Why cutting fuel duty increases oil dependence and funnels benefits to the very richest. We need a tax on Russian oil.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has pushed fuel prices to recent highs. To appease drivers at the pump, half of EU Member States (14 of 27 – see our Fuel Duty Tracker) have reacted by cutting fuel taxes. This study analyses the cost of these measures to public finances and explores other ways to raise revenue and help low-income families through the energy crisis.
While this policy approach has a simplistic appeal, it also generates perverse environmental incentives and inequitable social outcomes as the rich use eight times more fuel than the poor and oil companies will adjust their prices to take a share of the tax cut.
It is also an extremely expensive approach, already totalling nearly €9 billion in Member State commitments – an amount that may continue to rise if more Member States announce similar measures or if the temporary reductions are prolonged.
We call on EU member states to:
These recommendations provide a more equitable distribution of financial benefits by helping the poor as much as the rich and a more just means of public financing by taxing Russian oil imports. These recommendations would also avoid the perverse environmental and health impacts that arise from subsidising fuel and would move us closer towards a Europe free of Russian oil and free from fossil fuels altogether.
Cutting regulation is a gift to China’s car makers
Europe’s carmakers have a unique competitive advantage over their Chinese counterparts - yet the Omnibus proposals risk throwing it away
How to help Indonesia clean up its minerals act
Indonesia is big when it comes to the new race to secure minerals and cleantech. But as nickel demand takes off, so does its environmental and social...
The EU's funding instrument to support the rollout of public charging lacks €1.25 billion at a critical moment. An initiative to fill this gap should ...