By Maurizio Pavia, Francesco Pizzo, Piera Penna, Magda Serriello, Federica De Luca, Annalisa Di Ruzza

Tax Section

Reference for a preliminary ruling before the Court of Justice of the European Union concerning the extraordinary contribution against high energy bills

In the document concerning Case C-791/26, the Bologna Tax Court refers to the Court of Justice of the European Union a number of questions regarding the compatibility with EU law of the Italian extraordinary contribution against high energy bills provided for by Article 37 of Decree-Law No. 21/2022.

In particular, the court asks whether a levy that also applies to producers of electricity from renewable sources and that is calculated on the increase in the balance of VAT transactions, rather than on the windfall profits actually earned, is compatible with EU Regulation 2022/1854, adopted to address the increase in energy prices. The question also concerns the fact that this mechanism may not adequately take into account the costs and investments incurred by operators.

The Court of Justice of the European Union will also have to clarify whether the contribution may be incompatible with EU rules if, also as a result of its cumulative effect with other levies on energy operators, it ultimately hinders investments in renewable energy and the objectives of the Union’s energy policy.

Finally, two further issues are raised: on the one hand, whether limiting the levy only to certain categories of energy operators may result in a selective advantage for excluded operators, relevant for the purposes of EU State aid rules; on the other hand, whether the levy may entail a disproportionate financial burden and therefore conflict with the European protection of the right to property.

For the sake of completeness, we note that on 22 October the Advocate General delivered his Opinion in another case (C-153/25) concerning the compatibility of national measures with Regulation (EU) 2022/1854.

The dispute arose from the broader scope of the Italian measure compared with that envisaged by the Regulation. Indeed, the Regulation introduced a temporary contribution on the surplus profits of undertakings operating in the crude oil, natural gas, coal and refinery sectors. Italy, through Article 1, paragraphs 115 et seq., of Law No. 197/2022, defined a broader scope, also including electricity producers and resellers, importers and downstream operators. The Italian Constitutional Court therefore asked the Court of Justice whether such extension was compatible with the EU Regulation. According to the Advocate General, Regulation (EU) 2022/1854 does not preclude Italy from extending the solidarity contribution to operators other than those expressly covered by the EU Regulation, thus including, for example, electricity producers and resellers and downstream operators in the gas and petroleum products sectors.

Finally, as regards the specific situation of electricity producers already subject to the revenue cap measure, the Advocate General notes that Regulation (EU) 2022/1854 does not expressly preclude the temporary contribution introduced from being applied to undertakings in the electricity sector that are also subject to the revenue cap measure provided for in Article 6 of that Regulation, provided that the conditions laid down in Article 8(2) thereof are met. However, it is for the referring court to determine whether those conditions are satisfied in the case at hand (coverage of operating costs, profitability consistent with the expectations of a reasonable investor, and avoidance of adverse effects on investments).

According to the Constitutional Court, the windfall profit contribution for branches determined solely on output transactions is not unreasonable

With Judgment No. 135 of 21 July 2026, the Constitutional Court revisited the question of the constitutional legitimacy of Article 37 of Decree-Law No. 21/2022 (“contribution against high energy bills”).

The Court declared manifestly unfounded all the questions already examined in its previous Judgment No. 180/2025 (confiscatory effect, breach of the ability-to-pay principle, retroactivity, infringement of the right to property, failure to take into account the commencement of business activities during the comparison period); it also declared unfounded the new question concerning the treatment of transactions carried out through foreign permanent establishments.

With reference to the latter point, the taxpayer’s observation that the “LIPE” filings (periodical VAT settlement, whose data formed the basis for determining the contribution) include output transactions of permanent establishments but do not include the corresponding input transactions was unsuccessful. Although acknowledging the asymmetry, the Court held that this effect does not exceed the threshold of “manifest unreasonableness”. Indeed, if output transactions were excluded from the calculation, this would result in the contribution being substantially inapplicable, generating unequal treatment compared with operators conducting their activities exclusively in Italy.

Secondly, the Court did not find convincing the taxpayer’s attempt to put forward again, with reference to the case at hand, the argument developed by the same Court in Judgment No. 11 of 2024, in which it declared unconstitutional the inclusion of excise duties, paid to the State and indicated in sales invoices, for the purposes of quantifying the incremental balance relevant to the calculation of the contribution.

The Court of Cassation rules on the registration tax applicable to contracts for the availability of areas serving wind farms

Sentence No. 25213 of the Court of Cassation of 10 September 2026 confirms that the new wording of Article 20 of Presidential Decree No. 131/1986 continues to be decisive in interpreting deeds for registration tax purposes and revisits the issue of the tax rate applicable to the creation of a right of superficies over agricultural land.

On the first point, the Court recalls that it is essential to examine the legal effects actually produced by the deed and not merely the nomen iuris attributed to the contract by the parties; this must be done by reference to the content of the deed itself and without including extratextual elements in the assessment.

The deed under examination was formally classified as a lease agreement for the installation of wind power facilities, but it also provided for:

• the creation of a right of superficies over the areas occupied by the wind turbines;
• the granting of easements for power lines and rights of way;
• a thirty-year lease over the remaining and prevailing area.

