Cost-efficiency - Lithuania

Download Report

PRB monitoring

  • The en route 2025 actual unit cost of Lithuania was 53.21€2022, -4.2% lower than the determined unit cost (55.57€2022). Lithuania does not have a terminal charging zone.

  • The en route 2025 actual service units (0.50M) were +3.1% higher than the determined service units (0.48M).

  • The en route 2025 actual total costs were -0.3M€2022 (-1.3%) lower than determined. This is mainly due to lower other operating costs (-0.3M€2022, or -7.6%) and cost of capital (-0.3M€2022, or -14.0%) for Oro Navigacija, partially compensated by unplanned exceptional items (+0.5M€2022). The NSA explained that the decrease in other operating costs is attributable among others to lower utilities, office-maintenance and consultancy costs, while for cost of capital, it is due to a lower return on equity. The unplanned exceptional items reflect the one-off adjustment related to the ATCO’s early-retirement scheme.

  • Oro Navigacija costs of investments were 4.1M€2022 in 2025, -11.5% less than determined (4.7M€2022). According to the NSA, this reduction was mainly due delays in smaller investments, caused by longer procurement procedures, unsuccessful tenders due to a lack of bids, and technical or supplier-related issues.

  • The en route actual unit cost incurred by users in 2025 was 59.22€ (-2.1% below the 2025 DUC). The difference between the AUCU and the DUC is mainly driven by new and existing investments in cost exempt from cost sharing.

  • The en route regulatory result for Oro Navigacija amounted to +2.6M€, or 10.1% of the 2025 revenue. This may indicate that the airspace users are charged for costs which have not materialised in 2025.

En route charging zone

Unit cost (KPI#1)

Actual and determined data
Total costs - nominal (M€) 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
Determined costs 29.1 29.6 30.1 31.4 31.6
Actual costs 29.0 NA NA NA NA
Difference costs -0.1 NA NA NA NA
Inflation assumptions 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
Determined inflation rate 2.3% 2.4% 2.4% 2.4% 2.4%
Determined inflation index* 112.1 114.8 117.6 120.4 123.3
Actual inflation rate 3.4% NA NA NA NA
Actual inflation index* 113.4 NA NA NA NA
Difference inflation index (p.p.) +1.3 NA NA NA NA
*100 = 2022

AUC vs. DUC

In 2025, the en route AUC was -4.2% (or -2.36 €2022) lower than the planned DUC. This results from the combination of higher than planned TSUs (+3.1%) and lower than planned en route costs in real terms (-1.3%, or -0.3 M€2022).

En route service units

The difference between actual and planned TSUs (+3.1%) falls outside the ±2% dead-band but does not exceed the ±10% threshold foreseen in the traffic risk sharing mechanism. The resulting gain of additional en route revenues is therefore shared between the ANSP and the airspace users (see the main ANSP regulatory result).

En route costs by entity

Actual real en route costs are -1.3% (-0.3 M€2022) lower than planned. This is the result of lower costs for the main ANSP, Oro Navigacija (-0.9%, or -0.2 M€2022), the MET service provider (-6.3%, or -0.07 M€2022), the other ANSP (LGS, -12.8%, or -0.05 M€2022) and the NSA/EUROCONTROL (-1.0%, or -0.02 M€2022).

En route costs for the main ANSP (Oro Navigacija) at charging zone level

The slightly lower than planned en route costs in real terms for Oro Navigacija in 2025 (-0.9%, or -0.2 M€2022) are mainly due to higher than planned actual inflation index (+1.3 p.p), since, in nominal terms, the costs were slightly above plan (+0.3%). Based on the additional information to the en route reporting tables, this results from:

  • Slightly higher than planned staff costs (+0.7%), mainly driven by a higher share of costs allocated to en-route services as overflight traffic exceeded expectations, while staffing levels remained below plan.

  • Significantly lower than planned other operating costs (-7.6%), mainly due to lower utility and maintenance costs, procurement savings, and reduced consultancy expenditure, including the internalisation of part of the SWIM implementation activities.

  • Significantly lower than planned depreciation (-6.8%), mainly driven by delays in the implementation and commissioning of some investment projects, resulting in a later-than-planned recognition of depreciation expenses.

  • Significantly lower than planned cost of capital (-14.0%), mainly due to a lower-than-expected cost of capital rate, following the removal of the risk premium associated with Russian carriers’ debt exposure, despite a slightly higher asset base.

