Energy, sanctions and the NIS ownership question are turning fuel exposure into one of the defining business risks for Serbia in the second half of 2026.
Serbia’s most important business risk in the second half of the year may not come from demand, wages or interest rates. It may come from fuel.
The uncertainty surrounding NIS, the Russian-owned Serbian oil company that operates the country’s only refinery, has turned a sector-specific sanctions issue into a wider corporate concern. The company has applied for a new US licence to continue operating beyond June 16, when its current licence expires, according to Reuters. NIS has argued that regular operations are important for the orderly supply of Serbia’s domestic market, while Washington has been pushing for the divestment of the Russian stake.
For Serbian companies, the issue is less whether the pump price moves by a few dinars in any given week. It is whether fuel ceases to be a predictable cost. Transport operators feel that first, but the exposure quickly spreads to food distribution, construction, agriculture, retail, tourism, manufacturing and e-commerce.
The National Bank of Serbia has already made the link explicit. In June it kept the key policy rate unchanged at 5.75 per cent but said April’s inflation acceleration was driven almost entirely by global oil prices and domestic petroleum-product prices. It warned that oil and other commodity prices could push inflation temporarily above the top of the target band late this year or early next year.
That matters because Serbia is entering the period with otherwise resilient macroeconomic conditions. Real GDP rose 3.2 per cent year on year in the first quarter, and the central bank expects about 3 per cent growth for 2026. Lending to companies and households is also growing rapidly. But an energy shock can quickly change the arithmetic: it raises costs, tightens margins and forces management teams to choose between absorbing losses or raising prices into a still price-sensitive market.
The NIS ownership talks add a geopolitical layer. Serbia has completed talks on a shareholder agreement with Hungary’s MOL, according to Reuters. Serbia already holds 29.9 per cent of NIS; Gazprom Neft and Gazprom together hold the majority. Under the discussed structure, Serbia would buy an additional 5 per cent if the sale of the Russian-held stake to MOL is approved by the US Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control. MOL has also pledged that the Pancevo refinery would continue operating at at least its recent average annual capacity.
The base case for the second half is not a full fuel-supply rupture. Serbia, NIS, MOL and US authorities all have incentives to avoid a disorderly outcome. The more likely scenario is a period of regulatory extensions, ownership restructuring and higher risk premia in fuel-sensitive contracts.
That is still enough to change corporate behaviour. Logistics firms will push harder for fuel-adjustment clauses. Retailers will try to consolidate deliveries. Food processors will review inventory buffers. Construction firms will price transport and materials more conservatively. Farmers will watch diesel costs more closely than crop prices in some weeks.
The winners will be companies with scale, indexed contracts and cash buffers. Larger logistics groups can negotiate fuel supply and pass through costs more easily. Retail chains with dense distribution networks can protect margins better than fragmented operators. Export manufacturers with predictable order books can build fuel volatility into pricing. Smaller firms operating on spot contracts face the greatest exposure.
The forecast for the second half is therefore one of cost volatility rather than collapse. Fuel-sensitive industries should assume that transport and energy costs remain unstable through the third quarter, with possible stabilisation only if the NIS licensing and ownership question is resolved and oil prices ease. If no durable solution emerges, the risk is not merely dearer fuel; it is renewed government intervention through reserves, excise adjustments or price controls.
For now, Serbia’s energy story is not just about oil. It is about how a small, open economy manages geopolitical risk inside its domestic cost base.