The Court of Cassation confirms the reclassification of the transaction as the creation of a surface right rather than a mere lease, in line with the position taken by the Italian Revenue Agency.

According to the Court, the existence of the rights in rem created by the same deed rendered the lease substantially devoid of an autonomous economic and legal function because the typical effects of a lease (granting the right to use and enjoy the asset) were absorbed by the creation of the right of superficies and the easements. Therefore, the deed had to be classified on the basis of the actual legal effects it produced.

Furthermore, the ruling on the merits did not give weight to the quantitative data concerning the areas but rather to the overall legal effect of the contractual arrangement. Consequently, the different size of the areas formally subject to the different rights was not considered a decisive fact.

The Court of Cassation considered correct the assessment of the court ruling on the merits according to which, in the specific case, the lease was substantially deprived of its typical function of granting the right to use and enjoy the land. The Court regards this assessment as a genuine quaestio facti, entrusted to the court ruling on the merits and not subject to review by the Court of Cassation if adequately reasoned.

Although reaching the same conclusion, the Court of Cassation departs from the reasoning underlying the challenge according to which the contract had been structured in order to obtain tax savings. In reaching the conclusions set out above and also referring to Court of Cassation No. 10688/2021 and Court of Cassation No. 5715/2022, the Court of Cassation nevertheless clarifies that such consideration is not necessary for the reclassification and does not constitute the legal basis of the decision. Indeed, according to the Supreme Court, Article 20 is not an instrument against tax avoidance.

As regards the applicable rate, the Court of Cassation fully reiterates the approach first established by Court of Cassation No. 3461/2021 and confirmed by Court of Cassation No. 27293/2024, subsequently also adopted by the Italian Revenue Agency in Ruling No. 23/2025. The Court’s reasoning starts from Article 1 of Part I of the Tariff attached to Presidential Decree No. 131/1986, which distinguishes deeds creating or transferring rights in rem, subject to ordinary taxation, from transfers of agricultural land, subject to a higher rate (15% at the time). Therefore, the term “transfer” cannot include the “creation” of a right of superficies: with this step, the Court of Cassation appears to link the tax treatment to the civil-law classification of the transaction. The Court emphasises the distinction drawn by Article 952 of the Italian Civil Code between the creation of a right of superficies and the transfer of the ownership of a building separate from the land, recalling that only the latter constitutes a genuine transfer of an already existing right.

Therefore, the creation of a right of superficies over agricultural land does not fall within the 15% provision; instead, the ordinary rate applies (8% ratione temporis, currently 9%).

Advance payment of withholding taxes and substitute taxes on profits of large groups in the energy sector

On 25 September, Law No. 166, converting Decree-Law No. 133 of 27 July 2026, containing a series of measures aimed at containing high fuel prices, was published in the Official Gazette.

During the conversion process, two new articles (2-bis and 2-ter) were introduced, incorporating measures that had been introduced by Decree-Law No. 153/2026, which was repealed by the same Law No. 166.

The newly introduced Article 2-bis introduced for large groups in the energy sector a new advance payment obligation equal to 39% of the withholding taxes and substitute taxes payable with reference to profits whose distribution was approved in the previous financial year.

The measure applies to parent companies resident in Italy, required to prepare consolidated financial statements, which have generated total consolidated revenues exceeding EUR 20 billion on the basis of the latest approved consolidated financial statements.

Groups falling within the scope of the provision carry out, directly or through entities included in the scope of consolidation, activities involving the extraction, production, definitive importation or introduction into the territory of the State from other EU Member States, refining, processing, storage, transportation, distribution, marketing or sale of crude oil, petroleum products, natural gas, including liquefied natural gas, or other energy products, as well as electricity.

The advance payment concerns profits whose distribution was approved in the financial year preceding that in which they are paid.

For the first year of application, profits whose distribution was approved before 27 August 2026 are also covered, where payment is scheduled after 31 December 2026.

The advance payment must be made by 30 November of each year and, when making the payment, tax credits may not be used for offsetting purposes.

In respect of the amounts actually paid, the company is granted a tax credit of an equal amount, which may be used from the time the profits are actually paid in order to reduce withholding taxes and substitute taxes relating to the same distribution.

If, after offsetting against the withholding taxes actually applied, a residual portion of the credit remains, such residual portion may be immediately used for offsetting without the ordinary annual limits or may be claimed as a refund. If, on the other hand, the withholding taxes and substitute taxes actually due exceed the credit, the difference must be paid in accordance with the ordinary deadlines and procedures.

In the event of total or partial revocation of the resolution, the portion of the advance payment relating to profits no longer intended for distribution becomes immediately available for offsetting, without annual limits, or refundable.

The tax credit does not contribute to taxable income or to the net production value. The advance payment is also not deductible for IRES and IRAP purposes.

