Search

I would like us to maintain this program at least until the end of this year. – I would like us to maintain this program at least until the end of this year. We all see that the situation in the Strait of Hormuz is still very tense, that oil prices, fuel prices on the markets are still very high – stated Minister Andrzej Domański on Thursday, who is on a visit to the USA. (translated)

The Tusk law introducing a new tax has been signed. Tusk has no alibi anymore, he cannot shift the responsibility onto anyone else. We have record prices at the stations, although the oil prices are not record-high at all, and the zloty has a higher value against the dollar than it did years ago... The government has all the tools to reduce prices even starting tomorrow. Will we see 5.19 zł/l of fuel on the pylons in the morning? We know how much Tusk's stories are worth. (translated)

The government of ANO, SPD, and Motorists is reaching for two things that I consider fundamental: property rights and energy security. I do not want a state that tells people to whom they should preferentially sell their property. And I definitely do not want to live in a country that, after the experience with Russia, wants to take away gas and oil. (translated)

Summary of information from around the world 🌍. Thursday - 🇯🇵 Tokyo. 34 days of rain in a row. Record - ⚒️JSW: employment will drop by 4248 people in 2026 - 🚗CEO Ford: "Too late. Europe will lose the auto sector" - 🧑‍🍳 40% of Poles buy too much food. They throw it away - 🇵🇱 increase of the tax threshold from 120 to 130 thousand PLN - ⚽️Ronaldo is leaving the Portugal national team - USA expelled the Iranian delegation "abused hospitality" - 🇵🇱 NBP: Poland's foreign debt is 2.2 trillion PLN - 🐞Biedronka unions: +1000 PLN. 30% more people - 🇫🇷 France. Public debt is the highest since 1946 - 🇵🇰 Pakistan: we will defend Saudis 🇸🇦 against Houthis - 🇲🇳 Mongolia has fuel for 11 days. The whole country will stop. - 🛖mortgage in the USA is already 7.6% interest - 🇸🇦 more oil facilities are burning in Saudi Arabia - 🇸🇾 Explosion of a gas pipeline to Tishreen near Damascus - 🗣️Polish ElevenLabs worth 22 billion $. Voice AI - 🪖Rutte: "Putin knows he will never win against NATO" - 🇬🇧 UK government is considering returning to 🇪🇺 - 🇺🇸 Google releases Gemini 4 Argon - 🇱🇹Lithuania wants to cover the costs of US soldiers in its territory - 🇩🇪 Volkswagen: union members want a 5% raise - 🇮🇳 India: explosion at the largest oil refinery - 🇺🇸 8 nuclear power plants ☢️ in the USA will be built by Koreans -🌱Vegetarianism Day (How does a vegetarian call her husband for a meal? Dinner withers 🙃) (translated)

As a result of the transfer of part of the Russian cargo transport from the Black Sea to the Baltic after Ukrainian counterattacks, about 150 Russian ships, including 65 tankers and 85 freighters, are stuck in line to enter ports in the Leningrad region, which increases the risk of collisions and oil spills in the Gulf of Finland. (translated)

The drug trafficker Gustavo Petro had the paramilitary Juan Guillermo Monsalve well-dressed in designer clothes and well-groomed with a styled beard. But with Abelardo, the luxuries came to an end. Now he will go to a regular prison. Whether he lives or not will only depend on himself. (translated)

