Will Flanders’ energy tax shift really leave the average household no worse off?

The Flemish government provisionally approved an energy-tax shift on 10 July that will make electricity cheaper and fossil heating more expensive from 2028, placing household energy bills at the centre of Flanders’ attempt to accelerate electrification. Flemish Energy and Climate Minister Melissa Depraetere, of Vooruit, says the combination of transferred charges and an additional electricity reduction should be budget-neutral for a household with average consumption.

The headline figures are straightforward but do not describe every home. Reporting by Het Nieuwsblad, based on calculations first published by De Tijd, indicates that a household using 3.5 megawatt-hours of electricity annually would save about €80, while one consuming 17 megawatt-hours of gas would pay roughly €80 more. A heating-oil user consuming just over 23 megawatt-hours would face an estimated increase of €74.40. Households using both ordinary electricity and average amounts of gas could therefore come out close to even, while homes already heated with a heat pump would retain more of the electricity saving.

That distinction matters to residents, landlords and businesses in Vlaanderen because the reform rewards energy choices rather than guaranteeing every bill will fall. A poorly insulated home with high gas consumption may pay more, yet replacing its heating system can require an investment far larger than the annual difference. Tenants have still less control when the owner decides whether to renovate. Companies with energy-intensive premises will likewise experience effects determined by their individual mix of electricity, gas and oil.

The Flemish government says the present system is structurally skewed: policy costs supporting renewable generation and efficient energy use are charged exclusively through electricity, even though electrification is essential to reducing fossil-fuel consumption. Its approved framework will move those costs gradually onto fossil heating fuels and return part of Flanders’ future EU Emissions Trading System 2 revenue through an additional electricity cut. The proposal must still receive advice from the Flemish Utility Regulator, the Flemish data-protection authority, the Social and Economic Council of Flanders and the Environment and Nature Council.

Depraetere’s case is that cheaper electricity makes heat pumps and other electric technologies more attractive while reducing exposure to imported fossil fuels and volatile prices. The official Flemish explanation calls the reform cost-neutral at average consumption and says households that use less gas through insulation, behavioural changes or fossil-free heating should benefit. Income-linked renovation grants and loans, alongside a Flemish Social Climate Plan, are intended to help households that cannot readily finance that transition.

Opposition parties question whether the model household is a useful measure of affordability. In the Flemish Parliament on 8 July, Anders politician Tom Ongena asked how many actual households would gain, lose or break even and referred to concerns raised by the Finance Inspectorate. Vlaams Belang’s Filip Brusselmans argued that consumers could recover an electricity discount only to pay more through fossil heating or road fuel. PVDA’s Raf Van Gestel has separately stressed that households dependent on gas do not necessarily have the money or authority to install a heat pump.

The European layer is important but separate. ETS2 is an EU carbon market for fuel suppliers serving buildings, road transport and certain smaller industries; suppliers, rather than individual households, will buy allowances, though costs may be passed through. The Council of the EU says the system is now due to become fully operational in 2028 and is designed to cut covered emissions by 42 percent from 2005 levels by 2030. The European Commission presents its Social Climate Fund as the counterweight, financing renovation, clean heating, mobility and limited income support for vulnerable groups.

Flanders is therefore adding its own price signal at the moment the EU introduces a wider one. The decisive question is distribution: whether electricity reductions, renovation aid and social support reach fossil-dependent households before higher charges do. The advisory bodies will now scrutinise the draft, after which the government must finalise the decree and disclose more granular impact calculations. Until then, the €80 comparison is a useful illustration, not a promise about any individual bill.