The advance payment must be calculated taking into account the nature of the individual beneficiaries and the tax regime applicable to them as at the date of the resolution. Consequently, a distinction will have to be made between dividends subject to the ordinary withholding tax, reduced rates or exemption regimes. Where a regime excludes withholding tax, the relevant portion of the dividend should not give rise to an advance payment.

A decree of the Minister of Economy and Finance will establish the procedures for implementing the new provisions, including the rules governing information flows between the entities required to make the advance payment, the intermediaries required to apply substitute taxes and the central securities depository company.

“Omnibus” corrective decree and fiscal federalism reform decree: the main developments of interest to the sector

On 12 August 2026, Legislative Decree No. 148 of 7 August 2026 (the so-called Omnibus Decree), published in the Official Gazette, entered into force, containing provisions concerning income taxes, VAT, as well as controls and cooperative compliance. On the same date, Legislative Decree No. 147, concerning local taxes and fiscal federalism, entered into force.

In this document, relating to an industry frequently characterised by assets with very long useful lives, we consider it useful to draw readers’ attention to Article 22 – Time limits for assessments relating to multi-year expenses: it amends Article 43 of Presidential Decree No. 600/1973 in order to overcome the approach expressed by the Joint Sections of the Court of Cassation in Judgment No. 8500/2021, according to which negative items having multi-year effects could be challenged independently in each tax period in which they were deducted.

The new rules introduce paragraph 1-bis into Article 43, providing that “For negative components of business income having multi-year effects, with the exception of those relating to non-existent transactions, the assessment period starts from the tax return relating to the tax period in which, for the first time, a portion of such components was deducted.”

The provision also establishes that, once the notice of assessment relating to the first relevant financial year has been timely served, the Tax Authorities may exercise their audit powers, in accordance with the ordinary time limits, also with reference to the tax period in progress on the date of service, the preceding tax period and the subsequent tax periods.

The new rules apply to “goods and services purchased starting from the tax period in progress as at 31 December 2027”.

We also highlight Article 4 – Amendments concerning the determination of income of agricultural enterprises, which are often present among companies producing energy from renewable sources: the Decree amends certain provisions of the TUIR, taking into account the recent reform of agricultural income introduced by Legislative Decree No. 192/2024. In particular:

• Article 32, paragraph 2, letter C): it is clarified that related agricultural activities include soilless cultivation (i.e. the cultivation of plants through the use of properties registered in the land register under selected cadastral categories);
• Article 55, paragraph 1: it is clarified that, where the limits referred to in Article 32 of the TUIR are exceeded, business income also includes the “new” agricultural activities introduced by Legislative Decree No. 192/2024 into Article 32 itself (letters B-bis and B-ter, e.g. indoor farming and vertical farming, and environmental certificates obtained through agricultural activities), even if they are not organised in the form of a business;
• Article 56-bis, paragraph 4: the amendment confirms the applicability of the lump-sum method for determining business income to individual agricultural entrepreneurs, simple partnerships and agricultural companies that have exercised the option for the cadastral regime under Article 32 of the TUIR.

Turning to the decree concerning local taxes, it contains a series of provisions largely aimed at reorganising the regulatory framework. The decree addresses assessment, collection and penalty procedures. Of interest to the sector is the provision concerning the application of IMU to buildings with a challenged cadastral income (Article 32): by way of derogation from the ordinary time limits, the Municipality may assess the higher tax by the end of the fifth year following the date on which the judgment concerning the cadastral income becomes final, without applying penalties. The taxpayer, in turn, may request a refund of any higher taxes paid within the same period.

TCF – operational guidance on the exclusive right to use infrastructure

With the Director’s Provision No. 200904 of 6 July 2026, the Italian Revenue Agency approved further specific guidance concerning the mapping of tax risks arising from the accounting standards applied by the taxpayer within the Cooperative Compliance Regime.

As a preliminary point, it should be recalled that Article 4 of Legislative Decree No. 128/2015 concerning cooperative compliance provides that the system for identifying, measuring, managing and controlling tax risk (“Tax Control Framework” or “TCF”) required for participants in the regime must be capable of mapping the tax risks arising from the accounting standards adopted by taxpayers.

In this context, the joint technical working group between OIC (Italian accounting setter) and the Italian Revenue Agency issued the new guidance referred to above in July. This includes an initial guidance sheet concerning the accounting treatment of crypto-assets and another concerning the accounting treatment of an exclusive right to use infrastructure. The contents of the latter are summarized below, given the relevance of the case to the industry concerned.

The case addressed concerns the execution of an agreement for the exclusive use of identified infrastructure (for example, a specific fibre-optic route) for a period of 10 years, with the entire consideration paid in a single instalment upon execution. It is specified that: i) ownership of the infrastructure remains with the supplier, which remains responsible for ordinary and extraordinary maintenance; ii) no other ancillary services are provided; iii) there are no other related contracts to be considered jointly.

Accounting treatment. According to the document, the right is contractual in nature rather than a right in rem because the grantor retains ownership of the infrastructure and continues to carry out maintenance activities, while the transferee does not have control over the asset as would the holder of a right in rem. Consequently, the agreement is comparable to a lease, with the result that the initial payment should not be recognized in full as a cost in the financial year in which it is incurred. Instead, the company must recognize the consideration paid as a prepaid expense and progressively charge to the Income Statement the portion attributable to each financial year, classifying it under item B8) “Costs for the use of third-party assets”.

