.6 billion).
Subsidies include those for metallurgical industry, ceramic and other energy-intensive sectors, such as subsidies to electricity-intensive companies (aid to energy consumption worth 626 million) and for those available for instantaneous or emergency disconnection of the electricity supply (theinterruptibility worth 98 million), like the CO2 emission quotas (394.63 million) and aid to companies at risk of carbon leak, or even the incentive rates of Cip6 / 92 (445.9 million).
Why is diesel fuel affected?
Why hit diesel? I had said it in the Sole 24 Mineral the Minister of the Environment, Sergio Costa, but the Ministry of the Environment of the Catalog says so: “From an environmental point of view – the document points out – this difference in the tax treatment represents a significant distortion, since it encourages the use of vehicles with higher emissions’, in particular dust and nitrogen oxides.
However, diesel has lower emissions in terms of carbon dioxide, and the Catalog admits this: “On the other hand, diesel engines, if properly maintained and controlled, are more energy efficient than gasoline and this can lead to the reduction of CO2 emissions (gCO2 / km) contributing to the achievement of the climate objectives of carbon dioxide reduction ”.
The Court of Auditors on the diesel case
The comment of the judges of the Court of Accounts at the hearing on July 8 is interesting: «An example in this sense is the most relevant item among those highlighted, which is the lowest index of diesel compared to gasoline, valued at more than 6,000 million. It is well known that in France the proposal for a limited upward revision of diesel rates in autumn 2018 caused a strong social unrest linked to the increased energy poverty in rural areas, as if to freeze the entire project. In Italy, a revision in this sense, although desired by many and simple to implement, would see the opposition of the road transport and logistics sector and, therefore, it is classified in the group of measures that deserve further study.
The Court of Auditors adds on the classification of grants:
«The classification adopted in the Pniec does not follow an order of priority derived from an efficient price evaluation, that is, the price that considers external costs as the basis for the excise duty rate. According to some guidelines in the literature, for example, the sectors with the highest priority for intervention should be air and maritime transport, fishing, refining, agriculture and livestock because the relationship between external costs and the corrective tax is particularly high . In Pniec’s order of priority, on the contrary, interventions in air and maritime transport are delegated to specific agreements to be signed at the community or international level, with a low degree of viability ”.
