Moldova may enter the new heating season with a gas rate that will almost return to its previous crisis-era levels. The National Energy Regulatory Agency has proposed raising the price for residential consumers by 40.7%—from 13.35 to 18.79 lei per cubic meter, excluding VAT. Taking into account the current 8% VAT rate, the final rate could rise from 14.42 to 20.29 lei per cubic meter.
This is not yet a final decision, but rather a draft decision by the NARE submitted for public comment. However, the sheer scale of the proposed increase demonstrates just how rapidly conditions in the energy market have changed. As recently as early February 2026, the residential rate was reduced by 13.9%, and just a few months later, the regulator is considering raising it by nearly half.
For the average consumer, the difference will be quite significant. For consumption of 100 cubic meters of gas, the bill will increase by approximately 587 lei; for 150 cubic meters, by 880 lei; and for 200 cubic meters, the additional cost will exceed 1,170 lei. During the cold months, when gas is used not only for cooking but also for heating private homes and apartments with independent heating systems, this increase will be one of the main factors driving up household expenses.
The supplier’s request was even higher. Energocom proposed setting the residential rate at 19.38 lei per cubic meter excluding VAT, or 20.93 lei including VAT. NARE reduced the proposed amount by approximately 60 bani per cubic meter; however, this does not fundamentally change the situation: consumers are being prepared for a significant increase in gas prices.
The main reason cited for the tariff revision is the rise in procurement costs. When the current price was approved, the calculation was based on a weighted average gas price of 404.24 euros per 1,000 cubic meters. In fact, from January through July 2026, it amounted to approximately 423.28 euros, and for August through December, it is projected to reach 623.54 euros per 1,000 cubic meters.
Thus, the expected cost of purchases in the second half of the year exceeds the figure incorporated into the current tariff by approximately 54%. If the current price were maintained, the supplier would be selling gas to consumers at a price significantly lower than the cost required to purchase, transport, and deliver it.
According to data submitted to the regulator, in January–July alone, expenses for the regulated service exceeded potential revenues by approximately 106.8 million lei. If the tariff is not adjusted, these shortfalls will continue to accumulate. Ultimately, these shortfalls would have to be covered anyway—through a sharper price increase, government support, or by passing the accumulated losses on to future rates.
Formally, the increase is attributed to external circumstances. Geopolitical tensions in the Middle East have heightened volatility in the European gas market and led to rising prices. For Moldova, which remains dependent on imported gas and is unable to influence international prices, such fluctuations quickly turn into a domestic tariff problem.
The situation once again highlights a deeper vulnerability in Moldova’s energy model. The tariff reduction in February gave the impression that the period of high prices was behind us. However, the current price proved to be stable only under relatively favorable market conditions. As soon as procurement costs began to rise, the tariff once again required revision.
This means that consumers continue to bear almost the entire price risk. When gas prices on international markets fall, the tariff can be lowered, though usually with a certain delay. When prices rise, the supplier and the regulator are forced to pass on the additional costs to the end consumer fairly quickly to avoid accumulating financial shortfalls.
The increase will affect more than just household bills. Gas is a cost component in heating, thermal power generation, industrial operations, agriculture, the service sector, and other industries. Even companies that do not use gas directly may face rising costs due to higher prices for goods, logistics, rent, and utilities.
As a result, the new tariff could intensify inflationary pressure at precisely the moment when the government is declaring its intention to stimulate economic growth and increase household incomes. Higher utility costs reduce citizens’ disposable income, limit consumption of other goods, and simultaneously increase business costs.
The compensation program is a separate issue. If the rate is approved at the proposed level, the government will have to decide what portion of the increase it is prepared to cover from the budget. Without sufficient support, the most vulnerable families may face a sharp rise in energy costs. However, expanding compensation programs places an additional burden on public finances, which are already tasked with funding social programs, infrastructure, wage increases, and the new government’s reforms.
Thus, the cost of gas does not disappear—only who pays it and when changes. If the tariff remains below an economically justified level, the difference is absorbed by the supplier or subsidized by the government. If the price rises, the costs are immediately passed on to households and businesses.
NARE emphasizes that the tariff could be revised downward again if international prices fall. But this is little consolation for consumers: the heating season is just a few months away, and it is precisely during this period that a higher price will have the greatest negative impact.
The upcoming decision will be the first major economic test for the new government. The Cabinet of Ministers promises to restore confidence, stimulate investment, and make government policy more predictable. However, a tariff increase of nearly 41% will inevitably require not only a technical explanation of purchase prices but also a clear answer to the question of how the government intends to protect the population and the economy from another energy shock.
The February rate cut turned out not to be the beginning of a period of consistently cheap gas, but rather a temporary respite. Now Moldova must once again choose between rising bills, budget subsidies, and accumulating tariff debts. And each of these options ultimately comes at a cost. //July 23, 2026 – InfoMarket.