The treatment is similar to that applicable to a large initial instalment under a lease agreement.

Tax treatment. This varies depending on whether the agreement constitutes an operating lease or a finance lease:

• If the agreement is an operating lease, the accounting allocation of the consideration over the term of the agreement is also relevant for tax purposes pursuant to the derivation principle under Article 83 of the TUIR.
• If the agreement is a finance lease, the initial large instalment must also be deducted in accordance with the accrual principle and the provisions of Article 102, paragraph 7, of the Italian Tax Code apply, therefore paying attention to spreading the deduction over the minimum tax period if the contractual term is shorter than the minimum period provided for by the provision itself.

The Court of Cassation rules on environmental restoration provisions for waste-to-energy plants

The Court of Cassation recently ruled on a dispute, concluded by Order No. 26382 published on 7 October 2026, concerning the deductibility for tax purposes (IRES and IRAP) of provisions made by a company operating a waste-to-energy plant to cover future environmental restoration and remediation costs for the site upon termination of operations. The dispute arose from an assessment relating to the 2014 and 2015 tax periods.

Since they arose from obligations imposed by the Integrated Environmental Authorization (AIA) and were quantified by means of a technical appraisal, the company argued that such costs were already certain and determinable when the provision was recognized in the financial statements, without having to wait for actual payment; this position had been upheld by both the Provincial Tax Court and the Regional Tax Court of Lombardy, which considered applicable the principle already affirmed by the Tax Authorities for landfill closure costs (Resolution No. 52/E/1998).

The Court upheld the appeal of the Italian Revenue Agency and set aside the Regional Tax Court’s judgment. The arguments were as follows:

• landfills and incineration plants have different characteristics and, therefore, there were no grounds for extending the applicability of the aforementioned Resolution No. 52: in the Court’s view, the former differ from the latter because they have a predetermined capacity, closure costs that accrue in proportion to the filling of the landfill and can therefore be allocated over its useful life; accordingly, the tax allocation criteria applicable to costs relating to landfills could not be extended to waste-to-energy plants;
• provisions are deductible only if expressly provided for by tax law (Article 107, paragraph 4, TUIR): therefore, mere recognition in the financial statements under civil-law rules would not permit their deduction for tax purposes, which could occur when the cost actually arises and the provision is utilized;
• in any event, ministerial resolutions do not constitute sources of law and therefore, as they cannot override statutory provisions, are not binding on the court.

No IMU on panels installed for self-consumption on the roof of an industrial building

The Milan Court of Tax Justice of First Instance, in Judgment No. 2578/3/26, concluded that photovoltaic systems intended for self-consumption and installed on the roof of a building do not, as a rule, constitute separate real estate units for cadastral purposes and therefore do not, in themselves, generate a separate IMU (real estate local tax) taxable base.

The dispute was initiated by a company that challenged an IMU assessment notice issued by a municipality in Lombardy in relation to a photovoltaic system installed on the roof of an industrial building and intended for self-consumption of the energy produced. The Municipality had subjected the system to IMU using the accounting value criterion.

The Court reached its conclusion by referring to:

• Italian Revenue Agency Circular No. 27/E of 13 June 2016, according to which photovoltaic systems installed on buildings and their appurtenances normally do not have to be registered in the cadastre as separate real estate units;
• the Judgment No. 162/2023 of the Bergamo Court of Tax Justice, according to which a system located on the roof of a building and lacking independent access does not have autonomous cadastral relevance.

The Court highlights the difference with large-scale systems that are particularly autonomous or predominantly intended for the production and sale of energy, which may require separate cadastral registration and affect the IMU taxable base.

Italian Tax Authorities’ Reply no. 181/2026 – VAT Treatment of Storage System installed on existing photovoltaic plants

With the Reply no. 181/2026, the Italian Tax Authorities clarified that the reduced 10% VAT rate provided for under items 127-quinquies and 127-sexies of Table A, Part III, attached to Presidential Decree No. 633/1972 does not apply to the supply and installation of an electrochemical energy storage system (Battery Energy Storage System, or BESS) added to an already authorized, grid-connected, and operational photovoltaic plant. Accordingly, the transaction is subject to the ordinary VAT rate of 22%.

The case concerned a photovoltaic electricity producer operating a plant with an expected annual output of approximately 8,069 MWh. The taxpayer intended to purchase, under a single contract, a BESS composed of two containerized 5-MWh battery units and two PCS Stations, each with a capacity of 2.5 MW. The storage system would operate in hybrid mode, being charged both from the photovoltaic plant (approximately 700 MWh per year) and from the national grid (approximately 2,500 MWh per year), with the stored electricity subsequently used for time-shifting purposes, participation in electricity markets (MGP and MI), and the provision of ancillary services.

