CEO of Endesa, José Bogas, indicated that the government could act promptly. He stressed that making the regulation clearer and more transparent, with greater predictability and stability, would boost investor confidence in Spain.
In an interview with Europa Press, Bogas noted that investors always seek stability. When stability is uncertain, it creates constraints or hesitations about where to place capital.
He suggested that a government that must broker agreements with multiple parties to run the legislature could be seen as a vulnerability.
Within this context, the group InsideThe main shareholder of the Spanish electricity company Endesa, placed a high-stakes bet on the company. Endesa received a formal vote of confidence through a strategic plan valued at roughly 9 billion euros for the next three years.
He outlined the framework amid ongoing uncertainties, including an extraordinary tax planned for 2023 and 2024. The proposed levy would tax 1.2% of turnover for companies with revenues above €1,000 million, excluding regulated activities and operations outside Spain and non-peninsular areas. He described this as a potential solidarity contribution from large firms. Companies are in a challenging period, yet he argued that there is little point in imposing such a tax once the crisis subsides or during the worst moments of the downturn, when the situation begins to normalize.
In its new three-year strategic plan, Endesa does not anticipate the extraordinary tax for 2023 and 2024 extending beyond what was planned. The PSOE and Sumar government agreement envisages extending the arrangement, with bets that the tax will not apply from 2025 onward.
He argued that the measure does not make sense in itself, as it is no longer an extraordinary contribution and would hinder the investments needed to fight climate change. He emphasized that the substantial investments required to transition to cleaner energy must be financed in the future, and a tax that drains resources would also consume investment capacity. He also noted that competitors outside Spain, and even some rivals within Spain, would not face this tax, making it less reasonable.
Regarding another agreement within the PSOE and Sumar pact, such as the bailout of the former National Energy Commission, Endesa’s top executive estimated that there is no major difference in the scope of authority among the relevant bodies. He referenced the National Markets and Competition Commission, expressing that separating the two would not bring a large difference, as he explained to Europa Press.
A new wave of regulation to tackle
On the government’s roadmap to decarbonize by 2030, via the draft National Integrated Energy and Climate Plan presented at the end of June, Bogas said he is proud of the ambition in climate action and the goals set. He also noted that adjustments are still needed to electrify everything that is necessary.
He warned that a great deal of work remains to provide the regulatory framework required to address energy-transition challenges, including storage regulation and a redesigned electricity market, among other elements.
He stated that decisions often have to be made with all the information available in business and life, and this plan represents a firm commitment to investing in Spain that will stand for the duration of the strategy. He added that the timing should favor quick progress whenever possible.
Bogas pointed out, with support from Teresa Ribera, the head of the energy portfolio, that Spain has made tremendous efforts, and government plans to combat climate change are appreciated. He also stressed the need for greater specificity about where changes are required, particularly in regulation and the transmission networks, which are seen as a critical factor for integrating renewables and electrifying demand.
Energy crisis considerations
He believes the energy crisis caused by the war in Ukraine has already been resolved, or at least stabilized. He commented that while there may be occasional price volatility, such fluctuations are now part of daily business, not a sudden global shock.
He acknowledged that exceptional measures used during the crisis, such as limiting non-marginal production from certain sources and contracts priced above a threshold, were accepted but should be removed once the crisis passes. He concluded that while these instruments were sensible during emergency conditions, they have drawbacks for regulation, particularly at the European Union level, and that the market remains a European issue that requires ongoing scrutiny.