The European Commission recently introduced a draft of the revised EU ETS Directive which, among other things, proposes that 100 % of ETS revenues should be used for environmental measures. We welcome this idea but we’re also sceptical about how the ETS revenues are used in the Czech Republic. Therefore, we have prepared an analysis mapping the use of ETS revenues in Czech Republic and sent it to the European Commission as an input for the recent public consultation. The main conclusions are presented below.
Czech law states that 50 % of ETS revenues has to be used for environmental measures, which are enumerated in the ETS Directive. For 2021 the Czech government decided to cap this share at CZK 8 bn. (EUR 310 mil.), the rest of the revenues are considered income to the state budget. In case ETS revenues are higher than CZK 16 bn. per year, as predicted for 2021, there is potential for non-compliance with the ETS Directive, which requires at least 50 % of ETS revenues to be earmarked for climate-related projects.
Information about projects supported from ETS revenues is not publicly available, we assume that some of the means flows into the state budget and aren‘t used for environmental measures. Furthermore, ETS revenues dedicated to the Ministry of Industry and Trade, are used for continuous operating support for photovoltaic projects from the 2010s, which does not have any incentivising effect for the energy transformation. This support would have been paid anyway.
A new legal briefing by Frank Bold unpacks the new restrictions on information requests to business suppliers following the Omnibus 1 revisions to the CSRD and CSDDD, and explains the practical implications for companies.
Due diligence under the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) is designed to direct finite corporate resources towards the issues that matter most for people and the environment. At the heart of that effort is prioritisation, defined in Article 9 of the Directive. Having spoken about this topic at the RBA conference this week, I want to share some reflections on what good prioritisation looks like in practice and what pitfalls to avoid.
The Parliament proposal shows that many of the concerns raised through Frank Bold’s research and engagement with policymakers are now entering the legislative mainstream. But the negotiations ahead will determine whether the final framework is capable of addressing the structural weaknesses that continue to undermine trust in the sustainable investment market.