The taxpayer argued that the 10% rate should apply to the entire payment, citing the uniqueness and indivisibility of the transaction (CJEU C-349/96, Card Protection Plan; C-41/04, Levob), the ancillary nature of the network fee, proof of the intended use via a substitute declaration (Italian Supreme Court No. 11690/2021), and the incentive purpose of the provision.

The Tax Authorities rejected this interpretation, reiterating that the list in paragraph 127-quinquies is exhaustive and that the preferential provisions cannot be applied by analogy. For the purposes of paragraph 127-sexies, the reduced tax rate applies only to finished goods directly used for the new construction of the facility (or for its expansion, understood as a new “partial” construction), not for simple improvements or modifications, even if they result in an upgrade. The goods must be components necessary for the construction of the facility: it is not sufficient that they be “useful,” “related,” or “functional.”

Referring to ARERA’s definition of a storage system (Resolution 574/2014/R/eel), Directive (EU) 2019/944 (Art. 2, points 37, 59, and 60) and Legislative Decree No. 210/2021, the Tax Authorities emphasized the distinction between electricity generation and electricity storage.  On this basis, they concluded that a BESS is an infrastructure asset functionally connected to, but technically separate from, the photovoltaic plant. Since the storage system does not generate electricity but merely stores it, and because the photovoltaic plant was already fully operational without the BESS, the storage system cannot be regarded as a component necessary for either the construction or expansion of the generation facility.

Consequently, the supply and installation of the BESS are subject to VAT at the ordinary rate of 22%.

Electricity Excise Duty: Italian Customs Agency Issues Implementing Guidelines Under the Reformed Framework

 With the Circular Letter No. 21/D of 11 August 2026, the Italian Customs and Monopolies Agency (Agenzia delle Dogane e dei Monopoli) set out the implementing procedures relating to the excise duty regime on electricity, as established by Ministerial Decree of 10 March 2026 issued by the Ministry of Economy and Finance, adopted in implementation of Article 56-ter of Legislative Decree No. 504 of 26 October 1995 (Consolidated Excise Duty Act — Testo Unico delle Accise, hereinafter “TUA”), as amended by Legislative Decree No. 43 of 28 March 2025.

The administrative guidance, which follows Circular Letter No. 8/D of 2026 — previously devoted to natural gas — also includes a summary table of the various obligations incumbent upon operators active in the electricity sector. The aim of the Circular Letter at stake is to ensure uniformity in the implementation of the recently enacted provisions, while at the same time providing the addressees of the regulatory framework with greater operational clarity.

The Ministerial Decree completes the regulatory framework governing the taxation of electricity, systematically outlining the preliminary compliance requirements, the assessment procedures and the methods of discharging the tax liability, with reference to Articles 52, 53, 53-bis, 54, 55, 56 and 56-bis of the TUA, without, however, altering the subjective and objective conditions for the imposition of the excise duty.

Particular attention is reserved to the procedures for the assessment, liquidation and payment of the excise duty, as set out by the Article 55 TUA. The Circular Letter specifies the deadlines and methods of payment, establishes the obligations to submit semi-annual returns concerning the quantities of electricity invoiced or self-consumed — broken down by territorial area and intended use — and sets out the procedures applicable in the event of underpayment or overpayment.

Finally, operative guidelines are provided regarding the utilization of any credit balance arising from the adjustment resulting from the return filed by the taxpayers.

Waste Management and Reduced VAT Rate: Clarifications from the Supreme Court

By means of Order No. 10654/2026, the Italian Supreme Court provided significant clarifications on the VAT regime applicable to intermediation services in the waste management sector (a topic that has already been addressed in one of our previous in-depth newsletters on the subject).

An analysis of the ruling reveals that, under the current regulatory framework, activities carried out by intermediaries may benefit from the reduced VAT rate of 10% even where the waste is not physically held by the operator.

The dispute examined by the Supreme Court concerned a regulatory framework predating the amendments introduced by Legislative Decree No. 205/2010. At that time, intermediation without physical possession of waste was not yet expressly included among waste management activities and, accordingly, could not qualify for the reduced VAT treatment applicable to such services.

Subsequently, the evolution of environmental legislation broadened the definition of waste management to encompass operations carried out by dealers and intermediaries operating without acquiring physical possession of the waste. This amendment extended the scope of the reduced VAT rate to intermediation activities closely connected to the recovery and disposal cycle.

CBAM: EU Proposals to Expand the Mechanism and Support Industrial Decarbonization

During the plenary session of 14–15 September 2026, the European Parliament adopted its position on two relevant legislative proposals to the Union’s climate policy, both originating from European Commission initiatives dated December 2025. The first concerns the strengthening, from an anti-circumvention perspective, of Regulation (EU) 956/2023 on the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM); the second provides for the establishment of a temporary Decarbonization Fund, designed to support businesses in transitioning towards lower carbon-intensity production processes.

Building upon and supplementing the position already adopted by the Council on 12 June 2026, Parliament further extended the range of products subject to the mechanism by adding new customs codes relating, inter alia, to mechanical and industrial components (headings 8207, 8409, 8481, 8482), vehicles and vehicle bodies (headings 8704 and 8707), and medical devices (heading 9018). This extension is aimed at countering carbon leakage — namely, the relocation of industrial activities to jurisdictions with less stringent environmental constraints.

