Following the ECJ ruling, Germany now needs to reform its TAC system. This is proving to be a politically sensitive task: the German states, who fund local passenger rail, fear that they will no longer be able to so if prices go up. Under the existing pricing system, charges for local passenger rail are tied to funds given to states for the local rail operations.

The transport ministry is aiming for a renewed system by 2027: “Our goal is and remains to present a new track access charge system by the timetable change in 2027”, minister Schnieder said earlier.

That timeline does not satisfy the rail freight sector. These companies are hoping for short-term clarity for their own financial planning. Without knowing what’s coming, such planning becomes guesswork. If they plan ahead with a price that’s too high, they could lose customers. If they calculate with a price that is too low, they might have to compensate for additional costs later, writes German publication DVZ.

Full-cost or marginal-cost?

Lastly, there is the question of the TAC model. Currently, Germany charges infrastructure usage fees on the basis of the full-cost principle. The rail freight industry has spoken out in favour of a marginal-cost pricing system, where companies pay only for the infrastructure costs added by an additional train and a possible efficiency markup. A study by INFRAS, commissioned by rail freight association Die Güterbahnen, has shown that this could reduce TACs by 54% for freight operations.

The marginal-cost system is the standard pricing model in Europe. However, the German transport minister has expressed concerns that its implementation in Germany would lead to a major financing shortage for the railways.

Die Güterbahnen claims otherwise: “Contrary to repeated claims by the Federal Ministry of Transport, such a switch would not create a funding gap, and therefore there would be no additional burden on the federal budget if three existing federal funding streams were consolidated simultaneously”, the association wrote.

Supposedly, the eight billion missing euros are already provided for indirectly. The German government provinces retroactive TAC subsidies, the local public transport funds and planned maintenance subsidies.

“Track charges based on marginal costs lead to more traffic and thus higher revenues. The current full-cost system, on the other hand, stifles traffic and makes the network operator sluggish. The figures show: The alleged funding gap is a political scare tactic – nothing more”, Die Güterbahnen’s Managing Director Peter Westenberger commented earlier.

The subsequently higher TACs for rail freight have been a major annoyance for the industry. Higher charges bring about higher costs. This hinders the competitiveness of rail freight companies. They already struggle to compete with the road sector.

“This ruling is the final nail in the coffin for the current German track access charge system”, commented Die Güterbahnen Managing Director Peter Westenberger.

Multi-million euro refunds

“Federal Transport Minister Schnieder must now prioritise presenting proposals for a fair, legally sound, reliable, and effective track access charge system that will boost transport volumes. We demand that the incorrect track access charge calculations for 2025 and 2026 be reversed as quickly as possible.”

The ruling is great news for TAC-paying rail freight companies operating in Germany. They can reclaim the overpaid charges. They expect the total figure to amount to a “three-figure million-euro sum”, between 100 million and 999 million euros.

For 2025, following the Covid-19 pandemic and the high inflation rates of recent years, freight operators were expecting to face a track charge increase of 21.25%, for an average amount of 1.746 euros per kilometre. Such a rise would damage rail competitiveness against road transport, which benefited from the end of toll charges on around 1000 kilometres of highways.

Portuguese freight train operators complained, and AMT intervened, analysing the track access structure and proposing initiatives to make rail transport (at least) as competitive as truck service. Minimum access package variations barely influence passenger companies, since their operators are under public service contracts (CP – Comboios de Portugal) or public-private partnerships (Fertagus). In this segment, the only exception is CP’s Alfa Pendular, run with Pendolino trains and considered a commercial service, without subsidies.

Lower increases

After the policy intervention, freight operators will face a track charge increase of 2.4% in 2025, the same inflation rate forecasted by the Government. On average, the freight access charge will rise from 1.44 to 1.47 euros. For the period 2026-2028, AMT recommended a Compound Annual Growth Rate of 12.33%, with average access charges of 1.66 euros, 1.86 euros and 2.09 euros in 2026, 2027 and 2028, respectively.

