Cases of fried potatoes at the bonus stop

Last Friday, the finance ministers of the European Union countries finally approved the agreement with the European Parliament, reached in December, regarding new rules aimed at creating a carbon-free housing fund in the EU by 2050. This agreement must be ratified by national governments and will come into effect twenty days after its publication in the Official Journal of the EU. Government bodies will have two years to implement this directive into their national legislations. The final version includes softer requirements than those initially proposed by the European Commission; here is a brief overview of the intended goals.

Flexibility at the state level

At the state level, greater flexibility is provided for aligning local priorities. EU members will not only define possible exceptions to the norms but will also plan all necessary measures and incentive programs to achieve the set goals. Furthermore, each state will be able to adapt its objectives based on the availability of skilled labor and the feasibility of repairs from both a technical and economic perspective. Each country is required to develop a national restoration plan that will include measures aimed at:

• easing access to financing
• creation of a benefits system for significant restoration works
• assistance to vulnerable families
• establishment of information points regarding the energy efficiency of buildings

Exceptions to the rules

The list of possible exceptions is quite extensive and includes:

• cultural heritage sites (historical buildings and architectural monuments)
• buildings located in protected areas
• residential property used for less than four months a year
• residential property with an expected energy consumption below 25% of the level that would be the case with year-round use
• iconic buildings and temporary structures (construction offices and beach establishments)

Investments in the housing sector

According to estimates by the European Commission, by 2030 it will be necessary275 billion eurosannual investments to change the energy situation in the housing sector, which amounts to152 billion eurosmore per year than the current funding. Special funding is not provided; however, countries will be able to use European funds to support these changes: among them are the Climate Social Fund, the Recovery Fund, and Regional Funds.

The situation in Italy

Italy and Hungary opposed the agreement, while the Czech Republic, Croatia, Poland, Slovakia, and Sweden abstained from voting. According to estimates from the Italian Builders Association (Ance), out of 12 million residential buildings, more than 9 million do not meet the necessary energy efficiency standards. Additionally, according to data from the National Agency for New Technologies, Energy, and Sustainable Economic Development (Enea), about...75%buildings in Italian municipalities were constructed before the adoption of Law 10/1991, which regulates energy consumption in both public and private buildings. According to Enea,74%The Italian housing stock (which consists of 11 million properties) belongs to categories below class D. In particular,34%buildings of class G,23.8%– class F and15.9%– class E. According to the EU directive "Green Homes," it is expected that by 2033, at least a certain number of buildings in Italy will need to be renovated.two millionbuildings that do not comply with the new regulations.

It is obvious that this is yet another illustration of the so-called Italian exceptionalism. Italy is different; its housing stock is generally old and includes a significant number of truly outdated properties, which leads to misunderstandings from the global community and the European Union. I have previously addressed this issue, referring to the experience of France, where clear requirements are established and government subsidies are provided.

Nevertheless, as I noted, in the end, it will be the market that determines the effectiveness of all interventions, segmenting prices based on the energy efficiency of properties. This thought can be considered self-evident. The reaction of Italian politicians, as is often the case, was caricatured. Minister of Economy and Finance Giancarlo Giorgetti particularly stood out, commenting on the final approval of the directive and emphasizing: "We voted against the green homes directive, the process is complete. The question is who will pay. We have a sad experience in this country." He described the directive as "wonderful, ambitious," but questioned who would actually bear the costs. According to him, many fortunate individuals have retrofitted their homes thanks to the assistance provided by the government, which essentially means that the heavy burden falls on the shoulders of all Italians.

I'm sure that such a reaction could have earned Giorgetti an Oscar for Best Supporting Actor. Many of his colleagues from the ruling party were also involved in implementing questionable initiatives like...Superbonusand this raises additional questions.

Some commentators note that the only appropriate reward for such statements could beGiachettiAlthough I will try to remain restrained and not join in such a ruthless assessment. It should be noted that Italy has achieved the inclusion of all restoration measures since 2020 in the effectiveness criteria, which essentially means that abouthalf a millionThe "lucky ones" will influence the improvement of the country's position on decarbonization issues.

In turn, the Minister of Infrastructure and loyal ally of Giorgetti, Matteo Salvini, is already preparing for the upcoming European Parliament elections, actively criticizing this "eco-educational" agenda. He is not shy about using slogans: "A beautiful initiative: we are changing motorcycles, cars, vans, trucks, boilers, windows – but who will pay for it?" He, for his part, is proposing his own solutions, referring to the preparation of a housing support plan.

The Italian perspective on current events is diverse, and reactions to changes in legislation manifest in various forms. For example, the "Green Alliance" has proposed funding reforms through the introduction of a wealth tax related to "great fortunes," as well as a windfall tax for banks and energy companies, which seems strange at the very least. I am sure that a proposal will soon follow from the leader of the M5S, who was the architect and defender of...Superbonus.

In general, the Italian house has been mentally updated to create comfortable conditions for newcomers. Judging by the statements, life continues in a familiar mode, and a new aura of "modernity" envelops all levels of society. Meanwhile, no one considers that this is actually a unique opportunity to analyze our management preferences and their consequences, which is significantly overlooked in the broader context of economic responsibility. With each new initiative, complacency continues, as if the market will easily handle any situation, while Italian society has become accustomed to the Stalinist "masters of the steamships" management system, neglecting the need for a thoughtful approach to future challenges.