The group of oil and petroleum product distributors at the Chamber of Commerce unanimously agreed yesterday to request that the Government and Parliament retract the proposed amendment to the Energy Law regarding mandatory fuel labeling, as reported by “Vijesti”.

On Friday, the government approved the amendment without a public debate, incorporating a new chapter of 19 articles to the law concerning the labeling of fuel, or the process of adding markers (fine powder) to petroleum products during their importation.

The anticipated costs for this procedure are estimated to be between one to two cents per liter of fuel, which would then be reflected in the end consumer prices.

The primary draft of the energy law has already cleared the parliamentary committees and is set for discussion in a session beginning tomorrow. The Economics Committee is anticipated to review these government amendments later, likely early next week.

While Jugopetrol representatives were absent from the Group meeting, all other attendees were united in calling for the withdrawal of these proposed amendments.

During discussions, it was concluded that the amendments should be removed from consideration as there had been no public debate, and because they contradict European Union standards, potentially resulting in substantial costs for both traders and consumers. Furthermore, there is no established evidence of fuel smuggling, which this measure is intended to address.

Estimates suggest the costs could reach seven to ten million euros, and there is only one laboratory in Montenegro authorized to conduct this marking, raising concerns about favoritism in job allocation. Additionally, the government anticipates generating five million euros from smuggling efforts, which they believe is lower than the inherent costs being passed on to consumers.

The marking process would occur during fuel imports, post-payment of excise duties and VAT. Critics argue that this approach implies petroleum products are sold after all fees are settled, rather than addressing the issue of duty-exempt products that could be vulnerable to smuggling. Notably, there have been no documented cases of fuel smuggling by registered traders thus far.

It was also noted that implementing this marking would be sensible for fuel sold at marinas and ports, where owners have been exempted from paying shares while being simultaneously subjected to a new fee of three cents for creating oil reserves, along with the additional marking costs imposed on other traders.

This existing measure is likely to further undermine competitiveness, favoring Jugopetrol— the sole company capable of importing petroleum products cheaper by sea. Other companies face pressure to purchase from Jugopetrol or to transport imports from various other ports. Notably, the same marking cost applies both to a 25-ton tanker and to much larger tankers. Consequently, one marker could service a significant tanker, while thousands would be needed for the same fuel quantity in smaller tankers.

Additionally, those importing fuel via tanker face an extra hurdle in needing to register beforehand for the marking procedure and subsequently waiting for marker verification, which could prolong the import process by an entire day, especially during peak seasons with heavy road and border traffic. This, they assert, will lead to increased expenses related to storage, tanker rentals, driver per diems, and will cause delays in procurement.

Participants expressed doubts about the public interest in this marking process, arguing that the lack of evidence supporting fuel smuggling raises suspicions of private interest. They also inferred that the government appears to be avoiding a public debate on this issue.

Furthermore, it was reported that last year, the state experienced a 12 percent rise in revenue from fuel duties, excise duties, and VAT compared to 2023, and that these developments are now at risk. Ultimately, they concluded that there is no valid justification for implementing this measure other than to compromise competition and to benefit specific parties at the expense of the economy and citizens.

News