  • deduction of exceptional costs (+0.5 M€2022) not foreseen in the performance plan, which relate to a one-off change in the accounting treatment of the early-retirement scheme (DBO) for ATCOs, following recommendations from the external financial audit, whereby these obligations are now recognised based on actuarial calculations in line with IAS 19 rather than as direct annual payments.

Assessment of the actual performance in the charging zone reported by the NSA

The NSA of Lithuania provides the following overall assessment of the actual performance in 2025 at charging zone level:

“The actual en route unit costs in Lithuania's charging zone, expressed at 2022 prices, were lower by -4.2% than the determined real en route unit costs. This resulted due to higher by +3.1% than planned number of total en route service units and both the lower by -0.2% number of total costs expressed in nominal terms and higher inflation than it was forecasted at the time of drafting RP4 PP. Consequently, the combination of higher traffic and lower real costs expressed at 2022 prices resulted in actual en route unit costs below the determined en route unit costs.”

Explanation of the differences between actual and determined costs at charging zone level reported by the NSA

The NSA provides the following explanation for the differences between actual and determined costs in the charging zone:

“At the charging zone level, the difference between the actual and determined costs is very small (-0.2%).”

Recommendations formulated by the NSA to the ANSP (Oro Navigacija) to rectify the situation and actions taken by the ANSP

The NSA 2025 monitoring report indicates the following recommendations formulated by the NSA:

“No recommendations were formulated to ANSPs.”

Actual unit cost incurred by the users (AUCU) (PI#1)

AUCU components (€/SU) – 2025
€/SU
DUC 60.46
Inflation adjustment 0.49
Cost exempt from cost sharing -0.62
Traffic risk sharing adjustment -0.39
Traffic adjustment (costs not TRS) -0.22
Financial incentives 0.27
Modulation of charges 0.00
Cross-financing 0.00
Other revenues -0.78
Application of lower unit rate 0.00
Total adjustments -1.24
AUCU 59.22
AUCU vs. DUC -2.1%
Cost exempt from cost sharing by item - 2025 €'000 €/SU
New and existing investments -283.7 -0.57
Competent authorities and qualified entities costs -7.9 -0.02
Eurocontrol costs -15.1 -0.03
Pension costs 0.0 0.00
Interest on loans 0.0 0.00
Changes in law 0.0 0.00
Total cost exempt from cost risk sharing -306.8 -0.62

En route AUCU monitoring at charging zone level

The actual en route unit cost incurred by airspace users (AUCU) in respect of activities performed in 2025 (59.22 €) is -2.1% lower than the nominal DUC (60.46 €). The difference between these two figures (-1.24 €/SU) is due to:

  • the positive inflation adjustment resulting from higher than planned inflation (+0.49 €/SU);

  • the impact of adjustments resulting from the costs exempted from cost sharing mechanism (-0.62 €/SU);

  • the deduction of the traffic risk sharing adjustments (-0.39 €/SU);

  • the deduction of the traffic adjustment (-0.22 €/SU) for the costs not subject to traffic risk sharing;

  • the impact of financial incentives (+0.27 €/SU); and,

  • the deduction of other revenues (-0.78 €/SU).

The share of the regulatory result (see next sub-section) in the AUCU (before the deduction of other revenues) is 9.0%.

Initiatives implemented or planned that will improve this PI reported by the NSA

The NSA of Lithuania provides the following information regarding the initiatives:

“No initiatives were implemented in 2025 as the actual performance was a reasonable one.”

Regulatory result (RR)

Oro Navigacija net gain/loss on activity in the Lithuania en route charging zone in 2025

Oro Navigacija reported a net gain of +0.7 M€, as a combination of a loss of -0.04 M€ arising from the cost sharing mechanism, with a gain of +0.6 M€ arising from the traffic risk sharing mechanism and a gain of +0.1 M€ relating to financial incentives.

Oro Navigacija overall regulatory result (RR) for the en route activity

Ex-post, the overall RR, taking into account the net gain from the en route activity mentioned above (+0.7 M€) and the actual RoE (+1.9 M€), amounts to +2.6 M€ (10.1% of the en route revenues). The resulting ex-post rate of return on equity is 8.5%, which is higher than the 7.6% planned in the PP.