Fit for 55 package: Energy performance of buildings (recast)

After two negative opinions from the Commission's Regulatory Scrutiny Board and without making adaptations in the IA itself after the second negative opinion, the Commission adjusted its legislative proposal: the legislative framework for new buildings would conform largely to the preferred PO3 ('High ambition I'), while changes for existing buildings would conform broadly to PO2 ('Medium ambition'). The IA analyses the problem, the problem drivers and the likely impacts of the proposed policy options, based on sound research and reliable data. However, although interlinkages with other legislative proposals of the 'fit for 55' legislative package are described, the size of the problem is not fully clear and could have been better explained. The IA draws a clear logic between the problems, the problem drivers and the specific objectives. It provides realistic alternative options. However, the multitude of measures, with varying levels of policy intensity for each of the options, lacks clarity and therefore weakens the IA's ability to inform decision-making effectively. The presentation of the options and the description of the baseline as the 'starting point' for comparison of options is at times unclear, which makes it difficult to follow the reasoning as to why PO3 ('High ambition I') was chosen as the preferred option. Finally, the IA provides a detailed description of the stakeholder consultations. However, the IA presents the views of stakeholder groups (including SMEs) in relation to specific measures rather than to the proposed policy options. It is therefore unclear what support the preferred option of the IA enjoys among stakeholders, in particular SMEs.