(de-news.net) – Amid a context of markedly rising fuel prices, Federal Minister for Economic Affairs Katherina Reiche (CDU) has directed criticism at the mineral oil industry, arguing that it has failed to adequately justify recent price developments in Germany, where increases have reportedly exceeded the European average. She indicated that this divergence had not been convincingly explained by industry actors and that, as a consequence, the federal government was preparing to pursue regulatory intervention. In her assessment, the pattern of price-setting practices—characterized by frequent adjustments reportedly reaching up to twelve changes within a single day—has not contributed to improved transparency but has instead undermined market clarity. Against this background, she outlined a package of policy measures designed to address these concerns, including, among other provisions, the introduction of a cap limiting price increases at filling stations to once per day.
According to Reiche, the proposed measures are already undergoing interministerial coordination, suggesting that the policy initiative has entered an advanced stage of executive deliberation. Legislative consideration is expected to follow shortly, with the minister anticipating that an initial parliamentary reading could take place within the same week. This timeline, she suggested, would enable the legislative process to be concluded by late March or, at the latest, early April, thereby indicating an accelerated policy schedule in response to mounting public and political pressure.
Parallel criticism was articulated by Armand Zorn, deputy parliamentary group leader of the SPD, who characterized the industry’s conduct—particularly its presentation before the fuel price task force—as inconsistent and insufficiently persuasive. He emphasized that, in principle, retail fuel prices ought to reflect developments in global energy markets, yet noted that industry representatives had been unable to satisfactorily account for instances in which declining world market prices were not transmitted to consumers. This discrepancy, in his view, raised concerns regarding the fairness of market outcomes and reinforced the political rationale for intervention. On this basis, he confirmed that the governing parties intended to advance the fuel price reform package. In addition to proposing the adoption of a pricing framework modeled on the Austrian system, Zorn underscored the importance of strengthening the Federal Cartel Office, arguing that it should be equipped with enhanced powers to intervene more rapidly and to impose sanctions where there is a substantiated suspicion of unfair practices.
Cartel office cites limits
By contrast, the Federal Cartel Office has itself emphasized the institutional limits of its current mandate, noting that it does not possess the authority to directly regulate fuel prices. Its president, Andreas Mundt, explained that the pricing mechanisms employed by mineral oil companies are highly complex and require careful analytical reconstruction before any formal proceedings can be contemplated. He reiterated that the authority functions not as a price regulator but as a competition watchdog, capable of acting only in cases where collusion or anti-competitive agreements can be demonstrated. At present, he indicated, no such evidence is available. Moreover, he observed that the high degree of transparency in fuel markets enables firms to monitor competitors’ pricing behavior in real time, thereby reducing the necessity for explicit coordination while complicating the evidentiary threshold for regulatory intervention.
Within the broader policy debate, the German Taxpayers’ Association (BdSt) has also advanced proposals aimed at mitigating consumer burdens. Its president, Reiner Holznagel, called on the federal government to revise the application of value-added tax on fuel by limiting it to the net price and excluding the CO₂ levy, thereby eliminating what he characterized as a form of double taxation. He argued that such a measure would be consistent with established tax principles rather than constituting a subsidy and would represent a targeted and administratively feasible means of providing relief. Under the current system, the application of VAT to the CO₂ component increases the price of a liter of gasoline by approximately 2.5 euro cents, a margin that, in his view, could be reduced through relatively straightforward fiscal adjustment.
