Energy saving obligation, part II
The energy saving obligation has been the main instrument applied for the past 30 years by the Minister of Climate Policy and Green Growth (KGG) and her predecessors to encourage businesses and also institutions such as schools, churches and sports clubs to cut their energy consumption. Our previous audit concluded that the obligation had been less than effective. The Minister of KGG and other ministers also provided grants and tax allowances to promote energy saving measures. Businesses might therefore be receiving money to implement measures that they already have to take under the energy saving obligation. This would be an inefficient use of public money.
What are we auditing?
We are auditing whether ministers are ensuring that businesses and institutions do not receive grants to carry out energy saving measures that are required under the energy saving obligation. We are examining a variety of grant and tax schemes, including the Energy Investment Allowance (EIA) and the BOSA grant incentive scheme for the construction and maintenance of sports facilities. We are asking whether grants or tax allowances are being provided for energy saving measures that are already required under the energy saving obligation. We are also asking whether ministers can explain any overlap and whether they inform parliament properly.
Why are we carrying out this audit?
The Netherlands Court of Audit investigates whether the government spends tax money sensibly, economically and prudently. Obligatory energy savings are seen by the government and experts as an effective and efficient means, also for businesses, to advance the energy transition. In part I of our audit of the energy saving obligation, we concluded that the obligation was not effective. Grants might be offsetting the cost of obligatory measures. Having both an obligation and grant funding could reduce the energy saving obligation’s efficiency and cost more money than necessary.
What are our audit questions?
- What financial instruments to save energy, such as the EIA, VAMIL, MIA, ISDE, VEKI and NIKI, were, or are being, provided for the same target group and measures that are subject to the energy saving obligation (as at 30 June 2023) and are the instruments efficient?
- On the extension of the energy saving target group as of 1 July 2023, did the minister take account of any overlap between the energy saving obligation and the financial instruments available for the new target group, such as the Horticulture Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Scheme, Energy Saving Investment Scheme / Environmentally-friendly Measures Investment Scheme and the Energy Innovation Market Introduction (Horticulture) Scheme?
- When measures such as the SME Sustainability Grant Scheme and the SME Intensified Saving Obligation Support Scheme were proposed, did the minister take account of any overlap with the energy saving obligation?
- Is government expenditure on oversight and enforcement of the energy saving obligation, in combination with financial instruments applied by the government to promote energy savings, efficient?
Do you want to take part in this audit?
The Court of Audit invites you to share any information you may have that would benefit our audit. We appreciate all contributions, knowledge and experience you may care to share with us on this topic. Simply send an email to bijdrage@rekenkamer.nl.
We read all emails carefully and treat them in confidence. However, we are not able to reply to every contribution we receive.