Renewable Energy Communities (CER) and the impact of cuts to 2026 funds

The beginning of 2026 brought with it a climate of uncertainty for one of the pillars of the Italian ecological transition: the Renewable Energy Communities (CERs). What was supposed to be the year of the definitive consecration for widespread self-consumption opened with an unexpected challenge. A significant revision of the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (PNRR) has in fact led to a drastic cut in the funds originally intended to support the birth and development of these realities.

Le CER represent one of the most interesting innovations in the national energy scene, promising to transform passive consumers into active protagonists of electricity production. However, the reduction in financial resources decided at ministerial level risks curbing the enthusiasm of thousands of citizens, businesses and local governments abruptly. In this scenario, understanding regulatory developments and evaluating the available alternatives becomes essential for anyone who wishes to continue to invest in photovoltaic and green energy in an effective and safe way.

What are CERs and how does the collective self-consumption model work

To fully assess the scope of recent funding developments, it is essential to define precisely what Renewable Energy Communities are. A CER is an autonomous legal entity, based on the open and voluntary participation of shareholders or members. These can be individuals, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), local authorities or territorial authorities, located in the vicinity of production facilities.

The technical mechanism and geographical proximity

The operation of CERs is based on the concept of 'widespread self-consumption'. Energy is produced by one or more plants powered by renewable sources (in most cases photovoltaic) and is virtually shared between members of the community. A fundamental technical aspect is the geographical location: producers and consumers must be connected to the same primary electric cabin.

The sharing does not take place through dedicated physical cables, but by exploiting the existing national distribution network. Through a monitoring system managed by the GSE (Energy Services Manager), the energy produced and instantly consumed by CER members is counted for the provision of specific incentives.

Social, economic and environmental objectives

Unlike a purely commercial investment, the primary purpose of a CER is not financial profit, but to provide environmental, economic, or social benefits at the community level.

• Environment: reduction of CO2 emissions thanks to the local production of clean energy.
• Social: combating energy poverty, allowing families in difficulty to access energy at reduced costs.
• Economical: reduction of bill costs for members thanks to the premiums provided on shared energy.

The state of funding in 2025 and the abrupt change of course in 2026

2025 was the year of expansion, backed by an impressive financial envelope. The incentive framework consisted of two parallel tracks: a premium rate on shared energy for the entire national territory and a non-repayable contribution aimed specifically at small municipalities.

The 40% contribution and municipalities under 5,000 inhabitants

The lost fund, financed by the PNRR, covered up to 40% of the costs of building photovoltaic plants for CERs located in municipalities with less than 5,000 inhabitants. This measure had the objective of combating the depopulation of inland areas and encouraging sustainability in small villages. The initial budget had been set at 2.2 billion euros, a figure that had generated enormous expectations across the country.

The incentive rate and the role of the GSE

In addition to the capital contribution, the system provides an incentive rate provided by the GSE for a period of 20 years on energy produced and shared. This incentive remains a backbone of the system, but alone it is not always sufficient to cover the high initial investment required for the construction of the plants, making the non-repayable contribution a decisive element for the economic viability of many projects.

The funding cut: numbers and official justification

Despite the premises, at the dawn of 2026, the Ministry of Environment and Energy Security formalized a drastic downsizing. The original 2.2 billion has been reduced to about 795 million euros. The official justification lies in the failure to reach the expected number of applications and in a relocation of resources to other measures considered more urgent within the framework of the RepowerEU plan.

The technical and bureaucratic reasons behind the CER slowdown

Why has such an advantageous model seen a lower participation than ministerial expectations, then leading to a cut in funds? The answer should not be sought in the lack of interest of citizens, but in the systemic barriers that have characterized the last two years.

Bureaucratic and regulatory complexity

Creating a CER is not an immediate process. It requires the establishment of a legal entity, the agreement between numerous different subjects and the overcoming of complex administrative procedures. Many potential promoters have been faced with interpretative uncertainties of the implementing decrees and with response times from the bodies in charge that have discouraged smaller initiatives.

Achieving the M2C2 'milestone'

Another determining factor was the early achievement of the so-called European 'milestone'. The government had the objective of installing at least 1,730 MW of power through CERs. Since this numerical goal was brought closer or reached thanks to large projects already in the pipeline, the Ministry considered that it could “divert” the remaining funds to other sectors, considering the PNRR objective formally fulfilled. However, this approach ignores the myriad of small local projects that have been left out.

The consequences for those who have started projects or want to invest

The impact of the cuts affects different types of subjects, creating a situation of uncertainty that risks paralyzing the sector throughout 2026.

Projects already submitted and under evaluation

Thousands of applications are currently 'frozen' at the GSE. With the reduction of the budget, there is a real risk that many projects, although technically valid, will not find financial coverage. This puts in serious difficulty local governments and SMEs that had already committed resources to design and that now find themselves without the certainty of the 40% contribution.

New applicants: the stop to applications?

For those who intended to apply during 2026, the road is uphill. The reduction in funds means that the rankings will be much more selective and competitive. Many experts suggest that, without the non-repayable contribution, the payback time for a CER is significantly extended, making the project less attractive to individuals and forcing communities to seek traditional bank financing, which is often difficult for non-profit entities such as CERs to obtain.

Uncertainty for small municipalities

Small municipalities, which were supposed to be the main beneficiaries of the measure, are the most affected. Often without specialized technical personnel to manage such complex procedures quickly, they now see themselves taking away the main resource that would have allowed them to become self-sufficient from an energy point of view.

Beyond CERs: the new frontiers of shared photovoltaic investment

Faced with such an unstable regulatory and financial framework for Energy Communities, individuals and businesses are starting to look towards investment models that are more agile, transparent and less tied to local bureaucracy. Photovoltaic remains the best choice for savings and sustainability, but 'how' you invest is changing radically.

Why shared solar parks exceed the limits of CERs

I shared solar parks represent the logical evolution for those who want the benefits of the sun without the obstacles of CERs. While an Energy Community is bound by the geographical proximity to the primary cabin and by the need to manage a collective entity, the model of shared parks is digital, scalable and immediate.

In a shared solar farm, it is not necessary to wait for the establishment of an association or the resolution of a municipality. The investor buys a share of an industrial plant already operational or under construction, located in areas with maximum solar yield. This guarantees a certain economic return and professional management of the components, eliminating any bureaucratic or technical concern for the end user.

GridShare's proposal for a democratic transition

In this context of cuts and uncertainties, GridShare stands as a solid and innovative alternative. Instead of depending on PNRR funds or the delays of CERs, citizens and businesses can rely on shared solar parks created by experts in the field.

Here's why this solution is gaining ground in 2026:

• Absence of geographical constraints: You can participate in the production of clean energy wherever you are, regardless of your primary cabin or the area in which you live.
• Guaranteed tax deductions: Investing in innovative companies such as GridShare often allows access to tax benefits (IRES/IRPEF deductions) linked to investments in innovative startups, independent of PNRR calls.
• Simplicity and transparency: Through a digital platform, you can monitor your production share and receive the proceeds deriving from the sale of energy, which will directly offset the costs of your bills.

While Renewable Energy Communities are painstakingly looking for a new path after the cuts of 2026, the model of shared solar parks offers an immediate response to those who do not want to give up their contribution to the planet. Participating in a shared project means bypassing bureaucracy and government cuts, securing a place at the forefront of the energy transition with a safe, profitable and truly sustainable investment.