Lower increases are combined with a government subsidy of 9 million euros every year until 2028, under the green mobility package. Nevertheless, the smoother track access surge and the government subsidy are “lower than the amount paid by the operators to the infrastructure manager”, as AMT recognises in a recently published report. Without intervention, freight operators would face a track charge surge of 6.93% in 2026, 6.37% in 2027 and 5.49% in 2028. On average, that would cost 1.867 euros in 2026, 1.1986 in 2027 euros and 2.095 euros in 2028.

Compensation incoming

This governmental initiative will reduce IP’s revenues by around 5.1 million euros compared to the case base scenario. The state is required to compensate for this amount, which is fundamental to fund the conservation and maintenance of the Portuguese rail network. Access track charges represent the majority of IP’s own revenues for rail network management.

If there was no initiative, “there would be a risk of creating a negative incentive to reduce the maintenance requirement to lower costs for operators”, warns AMT. The better the rail track condition, the more willing operators are to use trains to carry goods, with positive impacts on IP’s budget. For this reason, AMT introduced an efficiency criterion to improve network investments in the proposal to update track charges.

Addendum and doubts

AMT recommendations were followed by IP, which published an addendum to the network statements between 2025 and 2027. TAC were the only change between the original and addendum versions. The AMT’s report is based on a moderated growth scenario for the freight market, following the “reopening of the Beira Alta line (North International Corridor) in 2025 and the beginning of the operations in the rail track between Évora and Caia (South International Corridor, probably in 2025 and certainly in 2026”.

However, the reality is different between the two links. In Beira Alta, freight operators excluded the possibility of riding 750-metre-long trains in this TEN-T corridor, fully reopened in September 2025, because route gradients were not intervened: this means that long freight trains would require two locomotives, eliminating the reduction of costs expected. Between Évora and Caia (next to the Spanish border), the new 90-kilometre rail track is not expected to open before the beginning of 2027, after the certification process.

The problems with both TEN-T corridors might compromise AMT’s plan. This question was raised by APEF, the association that represents Portuguese freight operators. The Mobility authority claims that “the billions of euros invested in the network modernisation will certainly have a positive and relevant impact on the system’s sustainability and competitiveness, particularly in the freight rail transport”.

The sense of lateness reflects the now-vanished Great British Railways Transition Team, which already involved Network Rail. The sense of premature engagement comes from the small print. Consultation in 2027 implies that GBR itself remains several years from becoming a legal reality. Freight operators must continue making investment decisions under today’s rules, while being told tomorrow’s framework is already taking shape.

Freight will pay – and perform

The Railways Bill, which will nationalise Britain’s rail network, entered Parliament on 5 November 2025 and has now received its second reading. When enacted, it will create Great British Railways as the single guiding mind for infrastructure and publicly funded passenger services. Despite last week’s livery launch, this remains unfinished legislation.

Once in force, GBR will set track access charges and performance schemes. These will not be limited to passenger operators. They will apply to open access services, devolved authorities, charter operators, and freight. For freight, this is the sharp end of reform: the price of access, the treatment of delay, and the balance between passenger priority and commercial flexibility.

Same settlement, new label

As part of the transition, the UK government’s Department for Transport has asked Network Rail to begin developing the “Great British Railways Charges and Performance Schemes for Funding Period 1 (2029–2034)”. The long horizon will not be lost on freight operators planning terminals, wagons and contracts that extend well beyond the current control period.

Observers have already noted the scale of change. The existing regime of rigid five-year cash settlements, known as Control Periods, is being replaced by rigid five-year cash settlements known as Funding Periods. A profound shift — subject, of course, to consultation.

Engagement before incorporation

The DfT directive also requires a review of the existing charging and performance frameworks to ensure they align with the new legislation and industry structure. Network Rail says reviews “of this scale take time”, drawing on its experience of previous nationalisation exercises — the last of which concluded in 1948, just 54 years before Network Rail itself was incorporated.

