Holaluz is supplied with its: procedure to disqualify it filed

BarcelonaThe Spanish government has shelved the investigation it opened in mid-July against the Catalan company Holaluz, which could have led to the company being disqualified as an electricity marketer. "The company is sound," sources close to the matter told ARA.

The company led by Carlota Pi assures that it is "up to date with payments" and, finally, provides details on the reasons that led to the opening of the investigation. According to the same sources, there was a "discrepancy" regarding the "collectability" of invoices totaling 4.4 million euros, which has already been paid.

Holaluz had to demonstrate to the Ministry for Ecological Transition and the Demographic Challenge that these obligations – which it had incurred with three different suppliers – were "within its orderly and controlled treasury management system" and that they had a payment plan. The company, therefore, argued that the discrepancy was a "one-off situation" that "did not respond to either an intention not to pay or a financial situation that would prevent the company from regularly meeting its obligations".

In principle, the favorable closure of the investigation will be published this Saturday, August 29, in the Official State Gazette (BOE).

"David versus Goliath"

In an interview with the newspaper ARA just after presenting allegations in the disqualification procedure, Carlota Pi defended that Holaluz is "one thousand percent viable" and that it does not have "excessive debt, not at all".

She framed the ministry's file as a confrontation "between the old business model, which controls people through scarcity and expensive energy", and that of Holaluz. "It has nothing to do with the asset situation or the company", she defended.

Treasury cutbacks

Holaluz does acknowledge "treasury cutbacks" as a consequence of the Middle East war's impact on the energy market. The marketer was particularly disadvantaged by the VAT reduction on electricity bills, as it had to pay a rate of 21% to acquire energy but only charged 10% of what it supplied.

"The difference will be resolved in the coming months, when the Tax Administration makes the corresponding refund," the company trusts.