The PSOE government has opened a debate on what observers describe as a tax on energy companies. In July, Pedro Sánchez announced the proposed “solidarity contribution” aimed at fossil fuel firms, a measure aligned with the European Commission’s suggestion and negotiated among EU member states. If approved, the policy would mark a major shift from the community’s existing recommendations, differing in several respects from the bill advanced by Socialist parliamentary groups and United We Can, which Congress is set to begin examining this Tuesday.
The core idea is a levy that expands on the European Commission’s goals. It is designed to be adaptable so that what has already been approved at the European level can be implemented within the Union. This proposal was endorsed by the socialist deputy Patricia White during the plenary session as debates on the plan continued in Congress.
The Spanish proposal, described by some as a patrimonial benefit rather than a traditional tax, seeks to address legal ambiguities. It would impose a 1.2% charge over two years on the income of all energy companies with annual turnover exceeding one billion euros. In contrast, a coordinated and temporary solidarity contribution on oil, gas, coal, and refining is envisaged to produce higher returns than the levels seen in 2019, 2020, and 2021, with a focus on 2022 and onwards.
Visible changes
Analysts estimate that the government’s energy tax could bring in around two billion euros, with revenue traced from 2022, 2023, and 2024. The model would require banks to pay approximately 4.8% of the interest and commissions, potentially generating about 1.5 billion euros per year. In the context of rising interest rates driven by the European Central Bank, the tax collection landscape has evolved, and some forecasts may be adjusted for older data.
Most parliamentary groups, including ERC, PNV, and Bildu, expressed support for the socialist and allied bill while signaling that the tax is highly likely to proceed. They highlighted the possibility of adapting the measure to align with European decisions on energy issues. The ERC also signaled that the tax could become permanent if the benefits to the two sectors remained extraordinary.
Legal doubts
Some groups, such as Bildu and Junts, urged higher collection rates to boost revenue. PNV and Bildu stressed that they would not support the tax under the current terms unless changes are made to accommodate the management of state assets across the three Basque provinces and Navarra. They also warned that technical issues must be resolved to prevent potential court challenges that could block the measure.
Opposition voices from PP, Vox, and Ciudadanos argued that energy companies and banks would eventually pass the cost onto consumers. Although the text restricts penalties to 150% of the transfer price, the National Markets and Competition Commission (CNMC) could verify whether the measure affected consumer costs.