In 2026, Network Rail will run a programme of “Early Industry Engagement”, billed as open and collaborative. Freight operators are invited to help shape a system that does not yet exist, for an organisation that has not yet been created.

Workshops and waiting

A series of workshops will follow, allowing stakeholders to test ideas and share perspectives before formal GBR consultation in 2027. Freight companies may also discover what the new order of Funding Periods means for their access bills.

The stated aim is to ensure proposals are practical, transparent and proportionate. Stakeholders can look forward to a workshop near them in 2026 — or perhaps 2027. If GBR is still some way off, there is at least time to redesign the livery. Freight, meanwhile, waits — sceptical, premature, or both — and prepares to tick the appropriate box when consultation finally arrives.

Even though the legal changes were approved over a month ago, DB InfraGO tried to stop the new legal limitations to TAC increases. DB InfraGO attempted to push for higher price increases and even bypass parliament, according to rail freight association Die Güterbahnen. That did not succeed – TACs only grew by 6% on Sunday 14 December.

The new kilometre charge for a standard freight train will be 3.93 euros. That is by no means a financial improvement, especially considering that Germany cut the budget for TAC subsidies by 10 million euros for a total of 265 million euros. Companies will pay more and get less compensation for it.

Opportunities and risks in 2026

However, there is a chance that German rail freight can reach close to a net-zero change later in 2026. The law amendment in question stipulates that a subsidy review will take place in spring, which could lead to an increase in TAC subsidies. The increase would be financed through repayments from DB InfraGO to the government, because the infrastructure manager failed to properly implement a restructuring programme. If those repayments turn out high enough, it could offset the 6% TAC increase.

Uncertainty about the new charges lasted up until the last moment. Next year may be no different, with a new battle on TACs on the horizon. DB InfraGO wants them to grow to 5.40 euros per driven kilometre, an increase of almost 40%. Furthermore, Die Güterbahnen explains, a pending European Court of Justice decision on preferential TAC policy for local passenger rail may also change the context for 2027.

“Rail freight cannot rely on parliament standing up to DB InfraGO every year”, comments policy officer at Die Güterbahnen Oliver Smock. “The German track access charge system has spiraled out of control in recent years and would continue to lead to explosive increases. Long-term reliability and prices acceptable in the competitive transport sector can only be achieved with a genuine track access charge reform.”

Who voted in favour?

The mitigating measure was approved by the German transport committee, but not all political parties were in favour. The coalition parties CDU/CSU and SPD, as well as the Green Party voted to reduce DB InfraGO’s profit margin, while The Left Party and AfD voted against. The main decision that needs to be made is whether or not the German infrastructure manager is a public service company, and thus would not need to turn a profit.

The plan is the following: The German government wants to reduce infrastructure manager DB InfraGO’s maximum return on equity by three percentage points. Because of how the German TAC system works, that would limit how much profit DB InfraGO can legally make on their track access charge income.

Now, explains German private rail freight association Die Güterbahnen, DB InfraGO is entitled to a maximum profit margin of 5.2%. Reducing that by three points would lower that number to 2%, which would limit next year’s TAC costs for rail operators in Germany.

Still a 16% increase

“Limit” is the key word here. Such a step “is far from sufficient to stabilise track access charges”, explains Die Güterbahnen. “On the contrary – they would rise again by up to 16%, following the 16.2% increase last year.”

The rail freight association laments the ever-growing and unpredictable “rail toll”, whereas the road sector has remained stable and predictable for several years. “Imagine buying a car today – but not finding out what it actually costs until six months from now”, rail policy offer Oliver Smock said. “That’s exactly how the current track pricing system works – and it’s unsustainable for companies.”

Die Güterbahnen calls for DB InfraGO’s return on equity to be set at 0%, “thus completely foregoing any return on investment.” That would reduce the cost burden for rail freight by around a billion euros, according to the association.

