The 2027 Budget reopens the debate between fiscal policy and national energy goals. In the draft Budget Law, Article 21 introduces an IRAP increase targeted at companies identified through the ATECO codes specified in the measure: five percentage points in 2027, followed by a three-point increase in 2028 and 2029.
For ANEV, the association representing the wind energy sector, the measure risks weighing on renewable energy operators as well, at a time when the system should instead be focusing resources and industrial capacity on opening new construction sites. The association challenges the general approach of the provision: the tax measure, it argues, eats into margins for companies already facing significant costs and delays for permitting, grid connections, and project development.
The issue does not only concern the income statements of power companies. Higher taxation alters the financial assessments used to decide investments in wind, photovoltaic, and other renewable technology plants. In a capital-intensive industry, where project feasibility is assessed over the plant's entire operating life, an additional burden can reduce expected returns or require a review of the economic conditions underpinning an initiative.
A measure in the decisive transition toward 2030
ANEV's protest comes at a particularly delicate stage for Italian energy planning. The country needs to increase domestic generation from renewable sources to move closer to the 2030 targets set by the PNIEC, the Piano nazionale integrato energia e clima. Achieving those results requires new plants to actually reach construction, after clearing permitting procedures, site availability, and grid connection.
It is precisely at these stages, according to the association, that the sector continues to encounter critical bottlenecks slowing project progress. Adding an IRAP hike therefore means intervening in an industry that is already not starting from easy conditions. The issue is industrial before it is accounting-related: the ability to plan multi-year investments hinges on regulatory predictability, grid access, and the ability to reliably estimate revenues and costs.
ANEV also links the issue to reducing Italy's dependence on fossil fuel imports. More domestic renewable generation can help curb exposure to international commodity markets and, over time, strengthen the competitiveness of the manufacturing system. But these effects presuppose that plants are built at a pace consistent with the PNIEC schedule. If tax pressure affects the propensity to invest, the association warns, it risks also slowing down the contribution of renewables to decarbonisation and to curbing energy costs.
The impact on FER X procedures
A specific passage concerns FER X, the mechanism that provides competitive procedures for access to support for renewable sources. Auctions operate on the basis of economic parameters that must enable operators to submit viable bids and, following the award, to actually build the plants. For ANEV, the increased tax burden must therefore be taken into account when defining the reference prices for the upcoming procedures.
This request is not marginal. If a tax change is not absorbed into the economic assumptions of the auctions, the risk highlighted by the association is that of squeezing participation or weakening the sustainability of awarded projects. The outcome could be a gap between the capacity tendered and the capacity that actually enters operation. Conversely, adjusting the parameters serves to prevent the higher cost from being ignored during the financial planning phase.
This does not automatically imply a single outcome for all companies or for every technology. Renewable projects have different characteristics in terms of location, permitting timelines, grid connection conditions, financial structure, and development maturity. However, ANEV's criticism concerns the overall signal sent to the market: an additional burden imposed while the sector is called upon to contribute to a significant expansion of clean generation.
The precedent of the Decreto Bollette
The association's position is also weighed down by the recent regulatory context. ANEV points to the consequences of the provisions introduced by the Decreto Bollette and sees continuity in the Manovra's approach toward FER companies. Hence the definition of a “punitive” approach toward the power companies involved, adopted by the organization when commenting on the measure.
The criticism is not limited to calling for the absence of new levies. The association urges an approach capable of removing existing obstacles and creating favorable conditions for investment. In this perspective, taxation, auction rules, permitting, and grid infrastructure are not separate dossiers: they all combine to determine whether a project can be financed and built on schedule.
For businesses, uncertainty does not depend solely on the scale of an individual tax rate. What also matters is the ability to incorporate regulatory changes into business plans and contracts, especially when projects require years between the preliminary phase and commissioning. Higher taxation can be managed in various ways, but it becomes more problematic when added to complex permitting, connection delays, and frequent revisions of the regulatory framework.
What to watch now
The debate over the legge di Bilancio will first clarify the actual scope of the increase and the companies affected by the planned ATECO codes. The issue raised by ANEV regarding the FER X mechanisms will also remain on the table: the economic conditions of the upcoming procedures will have to contend with the new fiscal profile outlined by the draft legislation.
The stakes go beyond the dissent of a single trade group. Italian energy policy aims to combine security of supply, emissions reductions, and competitive prices for households and industry. For this trajectory to yield results, renewable capacity targets must translate into investment decisions and construction sites. The debate over IRAP shows how much this path also depends on rules seemingly outside the energy sector: a budget choice can directly impact the cost of capital, auction bids, and, consequently, the pace of the transition.
