European Commission sets 2028 deadline to ban all Russian gas imports

The European Commission has laid out a legally binding timeline to end all Russian gas imports by 1 January 2028, declaring that the phase-out will proceed even if a peace agreement is reached in Ukraine. The proposal, presented by Energy Commissioner Dan Jørgensen, frames the ban as a structural response to Moscow's repeated use of energy as a political weapon rather than a reaction to the full-scale invasion alone.

A decade of supply cuts and price shocks

EU officials pointed to a pattern stretching back to 2006, when Russia first cut gas flows to Europe via Ukraine, followed by further disruptions in 2009 and 2014. In 2021, months before the invasion, Gazprom deliberately reduced deliveries into European storage, contributing to a spike in wholesale prices that fed into the highest inflation rates the euro area had seen in a generation. That history, the Commission argues, makes any return to Russian supply a strategic liability.

The numbers illustrate how far the bloc has already moved. Russian pipeline gas, which once met roughly 45% of EU import demand, is expected to account for only 13% in 2025, according to Eurostat data. Yet the picture is not straightforward: in 2024 the EU purchased record volumes of Russian liquefied natural gas, raising questions among member states and MEPs about the coherence of the bloc's energy and foreign policy.

How the ban would work in practice

Under the legislative proposal, European companies would be prohibited from importing Russian gas or providing regasification services at EU LNG terminals to Russian counterparties. Contracts signed after the regulation enters into force must be terminated by 1 January 2026. Pre-existing long-term agreements, many of which run into the 2030s, receive a final deadline of 1 January 2028. To prevent re-flagging, importers will have to submit detailed certificates of origin to customs authorities for every cargo.

The Commission insists that companies forced to break long-term contracts will not face liability for damages. Jørgensen characterised the ban as force majeure, an external event beyond any party's control, shifting the legal risk from private firms to the sovereign decision of the Union. Legal scholars note that this interpretation will almost certainly be tested in arbitration courts, where Gazprom and its European counterparts have litigated for years.

The holdouts: Hungary, Slovakia and Austria

Opposition has coalesced around three central European capitals. Hungary's foreign minister, Péter Szíjjártó, released a video on social media warning that household utility bills could quadruple, a claim the Commission dismisses as unsupported by market modelling. Slovakia's government has echoed the price argument, while Austria's energy ministry told the Financial Times that the EU should keep the option of resuming Russian gas flows open if a peace deal materialises.

That Austrian position drew a sharp rebuttal from Lena Schilling, a Green MEP and former Fridays for Future activist. "Have we learned nothing from bombed hospitals, abducted children and a war of aggression in the heart of Europe?" she asked, calling the ministry's stance shortsighted and morally irresponsible. The divide reflects a deeper fault line between governments that remain physically dependent on Russian infrastructure and those that have diversified.

The Druzhba carve-out survives

The gas proposal does not touch a parallel exemption in the EU's oil sanctions regime. When the bloc agreed an embargo on Russian crude in March 2023, Hungary and Slovakia secured a permanent opt-out for supplies delivered via the Soviet-era Druzhba pipeline. That carve-out rests on a different legal basis, the sanctions framework rather than energy legislation, and cannot be amended by the current proposal. The Commission has also set a 2028 target for ending Russian oil imports, which have already fallen from 27% of the total in 2021 to 3% today.

Price forecasts and political arithmetic

The Commission's impact assessment projects limited price effects, arguing that global LNG capacity coming online in Qatar and the United States between 2026 and 2028 will more than replace remaining Russian volumes. Critics in Budapest and Bratislava counter that central Europe lacks the regasification and pipeline interconnectors to access that supply cheaply. The debate mirrors the 2022 dispute over the oil embargo, when similar warnings of economic collapse proved exaggerated but not entirely baseless.

Diplomats in Brussels expect the regulation to pass under a qualified majority vote. Hungary and Slovakia together lack the population weight to form a blocking minority, and Austria has not signalled a willingness to veto. The European Parliament, where Greens and liberals hold sway on energy files, is likely to push for an earlier deadline rather than a softer one.

What happens next

The proposal now moves to the Council and Parliament for negotiation under the ordinary legislative procedure. A first reading in the Council's energy working party is scheduled for July, with trilogue talks possible before the end of the year. The key dates to watch are the contract wind-down deadlines, 1 January 2026 for new deals, 1 January 2028 for legacy contracts, which will force companies to make commercial decisions well before the law is finalised.