One year on: Most social climate plans still missing despite EU legal deadline

Exactly one year after the June 2025 deadline, only Sweden and Lithuania have formally adopted their social climate plans, making them the only EU Member States currently eligible to receive disbursements from the Social Climate Fund. These early payments are essential for preparing administrations, launching investment programmes, and alleviating the socio-economic pressures caused by rising energy and transport costs for the most vulnerable households and transport users.  

To mark this missed milestone, CEE Bankwatch Network has joined a coalition of civil society organisations in urging national decision makers to act without further delay. The signatories include Carbon Market Watch, the European Environmental Bureau, Climate Action Network Europe, REScoop.eu, the Cool Heating Coalition, FEANTSA, and the LIFE Effect project. 

The need for immediate action is clear. Nearly EUR 87 billion intended to support vulnerable households, transport users and microenterprises remains inaccessible. Despite this urgency, only a handful of Member States have submitted draft social climate plans to the European Commission for approval: Slovenia, the Netherlands, Malta, Latvia, Greece and Croatia. The remaining Member States have yet to submit their plans, leaving millions of citizens unprotected. Without upfront funding, governments cannot begin the long-term structural investments needed before the launch of the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS2) in 2028, including building renovations, heat pump deployment and clean mobility support. 

Households in eastern Europe spend more than twice as much of their income on energy as those in western Europe. The combination of ageing, energy-inefficient housing stock – much of which dates to the Soviet era – and outdated or inadequate public transport infrastructure places countries closer to the EU’s eastern border under particular strain, underlining the importance of long-term investment. Nevertheless, all Member States urgently need structural investments that improve access to clean, affordable energy and sustainable mobility. 

CEE Bankwatch Network has been closely monitoring the development of social climate plans across central and eastern Europe, tracking both the pace and quality of national preparations. Last June, we published an analysis of the state of play across the region, highlighting early warning signs, including limited transparency, insufficient civil society inclusion, significant data gaps and slow administrative progress. Unfortunately,these concerns have since proved well founded. In many capitals, the preparation of social climate plans remains opaque, under‑resourced or politically deprioritised.

‘Latvia’s submission is a step forward, but the process has fallen short of genuine civil society involvement. Consultations were rushed and poorly publicised. This undermines the credibility of the plan and risks overlooking the needs of the most vulnerable households. We also consider support for hybrid heating systems deeply problematic. These technologies lock households into further fossil fuel dependence and contradict the long‑term objectives of the Social Climate Fund. Latvia should prioritise fully renewable heating solutions instead of prolonging the life of gas‑based systems,’ says Maksis Apinis from Green Liberty Latvia. 

In a recent episode of The Bankwatch Podcast, Krzysztof Mrozek from the Polish Green Network warned that if Poland fails to transpose ETS2 and submit its social climate plan, the consequences will be severe. Polish households would face rising fuel and heating costs without any compensatory support from the Social Climate Fund. At the same time, Poland would forfeit billions of euros in EU financing for building renovation, clean heating and sustainable transport. This would leave the country more exposed to energy poverty, deepen regional inequalities and undermine public trust in the transition. ‘Delaying action is not a strategy; it’s a direct threat to social stability,’ Mrozek concludes. 

‘Implementation of the Social Climate Fund should already be under way. But what exactly can governments implement if there’s no plan to guide investments, define beneficiaries or tailor support measures? The absence of social climate plans is only part of the problem. Far greater investment is needed to reduce social inequalities both between and within Member States. The plans should therefore function as strategic reference points for directing further socially oriented investment from other funding sources, including the next EU budget, additional ETS1 and ETS2 revenues, and fossil fuel taxes. It’s imperative that Member States finalise credible, socially ambitious plans as soon as possible,’ says Maris Pedaja, Policy Officer at CEE Bankwatch Network. 

The fact remains that many governments have failed to conduct meaningful public consultations, despite the legal requirement for social climate plans to be inclusive and evidence‑based. Some have even called for ETS2 to be postponed altogether. However, postponing the mechanism would undermine both climate progress and social cohesion. Instead of delaying action, policymakers should ensure that robust support frameworks are properly in place. As Europe moves closer to 2028, the window for delivering a socially just transition is rapidly closing.

Contacts: