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 ↓

PoliticsDeveloping

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

European Commission

Commissioner Jorgensen formally acknowledged the post-Russia energy security framework cannot absorb the LNG shock, cutting the mandatory storage target from 90% to 80% and explicitly warning that normalisation is not foreseeable even with immediate peace. The Commission is now dependent on coordinated member state LNG purchasing and demand flexibility to bridge the remaining gap.

Germany

Germany holds the EU's largest storage estate but entered injection season at 23.32% fill with a 4.3 TWh/day injection ceiling that physically prevents any sprint recovery; the Bundeswirtschaftsministerium has maintained its early warning stage since July 2025. An escalation to Alarmstufe, which would trigger compulsory injection obligations, remains live if storage fails to rise through April.

QatarEnergy

QatarEnergy declared force majeure on European LNG contracts citing Ras Laffan strike damage, while the Gulf Research Centre assessed the declaration may also reflect a commercial decision to reallocate volumes toward higher-priced Asian spot markets without triggering breach penalties. Independent engineering confirmation of damage extent has not been published, leaving legal and commercial uncertainty unresolved.

Equinor / Norway

Norway remains the EU's largest pipeline gas supplier and benefits from sustained elevated TTF; Norwegian pipeline capacity has partially offset the Russian supply loss but cannot close the structural gap. Norway Zone 4 power prices at EUR 2/MWh on 13 April illustrate how hydro-dominated systems are structurally decoupled from the gas price shock affecting continental Europe.

Italy

Italy cleared day-ahead power at EUR 133/MWh on 13 April, four to five times the Iberian equivalent, because gas-fired plants set the marginal price for approximately 90% of generation hours. Italy's circa 40 GW of gas-fired CCGT capacity, built when gas was cheap and nuclear was politically blocked, is now a structural liability at EUR 47/MWh TTF.

Spain

Spain cleared at EUR 29/MWh on the same day Italy paid EUR 133/MWh, the starkest single-day demonstration that its renewable energy investment is translating directly into price shock insulation for industry. Iberian interconnector constraints at the Pyrenees mean Spain cannot export this advantage to northern European markets at scale.