The Experts Club think tank has analyzed European countries’ responses to the fuel crisis. European countries’ responses to the 2026 fuel crisis have so far been mixed. Some governments are directly intervening in the fuel market by restricting exports, introducing price caps, and releasing reserves. Others are limiting themselves to price monitoring and coordination at the EU and G7 levels, trying not to provoke a shortage with even tougher measures.
Serbia has chosen the most aggressive form of intervention. The authorities have temporarily suspended exports of oil, gasoline, and diesel until March 19, explaining that this is to protect the domestic market from shortages and price spikes. Reuters notes that Serbia had already been controlling fuel prices since February 2022, meaning that the current decision is a continuation of a more interventionist regulatory model.
Hungary has opted for a mixed scenario. On the one hand, Budapest has introduced a price cap on gasoline and diesel for cars registered in Hungary. On the other hand, the government decided to use state reserves, and the Minister of Economy, according to Hungarian media reports, also announced a reduction in excise duties and a ban on the export of some petroleum products. This is a typical example of a combined anti-crisis scheme, where the authorities simultaneously try to keep retail prices down and maintain the physical availability of fuel on the market.
Croatia has chosen a softer approach—limiting maximum retail prices for a two-week period. The government has set a maximum price of EUR1.50 per liter for Eurosuper, EUR1.55 for diesel, and EUR0.89 for “blue diesel,” and has also limited prices for liquefied gas. Zagreb has stated outright that without this measure, diesel would cost EUR 1.72 per liter and gasoline EUR 1.55. This means that Croatia is trying not to isolate the market, but to soften the final effect on households and businesses.
Slovakia and, to some extent, the Czech Republic have focused not on retail regulation but on supporting physical supplies. After the failure of supplies via Druzhba, Slovakia approved the use of 250,000 tons of oil from strategic reserves for refining, while Hungary and Slovakia began negotiations on the use of reserves back in February. The Czech Republic, in turn, announced its readiness to send small volumes of oil to Slovakia via the eastern Druzhba pipeline.
The UK has not yet introduced price caps or export bans. Treasury Secretary Rachel Reeves said the government was monitoring the situation closely and warned retailers that it would not allow “excessive profits” amid the oil shock. This approach is closer to a supervisory model: the authorities are signaling to the market that they are ready to tighten control over the behavior of sellers, but are not moving to direct price administration.
At the pan-European level, caution prevails for now. The G7 and the EU are discussing possible measures, including the use of strategic reserves, tax changes, and carbon price adjustments, but no decision on coordinated release of reserves has been made yet. France, as chair of the G7, says that “all options are on the table,” but acknowledges that there is no immediate shortage in Europe.
The European Commission, for its part, points to the structural vulnerability of Europe, which imports more than 90% of its oil and about 80% of its gas.
The main conclusion for Europe now is that countries are responding differently depending on their own vulnerability. Balkan and Central European countries, which are dependent on imports and specific supply routes, tend to act faster and more aggressively — through bans, price caps, and reserves. The large economies of Western Europe are still favoring coordination, market pressure, and preparing tools in case the situation worsens. But if the oil shock drags on, the current targeted measures could turn into a broader wave of European intervention in the fuel market.
