13APR

ACER reviews its own powers and LNG pricing

2 min read

22:33UTC

A call-for-evidence on ACER's investigatory powers runs to 6 May, alongside a new LNG price assessment Expert Group.

← Back to Europe's thinnest gas cushion since 2018 Jump to analysis ↓

EconomicDeveloping

Key takeaway

ACER's LNG price methodology review will shape how benchmark prices are assessed during supply crunches.

ACER launched a call-for-evidence evaluation last Thursday, running to 6 May, assessing the agency's own performance under its expanded investigatory powers granted by the 2024 REMIT amendments. Separately, ACER updated its LNG price assessment methodology and convened a dedicated Expert Group.

The LNG price methodology review carries direct market relevance. During periods of extreme spot market tightness, assessed prices (published benchmarks) and actual traded prices can diverge significantly, as they did during the previous energy crisis when the EU introduced its gas price cap mechanism. How ACER assesses LNG prices feeds into regulated tariffs, storage injection economics, and the reference prices that trigger emergency supply measures. The Expert Group's conclusions will shape the transparency infrastructure for the next LNG supply cycle.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

ACER is the EU regulator that monitors European energy markets for manipulation and rule-breaking. It recently received expanded powers to investigate potential misconduct, similar to a financial market regulator. ACER is now reviewing its own performance under those expanded powers and also reassessing how it measures LNG prices. The LNG price review matters because the price assessments that ACER or its approved agencies publish affect billions of euros of contract valuations across the European gas market.

Deep Analysis

Root Causes

ACER's self-evaluation was triggered by two specific regulatory commitments. The 2024 REMIT amendments required ACER to review its own performance within 24 months of receiving expanded powers.

Separately, the Gas Regulation review underway since 2023 requested that ACER assess whether its market surveillance functions are adequate for an LNG-dominated supply market, which requires different data and analytical capabilities than the pipeline-dominated market REMIT was designed for.

What could happen next?

Opportunity
An ACER-published LNG benchmark price, if adopted, would reduce the scope for private price assessment agencies to influence spot valuations during thin-market episodes such as the current Hormuz disruption.

Source Landscape

This story draws on neutral-leaning sources from Belgium

Belgium

Primary parallel: LIBOR's transition to SONIA (2021-22) provides a direct structural parallel: a benchmark price methodology dominated by bank submissions was replaced by a transaction-based alternative after the 2012 LIBOR manipulation scandal. ACER's LNG price assessment review follows the same logic: current Platts/Argus assessed prices are based on surveyed quotes, not confirmed transactions, creating manipulation opportunities during thin-market episodes.

Counter-parallel: The oil price benchmark reforms of 2013-14, when Platts ICE Brent methodology was tightened following IOSCO review, show the limitation of methodology reform without enforcement: the reforms reduced the number of reported transactions used in price assessment but did not prevent subsequent manipulation allegations in 2018.

Consensus view: The Council of European Energy Regulators (CEER) published a parallel assessment concluding that ACER's 2024 expanded investigatory powers have been underused: in the 18 months since the REMIT amendments, ACER opened 12 formal investigations but concluded none with a published enforcement decision. The self-evaluation is partly a response to this criticism from CEER and the European Parliament's Industry Committee.

Counter-view: The International Energy Agency's energy market governance team argued that ACER's LNG price assessment methodology review is more commercially consequential than the investigatory powers self-evaluation: currently, EU LNG spot prices are assessed by Platts and Argus Media using proprietary methodologies that ACER does not oversee. An ACER-published benchmark price would reduce trading firms' ability to influence spread calculations during volatile periods.

Key tension: Whether ACER's institutional priority is demonstrating enforcement credibility under its existing expanded powers or establishing regulatory authority over LNG price benchmarks, two objectives that require different timelines and institutional capabilities.

Sources:European Commission

Mentions:ACER →European Parliament →Parliament →Prima →International Energy Agency →ICE →REMIT →Argus Media →

First Reported In

Update #1 · Europe's thinnest gas cushion since 2018

European Commission· 13 Apr 2026

Read original →

Different Perspectives

Amsterdam-Rotterdam gas trading desks

TTF failing to sustain EUR 47+ with 51 mcm/day of Norwegian capacity offline confirms EUR 50 as a diplomatic ceiling; the curve is a Troll-restart long, and EBN's EUR 233 million mandate budget cap is a known limit on price-insensitive prompt buying.

ARERA

Italy's energy regulator is running mandatory storage injection that carries the EU aggregate trajectory alongside CRE and EBN, while Italian industrial consumers at Panigaglia face a simultaneously low-utilisation terminal and a EUR 2/MWh delivered-cost basis above TTF. The mandate funds security of supply at the expense of Italian competitiveness.

Shell

As a long-term Russian LNG contract holder, Shell faces a replacement procurement problem concentrated in Q3-Q4 2026 ahead of the 1 January 2027 double cliff; with terminal booking lead times running weeks, the real deadline is late November 2026 and no replacement supply has been publicly named.

CRE

France's 100% mandatory booking order funds injection regardless of the inverted strip, providing the EU aggregate cover that Germany's abolished levy cannot; the CRE order is renewed annually, making it a political risk rather than a structural guarantee. That dependency exposes the EU injection trajectory to French electoral cycles.

Bundesnetzagentur

Germany's regulator holds the early-warning gas stage active with no statutory instrument to compel commercial injection, and Berlin confirmed on 20 May it will introduce no summer incentive scheme; Germany is the EU's only major unincentivised storage market after the levy lapsed on 1 January 2026. The mandate gap is carried by three other member states.

European Commission

The Commission relaxed the mandatory fill target from 90% to 80% and published an ETS benchmark revision saving industry EUR 4 billion, choosing industrial competitiveness over both climate and storage ambition at the moment physical margins are tightest. Both decisions reduce policy pressure at the exact week the trajectory margin narrowed to 45 GWh/day.