IN Brief:
- DB InfraGO’s proposed 2028 freight tariffs imply increases of 6.6% for standard trains, 63.5% for dangerous-goods services and 84.8% for very heavy trains.
- The rail-freight association Die Güterbahnen says the weighted average proposed increase exceeds 14% and has called for tariff reform.
- These are proposed 2028 charges, not approved rates or charges currently being collected.
DB InfraGO has published proposed German rail track access charges for 2028 that could increase the price paid by some industrial freight trains by as much as 84.8%. According to the rail-freight association Die Güterbahnen, the proposal envisages a 6.6% increase for standard freight services, 63.5% for dangerous-goods trains and 84.8% for very heavy trains. These are proposed rates for a future timetable, not tariffs currently in force or approved by the regulator.
The proposed increases differ sharply by train segment. Die Güterbahnen cites mineral oil, chemicals and fertilisers among traffic that could fall within the dangerous-goods group, while the very-heavy group includes some flows serving construction, steel and energy. Classification under DB InfraGO’s charging schedule, not the broad industry of a consignor, determines which proposed rate applies. A train carrying steel is not automatically subject to the highest percentage, and the association’s examples do not establish what any individual customer would pay.
Rail infrastructure access charges are paid by train operators to use the track network. They generally form one part of the cost of carrying a consignment, alongside rolling stock, traction energy, crew, terminals, marshalling and other services. An 84.8% rise in one track access tariff is therefore not an 84.8% rise in the entire door-to-door freight bill. Operators may nevertheless face substantial increases where the infrastructure charge is a significant component of a frequent or long-distance train service.
Die Güterbahnen calculates a weighted rise of more than 14% for freight services in the 2028 proposal, following a proposed increase of almost 13% for 2027. These figures aggregate different traffic segments and must be separated from the 84.8% maximum. The association’s warning is part of the consultation and reform debate, not approval by the Bundesnetzagentur. Operators will know the amounts applicable to individual paths only after the regulator’s decisions and the relevant classification and funding arrangements are resolved.
DB InfraGO has previously outlined the basis for its 2027 proposal, including a target revenue requirement of approximately €7.5bn and an average freight increase of 12.9%. Its account refers to uncertainty over federal maintenance funding and the way infrastructure costs are recovered through the charging system. The proposed 2028 tariffs sit within that continuing discussion rather than an isolated freight surcharge imposed without regulatory process. Actual approved charges can differ from draft price lists after decisions on cost recovery and support.
Different train segments are priced using a framework that considers service characteristics and the commercial ability of markets to bear charges. Bulk cargo moved from industrial sidings may have limited practical alternatives because rail wagons and receiving terminals are designed for particular materials and tonnages. Operators serving those flows could have fewer opportunities to reroute than services using broadly available intermodal terminals. Die Güterbahnen disputes the resulting proposed charges, but its argument does not establish the amount of freight that would switch to road.
Replacing a heavy block train with road movements would require suitable trucks, drivers, loading points and sufficient road and site access. Where a plant depends on scheduled rail deliveries, higher infrastructure charges might instead feed into renegotiated contracts or revised wagon and train utilisation. A service’s exposure depends on route distance, tariff category, train weight, traction cost and how the charge is allocated under its transport agreement. Neither DB InfraGO’s proposal nor the industry’s response quantifies such changes at an individual industrial facility.
Financial comparisons also need to separate the 2028 proposal from decisions covering 2026. In July, the federal regulator revised previously approved 2026 charges after a European court judgment, reducing the rail-freight rates relative to the earlier approval. That was a specific reassessment of the applicable 2026 timetable pricing and does not amount to advance rejection or acceptance of the 2028 proposal. Quoting the two decisions without their different years and baselines would misstate the direction of the charge changes.
Die Güterbahnen is calling for a broader reform of the system and argues that continual infrastructure cost increases could erode the competitiveness of freight services. This is an advocacy position by an industry body whose members have a direct commercial interest in track prices. It is relevant to the debate but must not be presented as a regulator’s independent forecast of modal shift, company closures or employment losses. No verified corridor-level freight impact assessment accompanies the rates cited in the statement.
The 2028 tariff schedule remains subject to the applicable approval process, and future federal support could affect the approved amounts. Train operators negotiating longer contracts must therefore distinguish published proposals from current charges and from the separate regulator decision concerning 2026 rates. The confirmed development is a set of draft segment prices and a challenge from the rail freight industry. Any actual cost increase will depend on approved tariffs, each train’s classification and the access charges charged for its route.