The text also addresses the competitive imbalance between European importers and e-commerce platforms selling goods at a distance from third countries: the latter, by virtue of the new importer status introduced under the reformed customs code, will be required to comply with CBAM obligations and may obtain authorized declarant status.

On the anti-circumvention front, the concept of resource shuffling is introduced: the practice of reallocating lower carbon-intensity production to the EU while diverting more polluting output elsewhere, thereby circumventing the climate objectives of the mechanism. The Commission will be tasked with monitoring the goods-country of origin combinations most exposed to this risk, applying predetermined penalizing default values for embedded emissions.

As regards the temporary Decarbonization Fund, financed from the proceeds of CBAM certificates, Parliament endorsed its establishment while introducing a number of significant amendments to the Commission’s proposal. In particular, the period of support was extended to the three-year period 2027–2029 (rather than the two-year period 2028–2029 alone), the pool of eligible beneficiaries was broadened to include downstream operators using goods listed in Annex I to the CBAM Regulation, and specific application windows were established: 31 March 2027 for 2026 production and 31 March 2028 for 2027 production. Access to the Fund is subject to objective eligibility criteria, including the production of eligible goods during 2026–2027 and the submission of energy audits and investment commitments aligned with a climate neutrality plan.

The texts adopted represent Parliament’s negotiating position and will be the subject of trilogue negotiations with the Council and the Commission with a view to reaching the final version of the legislation.

Legal section

MASE Decree No. 291/2026 Introduces New Rules to Address Virtual Grid Saturation

MASE Decree No. 291/2026 of 8 September 2026 introduces a new framework for managing grid capacity for renewable energy plants and energy storage systems, aimed at addressing so-called virtual grid saturation, namely the occupation of grid capacity by projects that, although having obtained a grid connection solution, do not ultimately reach the permitting or construction stage.

The reform introduces three key innovations. First, it establishes microzones, the boundaries of which will be defined by Terna, as the new territorial reference for the management of available grid capacity. Second, it requires grid capacity to be updated at least on a quarterly basis, taking into account the actual progress of projects and the development of network infrastructure. Third, it introduces Open Season procedures, through which Terna will make available information on connection opportunities across different areas of the country.

The most significant operational change lies in the distinction between the certification of the grid connection solution and the allocation of grid capacity. While certification enables developers to proceed with the permitting process, grid capacity becomes definitively secured only once the relevant authorisation has been obtained and notified to Terna. Only at that stage are the injection capacity and the related connection point permanently reserved. Where multiple projects compete for the same available capacity, allocation is based on the chronological order in which the relevant authorisations are published. This mechanism is intended to encourage the effective advancement of projects and reduce the risk of virtual grid saturation.

The new framework is designed to improve the transparency and efficiency of grid management, reducing the risk that valuable network capacity remains tied up by projects with limited prospects of being developed. Rather than relying exclusively on the timing of connection requests, the system seeks to reward tangible project progress, fostering a closer alignment between available grid capacity and projects that are genuinely capable of moving forward.

For market participants, the reform represents a significant shift that is likely to influence project development, valuation and financing strategies, with potentially material implications for the Italian renewable energy sector in the years ahead.

FER-X Definitivo: operating rules approved for the new renewable energy support scheme

The Ministerial Decree No. 194 of 18 June 2026 (the “FER-X Definitivo” or the “Decree”), issued by the Ministry of the Environment and Energy Security, has brought the new support scheme for electricity generation from renewable energy sources into full operation. The Decree is applicable until 31 December 2030 and covers solar photovoltaic, wind and hydropower plants, as well as plants fuelled by residual gases from wastewater treatment processes.

The scheme provides an overall capacity allocation of 37.15 GW and offers two access routes: direct access for plants with a capacity of up to 1 MW, subject to a 10 GW cap, and GSE-run competitive procedures for larger plants, within a 27.15 GW cap.

For plants exceeding 1 MW, participation consists of a Preliminary Qualification, an Expression of Interest and a subsequent Economic Bid Stages. The new framework therefore brings forward the assessment of technical and administrative requirements and requires appropriate financial guarantees.

Key developments include a substantial increase in available capacity, mainly focused on the wind sector, and procedures aligned with the Net-Zero Industry Act. These procedures supplement price-based competition with criteria relating to sustainability, supply-chain resilience and cybersecurity.

The awarded price is granted for twenty years. Depending on the technology, plants must begin operating within 36 to 54 months; delays may result in a reduction in support payments and, in more serious cases, removal from the ranking.

FER-X Definitivo provides operators with a new framework for investment planning.

Thorough project preparation is therefore essential to capture the opportunities offered by the new scheme and compete effectively in the GSE procedures.

Competition Bill 2026: new authorisation requirements, standardised contracts and incentives for the transformation of the fuel retail network

On 27 July 2026, the Italian Council of Ministers approved the annual Competition Bill (the “Competition Bill” or the “Bill”), currently under review by Parliament, introducing a comprehensive reform of the fuel distribution sector and retail network.

