The CO2 price for refueling and heating with fossil fuels will continue to rise in the coming years. There could be climate money as compensation – but not in this legislative period.
The introduction of climate money to relieve citizens of rising CO2 prices is becoming increasingly distant. According to the federal government, it should be introduced by 2027 at the latest – well after the end of this electoral period. Government spokesman Steffen Hebestreit confirmed that the necessary mechanism would be in place by then and should also take effect. The next federal election is in autumn 2025.
Justification of the Federal Government
Hebestreit justified this with changes to European emissions trading that will take effect from 2027. From then on, the prices for CO2 emissions from buildings and traffic should be determined there. There should then be upper limits for the amount of available certificates that authorize CO2 emissions and that can be traded.
A significant increase in the CO2 price is also expected in German emissions trading from 2026 or 2027, said a spokesman for the Federal Ministry of Economics. Significant price increases for fossil energies and fuels can then be expected. Climate money would then be considered as a compensatory measure.
Hebestreit pointed out that the government has already used other mechanisms to reduce energy prices. Government representatives had emphasized that electricity consumers no longer had to finance the EEG surcharge to promote green electricity.
Lindner rushes forward
Finance Minister Christian Lindner (FDP) told the “Neue Osnabrücker Zeitung”: “From 2025 onwards, we can technically make a per capita payment. We are therefore on track. Whether we politically restructure the funding landscape in this direction will be decided after the next one election to be decided.” The idea of climate money is to transfer the income from the per capita CO2 price back to people. “Currently, the income is used to promote heating, building renovations, green steel production, charging stations for electric cars and so on.” You can’t spend the money twice.
Previously, some politicians, economists and consumer advocates had called for climate money to be paid out quickly in order to compensate for the increase in CO2 prices for consumers at the beginning of the year. This makes refueling and heating more expensive.
The SPD, Greens and FDP had agreed in the coalition agreement: “In order to compensate for future price increases and to ensure acceptance of the market system, we will develop a social compensation mechanism beyond the abolition of the EEG levy (climate money).” First of all, technical requirements must be created for direct payment to citizens.
The Green Youth reacted indignantly to Lindner’s statements. “The fact that Christian Lindner is burying the climate money for this legislature as a side note is a slap in the face for climate protection,” said the co-head of the Green youth organization, Svenja Appuhn, to the German Press Agency. “Anyone who so carelessly gives up the urgently needed social balance is wasting majorities for climate protection and risking people being driven into the arms of the right-wing.”
From the perspective of the FDP parliamentary group, the climate money can be paid out from 2025 “if subsidies in the climate and transformation fund are eliminated, which in any case only make little progress in climate protection,” as parliamentary group vice-president Lukas Köhler said. It is therefore sensible that Minister Lindner “does not build financial castles in the air with money that has already been earmarked for other purposes by the Minister of Economic Affairs.”
Kühnert calls for other social balance
In view of the rejection of climate money in this election period, the SPD is calling for a different social compensation for higher CO2 prices. “Social equalization is the glue of democracy that holds society together,” said SPD General Secretary Kevin Kühnert after committee meetings in Berlin. Kühnert said that “it cannot be the case that we put a price on daily consumption (…) if emissions are generated in the process, but that there is no corresponding return of these funds to consumers.” These could be tax discounts, a long-distance commuter allowance or other measures.
