Brussels declares Lithuania's LNG terminal aid unlawful but compatible with internal market

The European Commission has declared that Lithuania unlawfully implemented State aid for the LNG Terminal supplier Litgas between 2016 and 2018, because the measure entered into force before it was notified, while at the same time authorising it as compatible with the internal market. The ruling is Commission Decision (EU) 2026/2114 of 7 April 2026, signed by Executive Vice-President Teresa Ribera, and was published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 24 September 2026. The case is registered as SA.44678 (2022/C) (ex 2018/N) — modification of aid for the LNG Terminal in Lithuania.

The file dates back to Decision C(2013) 7884 final of 20 November 2013, which declared compatible the aid for the construction and operation of a floating liquefied natural gas terminal in the Klaipėda Seaport. Lithuania amended those measures on 1 January 2016 (the 2016 Amendments) but pre-notified them only on 26 February 2016, after their entry into force. On 7 July 2016, Achema and Achemos Grupė lodged a complaint alleging unlawful and incompatible aid; Lithuania formally notified the 2016 and 2019 Amendments on 9 July 2018, and the Commission approved them on 31 October 2018 in Decision C(2018) 7141 final.

That approval did not survive judicial review. On 8 September 2021, the General Court partially annulled the 2018 Decision in so far as it concerned the 2016 Amendments (Case T-193/19, ECLI:EU:T:2021:558), and on 1 December 2022 the Commission opened the formal investigation procedure, published in the Official Journal (OJ C 52, 10.2.2023, p. 27).

What the Commission decided

The conclusion is twofold. The Commission finds that Lithuania “unlawfully implemented the aid in question in breach of Article 108(3)” of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, yet holds that the measure is compatible with the internal market on the basis of Article 106 TFEU, in light of the 2012 SGEI Framework. Article 1 of the decision declares the aid to maintain the LNG Terminal operational, implemented for Litgas during 2016-2018, compatible with the internal market; Article 2 addresses the decision to the Republic of Lithuania. No recovery of the aid is ordered.

The money and the volumes

• Estimated total budget for the measure over 2016-2024: EUR 276 703 731; actual spending was lower, at EUR 217 684 793.
• Estimated budget for 2016-2018: EUR 78 631 120; actual budget EUR 71 846 326, split into EUR 30 258 089 (2016), EUR 19 066 043 (2017) and EUR 22 522 194 (2018).
• The mandatory LNG quantity was cut from 0,54 bcm per year to 0,37 bcm per year, against a total terminal capacity of 3,75 bcm.
• Litgas received a fixed profit margin of 0,24 EUR/MWh on sales to the Obligated Purchasers; its margin ranged from 1,1 % to 1,5 % in 2016-2018, against a market average of 3,2 %.
• The beneficiary, Litgas, was founded in December 2012 by KN; in October 2016 the State-owned Lietuvos Energija became its sole shareholder, and on 1 January 2019 it was merged into LDT, now operating as Ignitis.

Security of supply and the rejected complaints

The Commission treats the task of keeping the terminal operational as essential for Lithuania’s security of gas supply: before the terminal existed, the country’s only supply route was pipeline gas from Russia, with Gazprom as sole supplier. It therefore accepted that the service of general economic interest could not be entrusted through an ordinary public procurement procedure.

The complainants’ arguments were rejected. The Commission found unfounded the claims that Litgas bought excessive volumes at an excessive price under its contract with Statoil — signed on 21 August 2014 for five years at 0,54 bcm per year and renegotiated on 18 February 2016 to 0,37 bcm per year and extended to 2024 — and concluded that the compensation contained no overcompensation and included efficiency incentives.

The decision closes a decade-long dispute over who pays for keeping the Baltic state’s only alternative gas gateway open. It confirms that Lithuania broke the notification duty, but leaves the aid standing and the terminal’s funding model intact, while rejecting the challenge brought by Achema, one of the largest gas consumers in the country.

Source: Official Journal of the European Union, L series, 24.9.2026, 2026/2114 (official reference: CELEX:L_20262114).