Since January 1, 2026, EU imports of electricity from Serbia have been subject to the definitive phase of the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM rules). Serbian exporters and electricity traders must work under rules already in force while proposed changes that could ease electricity exports remain under negotiation in Brussels. Compliance depends on the rules applicable when goods are imported, not on an expected future version of the framework.
Current CBAM rules for electricity imports
The 50-tonne de minimis threshold introduced for cement, iron and steel, aluminium and fertilisers does not cover electricity or hydrogen. An EU importer buying Serbian electricity cannot treat a small transaction as outside CBAM solely because its volume or value is limited. This distinction is particularly important while changes to the electricity methodology are being negotiated.
The European Commission issued guidance for the definitive period on August 14, 2026, covering electricity, iron and steel, aluminium and other sectors. It updated its general questions and answers on October 15, 2026. Those materials sit alongside the rules currently applicable to imports.
Proposed changes to electricity methodology
Under COM(2025) 989, the European Commission has proposed changes to how embedded emissions are attributed to electricity. The measures would broaden the treatment of PPAs involving intermediaries, remove the current network condition in Annex IV point 5(b), and revise the nomination test. They are also intended to encourage decarbonisation in third-country electricity systems.
The proposal is politically advanced but not yet final law. The Council of the EU agreed its position on June 12, 2026. The European Parliament adopted its first-reading position on September 15, 2026, and returned the file for interinstitutional negotiations.
Serbian developers and traders should therefore model two separate scenarios: an operating case under current law and a reform case showing the potential effect if and when amended rules apply. A change-in-law clause could allow a PPA to move to a broader intermediary structure after a clearly defined legal trigger. That trigger should be tied to the publication and application of an adopted rule, rather than a political announcement.
Proposed downstream scope and Serbian trade
The European Commission has also proposed bringing 180 steel- and aluminium-intensive downstream products into CBAM from 2028. The Council’s position increased the proposed list to around 200 products, while the European Parliament supported a substantially broader list of 457. The final scope remains under negotiation, with the proposed expansion extending beyond basic materials into industrial supply chains.
Serbia’s trade links with the European Union make that proposed scope relevant to its industry. Serbian goods exports totalled approximately EUR 23.7 billion in January–August 2026, up 8.8% year on year, while EU member states accounted for 58.3% of Serbia’s total external trade. Companies whose products are not currently covered by CBAM should map where steel and aluminium inputs enter goods ultimately sold in the EU.
Contracts, records and project finance
Historical evidence should remain tied to the legislation applicable when the electricity was imported. Reconstructing or rewriting past data under a later methodology could create additional audit risks instead of resolving the original compliance issue. Data systems should remain flexible enough to accommodate changes to the electricity methodology while supporting compliance with current rules.
The same distinction applies to project finance. Investors should not capitalise a higher expected export premium solely on the assumption that the Commission’s proposal will make qualification easier. Banks are likely to assess whether a project remains financially viable under rules now in force, treating possible reform as optional upside until the final legal text, application date and implementing requirements are established.
For Serbian exporters, the practical approach is to maintain current compliance and include appropriate conversion mechanisms in long-term contracts rather than wait for the Brussels negotiations to conclude. Regulatory flexibility can create commercial value, but assuming a future benefit before it takes legal effect presents a financial risk.
Supported by CBAM.Clarion.Engineer