Mr. Czarnek, since we are already making this a bill for the government's policy, let's check the entire bill, not just the politically convenient items. Is inflation rising? Yes, but from the fact that fuel prices drive up CPI, it does not automatically follow that the increase in fuel prices is a result of the Polish government's decisions. 🤦‍♂️ That is simply a mistake in your reasoning or a deliberate manipulation of public opinion, because the effect of fuel prices on inflation does not determine the cause of fuel prices themselves. 🤷‍♂️ The Central Statistical Office indeed indicated transport, especially fuel, as a significant factor in price growth. I read that too, but it did not state anywhere: that is Donald Tusk's responsibility. You keep reminding us of Mr. Tusk's words, that he promised 5.19 zł. Yes. In June 2022. However, if statements from several years ago are to be an indefinite guarantee of fuel prices regardless of oil prices, war, sanctions, the dollar exchange rate, and the situation on the world market, then I propose to apply this method consistently. 🤷‍♂️ In 2011, Jarosław Kaczyński said: "The excise tax can simply be lowered. If it is lowered, the price of gasoline will also fall." At that time, the price of Pb95 was around 5.14 zł. Ten years later, already under the PiS government, the same Jarosław Kaczyński explained that the excise tax should not be lowered because it limits the state's revenue. 🤦‍♂️ So I understand that old declarations are valid forever, but only for politicians from the opposing camp? 🙂 Later you again claim that high fuel prices are the government's policy. No, Mr. Czarnek. The government influences taxes, some regulations, and support instruments - and that's all. However, it does not determine the world price of oil, does not control the supply of fuel, the dollar exchange rate, or the geopolitical situation. 🤷‍♂️ And since we are so eager to find politicians responsible for the current tensions in the energy market, it might be worth taking a look at Donald ... but Trump, your idol, and his policy towards Iran. Only then does your narrative become a bit less convenient. You claim that more expensive fuel means more expensive transport, production, and pressure on prices. Yes. That is actually true. But again - describing the effects of expensive fuel does not prove that the cause of expensive fuel is Tusk. Professor, you can really criticize the government; there are plenty of such issues or decisions. But maybe without equating: fuel is getting more expensive -> inflation is rising -> therefore Tusk is to blame. 🤦‍♂️ It is really becoming very irritating. (translated)

I'm already a bit tired of this war Nawrocki–Tusk over who wants to lower fuel prices more and who will hit their opponent harder. On a daily basis, I deal with law and legislation, so instead of another press conference, I prefer to try to do something more useful. Let's think about whether it is possible to create a mechanism that works independently of who is currently in power and who lives in the Presidential Palace. Let's tentatively call it the Fuel Price Stabilization Mechanism - nothing more spectacular comes to mind. I’m not talking about flashy slogans like administrative price setting or the prime minister should lower it, or the president presented a bill, so the problem is solved. I’m talking about an automatic system established in law. I imagined it so that if for a certain period, the reference price of oil or wholesale fuel exceeds a set threshold, a temporary reduction in excise tax is automatically triggered. Without a political decision being made anew each time, because that leads to endless arguments at the expense of citizens. The law specifies in advance: - when the mechanism is triggered, - by how much the burden is reduced, - how long it operates, - when it automatically expires. Of course, within the limits of EU law. Because it is worth reminding a rather prosaic fact - a member state cannot arbitrarily eliminate fuel taxation. Here the 2003/96/EC directive comes in, determining minimum levels of taxation for gasoline and diesel. So just as it should be done - first the law and only then the slogans - I’m directing this to my favorite camp, the surroundings of the office. Now there remains a more important problem. If we lower the excise tax, the budget receives less money. This cost does not disappear, it does not magically evaporate. You can't just move it to the "someone may pay later" column. That’s why the mechanism should have a second arm - a temporary levy on the truly extraordinary portion of profits in the fuel sector. But not on the entire profit and definitely not on the normal operation of the enterprise. Not because the company dared to make a profit but solely from that portion that exceeds the previously defined reference level. The current government project wants to use a similar construct - the reference point is margins from 2025 increased by 20%, and only the excess is taxed. The tax rate in the project is 60%, and the projected revenues are about 4 billion PLN. The government indicates that the funds are meant to compensate for the loss of VAT and excise tax revenue resulting from protective actions. However, I would change one fundamental thing. Only PROSPECTIVELY. First, we establish the rule, then we apply it. Not the other way around. This significantly reduces the dispute over retroactivity and legal safety - the reason for Mr. Nawrocki's veto. Revenues from such a levy should be additionally separated and accounted for solely for the purposes of the stabilization mechanism. Then we can show the citizen a simple calculation: - the budget lost X from the temporary excise tax reduction, - the extraordinary levy brought Y, - and the difference is Z. No miracles or political alchemy - simplicity in full scope. But there is still one problem. If the state reduces the burden by 20 groszy per liter, it doesn’t automatically mean that the driver will see 20 groszy less on the sign. Part of the relief may be taken by the margin because who doesn’t want to make a profit... That’s why there should be parallel, public monitoring: - raw material price, - wholesale price, - taxes, - average margin, - retail price. If there is an anomaly, we have UOKiK and competition law instruments. There’s no need to immediately create a state office to set the price of diesel at 7:43 in the morning. And a final safeguard. The price returns below the statutory threshold for a certain period? The reduction expires, the levy expires. The system returns to normal mode. (translated)