Race against time

The hope is that the German parliament will succeed in revising and passing the law ahead of the timetable change on 14 December, so that rail freight can immediately benefit. “In the medium term, the federal government must initiate the fundamental reform of the track access pricing system announced in the coalition agreement – ​​with stable prices, genuine efficiency incentives, and a consistent focus on the common good.”

The plan follows an increase in track access charges (TAC) of 40% between 2024 and 2025, which the Swedish branch organisation for rail operators suspects is the underlying reason for the funding increase.

TACs are a major cost burden for rail freight companies, so any form of support is welcome. To illustrate, logistics company ScandFibre expects its TAC expenses to nearly double in two years time: from 44 million Swedish crowns (3,8 million euros) in 2024 to 80 million (7 million euros) by 2026.

Reverse modal shift

“Major customers have declared that substantially reduced track access charges or similar was necessary for them to not switch to other modes of transport”, explains Lina Lagerroth, senior policy officer at the branch organisation. Rail freight needs to be affordable to avoid a reverse modal shift to the road. Financial support could help in keeping rail competitive.

Yet, going into the future, a more sustainable solution would be to just reduce TACs altogether, rather than providing compensation. The rail operators’ organisation hopes to discuss TAC calculations with the Swedish Transport Administration.

It hopes to focus on wear and tear of infrastructure: “Calculation of wear and tear can be done in different ways. It is important that the model reflects the actual wear and tear, which the Swedish rail companies believe is not done using the Swedish Transport Administration’s calculation bases”, Lagerroth explains.

Paying for diversions

Besides, the cost paid by rail companies should also reflect the service delivered, argues Lagerroth: “The cost of a train path must reflect the level of infrastructure and the ability to operate the train according to the ordered train path. Costs that are additional to this should be borne by the Swedish Transport Administration. For example, today the train operator pays track charges for diversion and not the route they have been promised”, she concludes.

“Anyone who seriously wants to shift traffic from road to rail must fundamentally reform the track access charging system.” Germany’s TAC system is notoriously complex and favours local passenger rail over freight and long-distance passenger traffic. The last two bear a disproportionate amount of the costs.

“Until this reform is implemented, significantly higher track access subsidies would have been absolutely essential. Instead, the federal government is responsible for massive misguided incentives in the system.”

DB InfraGO wants higher TACs

To make matters worse for German rail freight, the country’s infrastructure manager DB InfraGO has applied for a 24% TAC increase in 2026. “For our members, it is now a matter of survival”, comments Wesseln. According to Die Güterbahnen, such an increase would be“not out of necessity”, but rather “to reap high profits from the rail network.”

“The industry’s last hope lies in the planned law to reduce [DB InfraGO’s] profit claims, which will be debated […] next Wednesday”, says Wesseln. “However, the ‘moderate’ reduction in returns provided for in the bill is not enough. Relief will only come when DB InfraGO is finally operated consistently in the public interest and without profit. Rail is a public good – and must no longer be allowed to degenerate into a profit machine that drives transport away from rail.”

Marginal costs model

The proposal brought forward by Die Güterbahnen “includes converting the system to marginal costs in line with the current recommendations of the EU Commission”. In the current landscape, rail operators bear all infrastructure costs. However, the association thinks that only the costs incurred for a train journey should be included in the TAC, and they should not be a source of profit for the infrastructure manager DB InfraGO.

Moreover, the proposal brought forward by Die Güterbahnen would block the possibility of increasing TAC several times a year. The association is pledging to block them for five years. Such a plan would ‘create’ a hole of one billion euros per year for DB InfraGO. However, the proposal includes a flow of maintenance subsidies from the government to the infrastructure manager that would cover said hole.

“The model no longer provides for profit for DB InfraGO”, Die Güterbahnen reiterated. The association is urging institutions to develop a new plan based on their proposal before the summer of 2026, so that it can take effect in 2027.