The Bill revises the authorisation procedure for the installation and operation of fuel stations, replacing the current silent consent (“silenzio assenso”) regime with a requirement for an express decision by the competent authority within 90 days of the application. Authorisations remain subject to verification of the applicant’s technical, organisational and financial capability, as well as anti-mafia checks. The same controls will apply to existing authorisations. Where the relevant requirements are no longer met, the authorisation will lapse unless the deficiencies are remedied within 90 days. Revocation also entails the dismantling of the equipment, environmental assessments and site restoration at the operator’s expense.

Under the Bill, from 1 January 2028, new authorizations will be subject to the availability of at least one form of alternative fuel infrastructure, pursuant to a technology-neutral approach that includes electric charging stations, hydrogen, biomethane, biofuels and e-fuels. The transfer of an authorisation to a third party will also require the transfer of ownership of the relevant equipment and the issuance of a new municipal authorisation. These changes are expected to affect acquisitions of fuel distribution networks, transfers of individual stations and corporate reorganisations.

The Bill also introduces a standardised fuel supply agreement (“contratto di affidamento”) with mandatory minimum content, including its scope, a minimum term of four years, notice requirements and termination penalties capped at 18 months of residual remuneration. Any non-compliant provisions will be deemed null and void and replaced by law. Breaches may result in administrative fines ranging from EUR 2,000 to EUR 20,000 per retail outlet, up to an aggregate maximum of EUR 200,000.

Finally, the Bill establishes the Fund for the Transformation of the Fuel Retail Network towards Green Mobility, with an overall budget of EUR 120 million for 2028-2030. The Fund will cover up to 50% of eligible investment costs, up to EUR 60,000 per facility, for the conversion of service stations into electric charging hubs or biofuel distribution points. Additional support of up to EUR 30,000 will be available for facilities located in inland areas, while operators whose relationship does not continue following the conversion may be entitled to compensation of up to EUR 20,000.

The Bill remains subject to formal approval with possible amendments by the Parliament.

Bonus Charging Stations 2026: Applications Open for New Incentives Supporting Home EV Charging

With the opening of the Invitalia application portal on 22 September 2026, the new edition of the Home Charging Stations Bonus has officially been launched. The incentive is designed to support the uptake of electric mobility by funding the purchase and installation of private electric vehicle charging infrastructure. The scheme, refinanced under the Automotive DPCM of 10 June 2026 and managed by the Ministry of Enterprises and Made in Italy (MIMIT), will remain available until 2030.

The incentive is available to individuals residing in Italy and condominiums, covering 80% of eligible costs incurred for the purchase and installation of private charging stations or wallboxes. The contribution is granted up to a maximum of EUR 1,500 per individual applicant and EUR 8,000 for installations carried out in the common areas of condominium buildings.

For the 2026 funding year, eligible charging infrastructure must be installed and completed between 26 June 2026 and 31 December 2026. Applications may be submitted through the Invitalia online platform from 12:00 p.m. on 22 September 2026 until 12:00 p.m. on 31 January 2027, through a fully digital procedure accessible via SPID, CIE, or CNS credentials.

Eligible expenses include not only the purchase of the charging infrastructure itself, but also costs directly related to its installation, such as electrical and construction works, design and engineering services, site supervision, testing activities, and grid connection costs. Businesses and self-employed professionals remain outside the scope of the measure, as dedicated incentive schemes continue to be available for those categories.

The measure forms part of Italy’s broader policy framework supporting the energy transition and sustainable mobility and aims to promote the deployment of home charging solutions, which are increasingly regarded as a key driver for the adoption of electric vehicles. By covering up to 80% of the investment, the incentive significantly reduces the cost of accessing private charging infrastructure, encouraging uptake both in single-family homes and condominium settings.

For market operators and property owners alike, the launch of the new application window represents an important opportunity to plan electrification projects and enhance the value of real estate assets. This comes at a time when access to private charging infrastructure is becoming an increasingly relevant factor in vehicle purchasing decisions and broader decarbonisation strategies.

The Critical Raw Materials Act: Towards an Increasingly Integrated Compliance Framework

Over two years since the Critical Raw Materials Act (“CRMA”) came into force, the European framework governing critical raw materials is entering a phase of progressive implementation of the measures introduced by Regulation (EU) 2024/1252, which has been in effect since 23 May 2024. The Regulation aims to strengthen the security and sustainability of supplies of strategic raw materials by focusing on three main areas: (i) developing European capacity; (ii) diversifying sources of supply; and (iii) reducing supply-chain vulnerabilities.

Given the geographical concentration of extraction, refining and processing activities, and the potential introduction of export restrictions, as well as the increasing relevance of geopolitical factors, it is necessary to assess security of supply from a perspective that encompasses the entire value chain rather than limiting it to the economic terms of supply or the commercial reliability of an individual supplier.

This requires industrial operators, particularly utilities and energy companies, to integrate additional risk factors into procurement decisions and risk management processes. This is particularly important where such factors may affect the continuity and security of supply over the medium to long term.

