“Pure actionism”: Economists complain about “clear social imbalance” in the coalition’s relief plans

At the same time, it creates false incentives because it does not support the necessary reduction in energy consumption in road transport and could therefore increase price pressure elsewhere.

The tax-free one-off payment of up to 1,000 euros by employers is also not a targeted instrument emphasized Fratzscher. It primarily benefits employees in larger and financially strong companies, while other groups are left empty-handed – such as the unemployed, pensioners, students or employees in small companies. “The measure is therefore socially unbalanced and does not adequately reach particularly burdened households.” Overall, the package shows “a clear social imbalance”. “It would be crucial to provide more targeted relief, particularly targeting households with low and middle incomes,” emphasized Fratzscher.

Economic leader Stefan Kooths from the Kiel Institute also criticized: “It is an illusion that the state can relieve citizens of higher energy costs – it cannot.” The higher import prices for energy led to a loss of purchasing power across the economy, which is expected to amount to around 50 billion euros in 2026/2027. “At this scale, the overall economy becomes poorer.” The state can only redistribute the burden. “Today’s ‘relief’ is tearing holes in public budgets, for which other taxes can be increased or reduced in the future,” warned Kooths. “The citizens will therefore have to bear the bill one way or another.”

Ifo Institute: The fundamental problem is shortages

Joachim Ragnitz from the Munich Ifo Institute concluded that the costs of the energy price crisis would just be distributed differently. “The measures agreed in the coalition committee against high fuel prices are pure activism and do not solve the fundamental problem of increasing shortages.” Whether the proposed excess profits tax could be implemented in this way is extremely questionable due to constitutional concerns.

From the perspective of the trade union-affiliated IMK Institute, the steps taken as an immediate package are fine. “They reduce inflation in the short term and relieve the burden on households and companies”said IMK director Sebastian Dullien. However, consideration should be given to how higher oil and gas prices could be prevented from spilling over into the prices of other goods and services if high energy prices persist for a longer period of time. “Unfortunately, it is not yet clear how the government wants to ensure that the reduced energy tax on fuels is actually passed on.”

Friedrich Heinemann from the Mannheim ZEW Institute said the package was “balanced and deserves praise.” Lowering the price of gasoline is wrong in itself. “This tax subsidy is too general and reduces the incentive to leave the car parked more often.” On the other hand, this is only temporary and embedded in a reform program.

An income tax reform should provide greater incentives to work. In addition, the reform of the health system should relieve the burden on those paying contributions. This could secure the purchasing power of private households in the long term. “So overall the direction is right”said the ZEW expert with a view to further plans.

The federal government wants to reduce taxes on diesel and gasoline by around 17 cents per liter for two months. The relief amounts to 1.6 billion euros. In addition, employers should be able to pay employees a tax- and duty-free bonus of up to 1,000 euros. The coalition also agreed on an income tax reform on January 1, 2027, which is intended to relieve the burden on small and medium-sized incomes. To provide counter-financing, the tobacco tax is set to rise as early as 2026.