(de-news.net) – Steffen Bilger, First Parliamentary Secretary of the CDU/CSU parliamentary group in the German Bundestag, stated that additional measures to address rising energy costs remain under consideration. Possible interventions—including a windfall-profit tax or targeted forms of price relief—had not been excluded, he indicated, while the government continued to monitor fuel prices and broader market developments. According to Bilger, the coalition committee would review potential responses in upcoming discussions, although several proposals currently circulating in public debate could face legal and regulatory constraints that complicate their implementation. At the same time, he emphasized that the governing coalition had already adopted a number of measures designed to reduce the burden of high energy prices on consumers. These policies included adjustments to electricity taxation and grid fees as well as an increase in the commuter tax allowance. However, despite earlier campaign pledges by coalition parties, the electricity-tax reduction introduced at the beginning of the year applied primarily to industrial producers and to the forestry and agricultural sectors, rather than to private households. Bilger also expressed support in principle for an Austrian-style system regulating daily fuel price adjustments. While concerns had been raised that filling stations might respond by setting higher initial prices, he noted that existing transparency regulations already require stations to disclose prices publicly, allowing consumers to compare costs online and potentially limiting abusive pricing behavior.
Recent market developments, however—including comparatively higher fuel prices in Germany and frequent daily price adjustments—have strengthened calls for additional safeguards. In this context, a system restricting price increases to once per day, while still allowing subsequent reductions, has been proposed as a possible mechanism to curb exploitative pricing practices and introduce greater predictability into the retail fuel market. Support for limiting the number of daily price increases was also voiced by Jörg Dittrich, president of the Zentralverband des Deutschen Handwerks. Responding to the proposal advanced by Economy Minister Katherina Reiche, he described the initiative as a relatively modest regulatory intervention that would be unlikely to overburden oil companies while potentially improving planning reliability for craft businesses and small enterprises that depend heavily on fuel costs. At the same time, Dittrich cautioned that expectations regarding the measure’s direct effect on prices should remain limited. Fuel costs are shaped by a variety of structural factors, including taxes, regulatory levies, and the fact that crude oil is traded internationally in U.S. dollars, meaning that exchange-rate fluctuations and global commodity markets significantly influence domestic pricing. Nevertheless, he argued that the measure could help stabilize a highly volatile market environment and should be complemented by continued antitrust scrutiny of the retail fuel sector.
Germany plans strategic oil reserve release
At the same time, the German government announced plans to release part of its strategic oil reserves in response to a coordinated request from the International Energy Agency. The agency had asked its member states collectively to make up to 400 million barrels available in order to help stabilize international energy markets following supply disruptions. The proposed volume would exceed the roughly 182 million barrels released by member states in 2022 after the outbreak of the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Several other countries, including Austria and Japan, also announced planned releases from their national reserves. Reiche emphasized that Germany itself was not currently experiencing a physical supply shortage, but she framed the measure as both a gesture of solidarity with countries more dependent on shipments from the Gulf region and as a coordinated signal intended to reassure global markets. Initial reactions in energy markets were limited, partly because the planned intervention had already been anticipated by traders.
Mixed political reactions
Reactions to the policy package differed across the political spectrum. The CDU economic policy specialist Kai-Whittaker Wiener welcomed the decision to release oil reserves, describing it as a short-term instrument that could help dampen sudden price spikes. At the same time, he stressed that such a step would not resolve the underlying structural issue of constrained oil supply. By contrast, Janine Wissler of Die Linke argued that stricter regulatory oversight of fuel pricing had long been necessary, describing repeated daily price increases as an unreasonable burden for consumers. She nevertheless emphasized that restricting the frequency of price adjustments alone would not prevent further price increases and called for significantly stronger government intervention in the fuel market.
Criticism also emerged from economic advisory circles. Economist Veronika Grimm, a member of Germany’s Council of Economic Experts, questioned the effectiveness of limiting fuel price increases to once per day. She warned that the policy—modeled on regulatory practices in Austria—could encourage filling stations to raise prices preemptively in order to hedge against future wholesale increases. In her assessment, the initiative appeared largely politically motivated, reflecting public expectations that policymakers respond visibly to rising fuel costs. Although she considered the proposal unlikely to cause major harm, Grimm argued that governments should avoid broader subsidy programs such as fuel rebates. With regard to the release of national oil reserves, she also cautioned against acting prematurely, noting that the duration of the current crisis remains uncertain and that strategic reserves are finite resources. At the same time, she acknowledged that their deployment can help cushion short-term disruptions in energy markets.
Audio: TTSFree