In particular, the origin and geographical concentration of the supply chain are becoming increasingly important, in order to identify potential dependencies on regions that are more exposed to geopolitical or regulatory risks, as well as on individual countries, operators, or refining and processing facilities. This may give rise to specific concentration risks within the supply chain, as well as exposure to sanctions, trade restrictions, and export controls, which may affect the availability of raw materials, lead times, and the related economic conditions of supply.

These considerations are further compounded by the need for sustainability, traceability, and due diligence, which are crucial not only for qualifying and selecting suppliers but also for ensuring compliance throughout the supply chain. Additionally, there is exposure to shifts in the relevant legal and regulatory framework, which might necessitate adjustments to supply arrangements, internal processes, and the contractual framework governing the associated relationships.

Consequently, supply risk management is becoming increasingly integrated, with supply-chain analysis, supplier selection and qualification, regulatory compliance, and contractual risk allocation becoming closely interconnected.

In the critical raw materials market, long-term offtake agreements are one of the most commonly used instruments for supply planning and can also play a significant role in the economic and financial structure of new projects. In this context, contractual arrangements are particularly relevant with respect to the following matters:

• force majeure clauses, including those relating to export bans, sanctions or measures adopted by the relevant authorities;
• change in law clauses addressing the introduction or amendment of legal, regulatory or sustainability requirements;
• hardship and price-adjustment mechanisms, which are designed to regulate the consequences of circumstances that affect the economic balance of the contractual relationship;
• suspension and termination rights in the event of impossibility, interruption, or material changes affecting the conditions of supply;
• compliance, traceability and reporting obligations;
• mechanisms for diversifying sources of supply, alternative sourcing, and supplier substitution.

Such contractual provisions are intended not only to support continuity of supply, but also to expressly define the allocation between the parties of operational, regulatory, geopolitical and supply-chain concentration risks, identifying the relevant triggering events, consequences and risk-management mechanisms.

For operators, this highlights the need to address the regulatory, financial, contractual, and procurement aspects associated with the sourcing of critical raw materials in a coordinated manner. From this perspective, supply chain management requires an integrated assessment of risks relating to the availability of raw materials, supply source concentration, the applicable regulatory framework, and contractual arrangements governing relationships throughout the value chain.

Agrivoltaics and Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA): The Lazio Regional Administrative Court Calls for a Project-Specific Evaluation

With judgment No. 14547 of 2^nd September 2026, the Lazio Regional Administrative Court (TAR Lazio) reaffirmed a principle of particular relevance for the renewable energy sector: owing to their specific technological and functional characteristics, agrivoltaic plants cannot be automatically equated with traditional ground-mounted photovoltaic installations for the purposes of environmental assessments.

The ruling stems from a challenge against a negative environmental compatibility determination issued in relation to an approximately 87.4 MWp agrivoltaic project located in the Municipality of Tarquinia, largely within the Special Protection Area (SPA) known as the “Comprensorio Tolfetano-Cerite-Manziate”. The project featured design solutions aimed at limiting permanent land occupation, preserving soil permeability, and ensuring the continuation of agricultural activities, while also including specific ecological enhancement and biodiversity protection measures.

During the EIA procedure, the authorities involved expressed unfavourable opinions, highlighting potential impacts on protected habitats and species, as well as landscape-related and cumulative impact concerns. These assessments ultimately led to the adoption of a negative environmental compatibility decision by the Ministry of Environment and Energy Security, acting jointly with the Ministry of Culture.

In upholding the developer’s appeal, the TAR referred to the settled case law according to which agrivoltaics constitutes a distinct type of installation from conventional photovoltaic systems, as it is specifically designed to allow the coexistence of energy generation and agricultural use of the land while significantly reducing land consumption. Precisely because of these distinctive features, public authorities are required to conduct a specific assessment of the project’s actual characteristics and of the proposed mitigation and compensation measures, rather than relying on standardised evaluations or on a mere assimilation to conventional ground-mounted photovoltaic plants.

Particularly noteworthy is the Court’s analysis of the duty to provide adequate reasoning. According to the Panel, where projects involving the production of renewable energy are concerned, the administration must clearly demonstrate how it has balanced landscape and environmental protection interests against the EU-derived principle favouring the widest possible deployment of renewable energy sources.

In the present case, the TAR found that the authorities had failed to carry out an effective assessment of the specific features of the installation and of the ecological enhancement measures put forward by the developer. Consequently, the Court considered the reasoning underlying the negative environmental compatibility decision to be inadequate.

The judgment forms part of a broader line of case law aimed at recognising the role of agrivoltaics in the energy transition and confirms that, within permitting procedures, public authorities are required to undertake a particularly thorough review capable of taking into account the characteristics of each individual project and of rigorously substantiating the grounds for any refusal. The ruling therefore provides a further reminder of the need to avoid generalised approaches in the assessment of agrivoltaic projects, acknowledging both their distinctive nature and their potential contribution to decarbonisation objectives and soil preservation.