Skip to content
Welcome, thoughtbot's Giant Robots listeners!Start here
2026 FIFA World Cup
17JUN

Two capitals filed on the gas directive

3 min read
10:21UTC

Portugal lodged a partial transposition in April. Slovakia lodged a note saying it needs none. The other twenty-five member states have filed nothing at all.

SportDeveloping
Key takeaway

Only Portugal and Slovakia have told Brussels they have transposed the recast EU gas directive.

Portugal and Slovakia are the only members of the European Union's twenty-seven to have notified the European Commission of national measures transposing Directive (EU) 2024/1788, two days before the deadline of Wednesday 5 August 2026⁠1. The directive recast the bloc's rules for its internal markets in renewable gas, natural gas and hydrogen. Its Article 94 requires transposing measures to be in force by that Wednesday.

Portugal lodged Decreto-Lei n.º 94/2026 of 30 April 2026, whose own title calls it a transposição parcial, a partial transposition, covering this directive and the Energy Efficiency Directive together. Slovakia lodged Zákon č. 259/2025 under the register annotation "Member State does not consider the transposition necessary"⁠2. Bratislava has told Brussels it sees no new domestic law as needed. Lisbon has told Brussels it has written part of one.

EUR-Lex records notifications to the Commission, not the contents of national gazettes. Filing lags legislating as a matter of routine, and a capital can have a statute in force with nothing yet standing against its name in Brussels. What the register supports is the narrow reading, and the narrow reading still merits a desk's attention: two governments have told the Commission they have transposed, on a deadline whose listed articles run to unbundling, certification of transmission and distribution system operators, third-party access, tariff principles for gas and hydrogen networks, network development planning, storage and LNG facility access, and supplier switching⁠3.

Missing a transposition deadline starts a documented procedure rather than a fine. the Commission's April infringements package issued reasoned opinions against Croatia, Poland and Portugal over a separate electricity directive, leaving those three one procedural step short of a referral to the Court of Justice. The instruments that actually landed across the past fortnight came from agencies rather than parliaments: ACER published an EU-wide generation investment-cost dataset on 30 July, and CRE authorised experimental local flexibility markets on the RTE and Enedis platforms the same day. Harmonised hydrogen network access cannot arrive that way. It needs twenty-seven legislatures, and so far two of them have said anything at all.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

EU countries have until 5 August 2026 to write their own laws implementing a shared rulebook for gas and hydrogen networks, covering things like who can access a pipeline and how storage facilities are priced. Portugal has only partly done this so far, and Slovakia has told Brussels it thinks its existing laws already cover the requirement.

Deep Analysis
Root Causes

The directive folds hydrogen network access and storage rules into what was previously a gas-only regime, so states must decide whether to extend existing gas TSO certification frameworks to hydrogen operators or write parallel rules.

Portugal's partial filing and Slovakia's non-necessity claim both point to legislatures treating the hydrogen provisions as the harder drafting problem, not the established gas articles.

What could happen next?
  • Precedent

    The Commission's register will likely show a wave of late or partial notifications from other member states as the 5 August deadline passes, since Portugal and Slovakia's filings suggest hydrogen provisions are the sticking point across the bloc.

  • Risk

    Slovakia's non-necessity claim invites Commission scrutiny; a formal challenge would clarify how much existing national law can substitute for a new transposing instrument.

First Reported In

Update #32 · Two of 27 have filed on the gas rulebook

EUR-Lex· 3 Aug 2026
Read original →
Different Perspectives
French Football Federation
French Football Federation
The FFF called an 11:00 CEST press conference for 28 July, at its Paris headquarters, following an extraordinary executive committee meeting, at which Zinedine Zidane is expected to be presented as head coach succeeding Didier Deschamps. As of this writing no communique confirms the appointment, contract length or start date.
Morocco
Morocco
Morocco is pushing for the 2030 final at its Grand Stade Hassan II in Casablanca, a planned 115,000-seat venue that would be the world's largest football stadium on completion. The venue is contested by a Spanish petition for the Santiago Bernabeu, and FIFA has fixed neither the venue nor the tournament's proposed 64-team format.
FIFA
FIFA
FIFA's first tournament report, published 27 July, itemises nearly 300,000 accredited personnel, 73,700 security staff and 300,000 square metres of custom-grown turf, with no revenue or cost figure attached. As a Swiss association answering to its own Congress rather than a treasury, FIFA has followed the same operational-before-financial sequence it used after Qatar 2022.
Javier Tebas / La Liga
Javier Tebas / La Liga
La Liga president Javier Tebas said on 21 July that FIFA's system is rotten from the root and that Gianni Infantino's time as president has, in his words, concluded. Tebas has no vote in FIFA's process, so days after the IOC declined jurisdiction over a separate ethics complaint, he used the only instrument he has.
Mexico City government
Mexico City government
Head of government Clara Brugada presented a closing report on 22 July crediting the tournament with 44 billion pesos of economic activity, 2,000-plus accelerated public works and 100,000 formal jobs in June alone. The city has not published the method behind that figure, and three other Mexican bodies count the same five weeks differently.
Town of Foxborough
Town of Foxborough
Foxborough answered Kraft Group's June lawsuit on 7 July with a 61-page counterclaim, calling the stadium's owners 'a collection of multibillion-dollar corporations' trying to shift its $7.8 million security bill onto taxpayers. The town says its licensing power and its billing power run through the same board, and it wants the court to award its own costs too.