Blocking government laws by Karol Nawrocki is pure madness when you calmly look at specific laws. In most cases, the same pattern occurs—ordinary people lose out while large corporations or the old system gain. Below are examples: 1. Tax Code Gained: the tax authorities, penalties for formal violations become harsher. Lost: taxpayers and companies that were supposed to receive lower penalties for formal shortcomings. 2. Oil, fuel, and gas reserves Gained: no one Lost: Poles, new rules were supposed to apply during the crisis 3. Mandatory insurance Gained: Insurance companies Lost: drivers and the market, if the amendment really simplified the OC; this was not checked before coming into effect. 4. Water supply and sewage Gained: the current tariff and municipal company system. Lost: municipalities and consumers, the law was supposed to regulate tariffs in their favor. 5. Road Traffic Law Gained: the old system Lost: carriers counting on EU e-permits that were to be implemented immediately. 6. Electoral Code Gained: the current, narrower voting model. Lost: voters who were supposed to receive a more widespread postal vote. 7. CIT and family foundations Gained: family foundations and individuals using them for optimization. Lost: the budget, i.e. Poles 8. Crypto-assets market Gained: crypto companies Lost: clients and supervision 9. Education Law Gained: schools and teachers sticking to the old calendar. Lost: the government's schedule for the new basis and the postponement of the eighth-grade exam. 10. Sugar tax and PIT on winnings Gained: beverage producers, stores, casino players; Lost: Poles, NFZ, and the budget 11. Alcohol excise tax Gained: breweries, distilleries, trade, alcohol buyers Lost: Poles, the budget 12. NCBR Gained: the current setup in the agency. Lost: greater oversight over NCBR 13. Active farmer Gained: individuals benefiting from agriculture without real farming Lost: farmers actively working, whom the law was supposed to strengthen. 14. SAFE Gained: Russia, USA Lost: Poland 15. Family Code Gained: no one Lost: childless couples who could part without court. 16. Shaping the agricultural system Gained: current land turnover restrictions. Lost: land buyers and companies wanting cheaper, simpler transactions. 17. SENT Gained: companies trading concrete and transport outside the broader SENT. Lost: Poles (1.2 billion) to the budget from tightening 19. Health care benefits Gained: the current NFZ benefits system. Lost: patients and facilities 20. Status of a close person Gained: no one Lost: couples, including same-sex ones, without a cohabitation agreement and the rights that come with it. 21. Public transport Gained: carriers with longer, 10-year contracts. Lost: eventually, passengers 22. Energy law Gained: the old system Lost: ultimately Poles 23. tax on extraordinary profits of fuel companies. Gained: big oil corporations, Lost: the budget. (translated)

Merz: Russia is not interested in peace talks, but it will not win the war. “Russia will not win this war, and Russia itself will suffer enormous losses, including losses to its economy. We are already seeing how unstable the economic situation in Russia is. If Russia continues this war, it will pay a high price,” warned the German Chancellor. Friedrich Merz stated that Berlin will continue to support Kyiv militarily, politically, financially, and economically for as long as necessary. Germany will help Ukraine survive the upcoming winter, which could be very difficult. Berlin is also looking for alternative sources of oil. Merz identified Kazakhstan as an important option to replace Russian supplies. (translated)