Itaipu: Understand Adjustment designed by the government to avoid increased fare
The federal government is designing a solution to the impasse involving the Itaipu tariff, after the National Electric Energy Agency (Aneel) ended an end to the issue, at the risk of increasing the amount paid by consumers in the South , Southeast and Midwest by the power of the plant.
If the initiative does not prosper, the venture’s transfer rate may have a 6% increase on the Brazilian side, according to calculations of the regulatory agency, which would lead the Ministry of Mines and Energy (MME) to breach promise that Charge will be kept at $ 17.66 per kilowatt per month (kW.mês) even if the value of $ 19.28 kW.mês was agreed with Paraguay to remain in force by 2026.
The difference has been paid for a kind of cashback that provides for the reimbursement of the pending amount by discount on the investment made in Brazil by the plant. The problem is this amount will not be enough to cover the commercialization account deficit in 2024. The cost of assignment, which is the extra portion paid by Brazilians for the power of the plant that is not used by Paraguayans, will also need to be covered.
In this context, the government wants to avoid increasing the fare to face these costs using the “Itaipu bonus”, which occurs when the hydroelectric energy marketing account has a positive balance. Today, the rule requires the transfer of this bonus in the form of discount to residential and rural Brazilian consumers who had consumption of less than 350 kilowatts-hours (KWh). This was even the head of the January inflation.
According to Aneel’s director-general, Sandoval Feitosa, this strategy will be maintained and only part of the appeal that would become future discounts will be used to compensate for the missing amount in the transfer rate. According to him, the MME has already sent a decree authorizing the use of a portion of the total amount of the Bonus to validate the Civil House.
“This bonus is higher because it is having part of these resources that were deferred during the COVID account (loan paid in advance). So last year we had a $ 1.4 billion bonus, this year we have values of this order too, ”he told reporters.
At Broadcast Energia, Aneel clarified the R $ 1.5 billion considers a availability of resources that will take place over 2024 and is associated with the recomposition of loans made for distributors in the years 2021 and 2022, and do not include the R $ 1 , 3 billion, which have already been distributed in January.
Possible alternative
For the president of the Acende Brazil Institute, Claudio Sales, from the consumer’s point of visa, the measure is “neutral” since, if prospering, it will not change the amount paid in electricity bills. He ponders that if the government wanted to diminish the fare, it could do it by increasing the cashback that is being reducing the transfers to social and environmental works made with the plant budget, even though they have no direct connection with the hydroelectric dam.
He also points out that the Itaipu fare should have decreased by paying the financing for the construction of the plant, which occurred in 2023, which did not occur. The value used in these works is not administered, in the case of Brazil, “directly by the Brazilian government, without going through any of the checks and balances of public resources”, he reinforces.
For Angela Gomes, PSR’s technical director, the reduction of the discretionary expenses of the plant is, in fact, one of the options that could be considered and, from the point of view, would only depend on adjustments in the project’s budget. “It would just have to be reflected in the budget how much the Brazilian part has to make social and environmental investment and how much this cashback would be,” he says.
The expert also evaluates that Itaipu should continue to generate “just below average”, which may lead the same debate to occur next year, as the deficit is related to the generation of the plant in 2024.
Legal impasse
According to Aneel, the calculation of the bonus fare and the transfer rule is based on Law No. 10,438 of 2002, Decree No. 11,027 of 2022, in addition to tariff regulation procedures (PROPET).
Because it is provided by law, the first information about the decree for a distinct use of the bonus generated doubts as to the need to change the legislation.
Lawyer Laura Souza of Machado Meyer, however, states that the law only provides that “portion” of Itaipu’s outcome of energy will be intended for the bonus: “The law does not say that it is the whole result. And she says that it is by regulating the executive branch. ”
The jurist also points out that the detail is done by decree, so that a possible questioning as to the form “is not a thesis that should prosper in the judiciary.
(Collaborated Renan Monteiro)
