The regulator’s official management report was replete with institutional achievements: the phased implementation of the European energy package, the transition to competitive selection of public service providers, and the mandatory transition of large consumers to the free market.
Starting in January 2025, following the complete cessation of transit through Ukraine and supplies from Gazprom, the right bank and left bank of Moldova found themselves in a fundamentally new framework.
“Virtually the entire volume of natural gas starting in 2025 — and here I mean both the right and left banks — will be supplied from continental Europe, from the west, and specifically via the Ungheni interconnector. As a result, in 2025, 81% of the total volume imported by the Republic of Moldova over the course of the year, needed for both the right and left banks—was imported specifically through this interconnection point and via the Iași–Ungheni–Chișinău interconnector gas pipeline,” stated Alexei Taran, CEO of ANRE.
In addition, the regulator introduced a single, harmonized distribution tariff across the country, eliminating disparities among the 18 regional operators, and established obligations to build commercial and insurance gas reserves in storage facilities in Romania and Ukraine.
Pseudo-liberalization of the market?
Despite the declared progress, it was precisely the controversy with the parliamentary opposition that exposed the vulnerabilities of the current policy. Opposition representatives criticized the regulator’s claim of genuine liberalization of the gas sector, pointing out that the transition from one form of monopoly to another can hardly be called a fully-fledged market.
Specifically, in 2025, SA Energoсom held approximately 88–90% of the retail gas supply market, which, according to the government’s opponents, merely indicated a redistribution of administrative levers in favor of the state-owned player.
Furthermore, the opposition directly questioned the appropriateness of the 870 decisions adopted by the regulator over the course of the year, casting doubt on whose interests were being prioritized.
“I would like to note that in its activities, the agency is independent in its decision-making, and it must ensure a balance between the legitimate interests of consumers and the economic viability of market operators. And here I would like to clarify a point. What constitutes the consumer’s interest? Is it solely a low price, or does it also include the security of resource supply? Thus, this balance, ensured by the agency, allows operators to recover all necessary and fully justified costs,” Taran argued.
According to him, by the end of 2025, the agency had not approved for inclusion in tariffs across all sectors nearly one billion lei of what the operators had requested:
“In other words, the agency must ensure that, yes, consumers receive a fair, transparent price in line with global market conditions in the countries from which we import, but at the same time ensure that the supplier remains viable, can procure these resources, and has sufficient funds to transport and deliver them to the consumer.”
Doubts About Transparency
Another set of critical remarks from the opposition concerned issues of transparency regarding the regulator itself, including the modest proportion of public hearings relative to the total number of resolutions adopted, as well as the substantial administrative costs associated with renting ANRE’s central office. Of these 870 decisions, public consultations were held for only 49.
The agency’s leadership countered these criticisms by citing international assessments, according to which the Moldovan regulator has ranked first among Energy Community countries for the third consecutive year in terms of the level of implementation of European legislation.
The parliamentary hearings in the committee inevitably touched on the sensitive issue of administrative expenses, which are ultimately paid for by consumers. The case of Energocom, where ANRE recognized 60% of the total lease cost of 5.2 million lei in the tariff, highlights a gray area in public procurement. The fact that the law does not require public tenders for the rental of premises, but only provides for a simple call for proposals, leaves room for political interpretations and justified criticism.
Furthermore, of the annual budget of 9 million lei that ANRE pays for its own offices, 8.2 million lei goes solely to the central office in Chisinau. And the agency does not pay this money to the state.
I recall that several years ago, a high-profile scandal erupted in the pro-government press over the Moldovagaz office—at that time, the authorities and the public demanded explanations regarding the hundreds of millions of lei invested in the construction of the building, and the possible inclusion of related expenses in consumer rates. At the time, this case was cited as an example of inefficient management in the energy sector. Today, similar questions are being raised about Energocom—though, so far, exclusively by the opposition.
Naturally, salaries were also discussed. According to the data presented, for the head of a company—whether in the natural gas or electric power sector—the maximum allowable salary in 2026 was 56,000 lei gross. This does not apply to ANRE’s leadership; their salaries are nearly twice as high, although they do not receive bonuses. The agency’s head himself received nearly one and a half million lei last year.
The ANRE report showed that the transition to the European model is accompanied not only by new opportunities but also by serious risks: volatility in exchange prices, the need for strict control over investments in the grid, and a thorough review of every leu that state-owned companies factor into final consumer rates.
At the same time, energy sector executives continue to enjoy a sort of carte blanche from politicians in power: we can only hope that all decisions made are truly necessary and justified, since not everyone is capable of understanding all the internal calculations.
For consumers, however, the picture is crystal clear: companies, arguments, and political roles may change, but the outcome remains the same—the costs ultimately fall on their shoulders. It’s the same old story, just in a different guise—and significantly more expensive. Recently, Energocom requested that the National Energy Regulatory Authority (ANRE) approve a gas rate increase of more than 6.5 lei per cubic meter—up to 20.93 lei including VAT—while consumers currently pay 14.42 lei.
Follow our updates
